Cost-effectiveness of pelvic exenteration for locally advanced malignancy

Consumer Perspectives on the Adoption of a Prehabilitation Multimodal Online Program for Patients Undergoing Cancer Surgery

This study aimed to explore patients' perspectives on the adoption of a prehabilitation multimodal online program. Patients recovering from gastrointestinal cancer surgery at a tertiary hospital between October 2021 and November 2022 were invited to participate. An e-Health program including intensity exercises, nutrition and psychological counselling was used. Patients were instructed to navigate the e-Health program over 24 h using an iPad and then complete the study survey. Patients' characteristics, use of technology, views and minimal expected outcomes from a preoperative online program were collected. Of the 30 patients included, most were female, most reported confidence in the use of technology, most considered the online program safe and most agreed it would be beneficial for their health. "Poor preoperative health" and "lack of motivation and encouragement" were identified as the main barriers to the uptake of a preoperative online program, while program 'simplicity' and perceived 'benefits' were the main facilitators. Significant improvement in postoperative outcomes is perceived to influence patients' willingness to participate in a preoperative multimodal e-Health program. Gastrointestinal cancer patients perceived the adoption of a preoperative multimodal e-Health application as safe to be performed at home and of potential benefit to their health. A range of patient's characteristics, barriers and facilitators to the uptake of an online program were identified. These should be considered in future preoperative multimodal online programs to enhance patient experience, adherence and efficacy. The safety and efficacy of the online prehabilitation program will need to be determined in a larger randomized controlled trial.

Development of a risk prediction tool for patients with locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer undergoing pelvic exenteration: protocol for a mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

Pelvic exenteration (PE) surgery represents the only potentially curative treatment option for patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer (LARRC). Given the potential morbidity, whether or not PE should be recommended for an individual patient presents a major decisional conflict. This study aims to identify the outcomes of PE for which there is consensus among patients, carers and clinicians regarding their importance in guiding treatment decision-making, and to develop a risk prediction tool which predicts these outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study will be conducted at a specialist PE centre, and employ a mixed-methods study design, divided into three distinct phases. In phase 1, outcomes of PE will be identified through a comprehensive systematic review of the literature (phase 1a), followed by exploration of the experiences of individuals who have undergone PE for LARRC and their carers (phase 1b, target sample size 10-20 patients and 5-10 carers). In phase 2, a survey of patients, their carers and clinicians will be conducted using Delphi methodology to explore consensus around the outcomes of highest priority and the level of influence each outcome should have on treatment decision-making. In phase 3 a, risk prediction tool will be developed using data from a single PE referral centre (estimated sample size 500 patients) to predict priority outcomes using multivariate modelling, and externally validated using data from an international PE collaboration.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted for phases 1 and 2 (X22-0422 and 2022/ETH02659) and for maintenance of the database used in phase 3 (X13-0283 and HREC/13/RPAH/504). Informed consent will be obtained from participants in phases 1b and 2; a waiver of consent for secondary use of data in phase 3 will be sought. Study results will be submitted for publication in international and/or national peer reviewed journals.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022351909.

Cost-effectiveness of extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for refractory out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A modelling study

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Differences in Surgical Outcomes and Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Pelvic Exenteration Between Locally Advanced Versus Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancers

BACKGROUND

Although pelvic exenteration remains the only curative option for locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer, only limited evidence is available on the differences in surgical and quality-of-life outcomes between the two.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes and identify any differences or predictors of quality of life of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer undergoing pelvic exenteration.

DESIGN

This was a cohort study.

SETTING

This study was conducted at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.

PATIENTS

This study included patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer who underwent pelvic exenteration between July 2008 and March 2019.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures included Short Form 36 version 2 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal score.

RESULTS

A total of 271 patients were included in this study. Locally advanced rectal cancer patients had higher rates of R0 resection ( p = 0.003), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy ( p < 0.001), and had greater median overall survival (75.1 vs. 45.8 months), although the latter was clinically but not statistically significant. There was a higher blood loss ( p < 0.001), longer length of stay ( p = 0.039), and longer operative time ( p = 0.002) in the locally recurrent rectal cancer group. This group also had a higher mean baseline physical component summary score and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal score; however, there were no significant differences in complications or quality-of-life outcomes between with the two groups at any time points postoperatively up to 12 months.

LIMITATION

The study was from a specialized experienced center, which could limit its generalizability.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer tend to require a more extensive surgery with a longer operative time and more blood loss and longer recovery from surgery, but despite this, their quality of life is comparable to those with locally advanced rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B1000 .

DIFERENCIAS EN LOS RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS Y LOS RESULTADOS DE LA CALIDAD DE VIDA EN LA EXENTERACIN PLVICA ENTRE EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO Y EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE RECIDIVANTE

ANTECEDENTES:Aunque la exenteración pélvica sigue siendo la única opción curativa para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y el cáncer de recto localmente recurrente, solo hay evidencia limitada disponible sobre las diferencias en los resultados quirúrgicos y de calidad de vida entre los dos.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo comparar los resultados quirúrgicos e identificar cualquier diferencia o predictor de la calidad de vida de los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y cáncer de recto localmente recurrente sometidos a exenteración pélvica.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en el Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.PACIENTES:Este estudio incluyó pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y cáncer de recto localmente recurrente que se sometieron a exenteración pélvica entre julio de 2008 y marzo de 2019.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las principales medidas de resultado incluyeron el formulario corto 36 versión 2 y la puntuación de la evaluación funcional de la terapia del cáncer colorrectal.RESULTADOS:Un total de 271 pacientes fueron incluidos en este estudio. Los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado tuvieron tasas más altas de resección R0 ( p = 0,003), quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante ( p < 0,001) y una mediana de supervivencia general más alta (75,1 frente a 45,8 meses),a pesar de que esta última fue clínica pero no estadísticamente significativa. Hubo una mayor pérdida de sangre ( p < 0,001), una estancia más prolongada ( p = 0,039) y un tiempo operatorio más prolongado ( p = 0,002) en el grupo de cáncer de recto localmente recurrente. También tenían una puntuación de componente físico inicial media más alta y una puntuación de Evaluación funcional de la terapia del cáncer colorrectal; sin embargo, no hubo diferencias significativas en las complicaciones o los resultados de la calidad de vida entre los dos grupos en ningún momento después de la operación hasta los 12 meses.LIMITACIÓN:El estudio fue de un centro especializado con experiencia, lo que podría limitar su generalización.CONCLUSIONES:Los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente recurrente tienden a requerir una cirugía más extensa con un tiempo operatorio más largo y más pérdida de sangre y una recuperación más prolongada de la cirugía, pero a pesar de esto, su calidad de vida es comparable a aquellos con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B1000 . (Traducción-Dr. Yolanda Colorado ).

PRehabIlitatiOn with pReoperatIve exercise and educaTion for patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgerY: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled TRIAL (PRIORITY TRIAL)

Background

Radical surgery is the mainstream treatment for patients presenting with advanced primary or recurrent gastrointestinal cancers; however, the rate of postoperative complications is exceptionally high. The current evidence suggests that improving patients’ fitness during the preoperative period may enhance postoperative recovery. Thus, the primary aim of this study is to establish the effectiveness of prehabilitation with a progressive, individualised, preoperative exercise and education program compared to usual care alone in reducing the proportion of patients with postoperative in-hospital complications. The secondary aims are to investigate the effectiveness of the preoperative intervention on reducing the length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, improving quality of life and morbidity, and reducing costs.

Methods

This is a multi-centre, assessor-blinded, pragmatic, comparative, randomised controlled trial. A total of 172 patients undergoing pelvic exenteration, cytoreductive surgery, oesophagectomy, hepatectomy, gastrectomy or pancreatectomy will be recruited. Participants will be randomly allocated to prehabilitation with a preoperative exercise and education program (intervention group), delivered over 4 to 8 weeks before surgery by community physiotherapists/exercise physiologists, or usual care alone (control group). The intervention will comprise 12 to 24 individualised, progressive exercise sessions (including aerobic/anaerobic, resistance, and respiratory exercises), recommendations of home exercises (16 to 32 sessions), and daily incidental physical activity advice. Outcome measures will be collected at baseline, the week prior to surgery, during the hospital stay, and on the day of discharge from hospital, and 1 month and 1 months postoperatively. The primary outcome will be the development of in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes include the length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, quality of life, postoperative morbidity and costs.

Discussion

The successful completion of this trial will provide robust and high-quality evidence on the efficacy of a preoperative community- and home-based exercise and education intervention on important postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing major gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

Trial registration

This trial was registered prospectively with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621000617864) on 24th May 2021.

Preoperative nutritional status impacts clinical outcome and hospital length of stay in pelvic exenteration patients - a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Preoperative malnutrition is common in surgical oncology patients and can have negative effects on postoperative outcomes. Pelvic exenteration is major surgery associated with high morbidity rates. Associations between preoperative malnutrition, determined using the patient-generated subjective global assessment, and postoperative outcomes in this patient cohort has not yet been investigated.

AIM

To determine if preoperative nutritional status is associated with postoperative surgical and quality of life (QoL) outcomes after pelvic exenteration surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at a quaternary hospital investigating 123 patients who had pelvic exenteration surgery from January 2017 to August 2019. Preoperative nutritional status and postoperative surgical and QoL outcomes were collected and analysed to determine any associations.

RESULTS

Overall, 49.6% of patients were female with a median age of 59 years. Forty patients (32.5%) were malnourished and 83 (67.5%) were well nourished before surgery. Well-nourished patients had a shorter length of hospital stay (p = 0.034) and at 6 months post-surgery, presented with a significantly better physical and mental QoL score (p = 0.038 and p = 0.001 respectively). The regression analyses showed that intensive care unit (ICU) readmission rates were 7.19 times more likely to occur in malnourished patients (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative malnutrition is associated with increased length of stay, ICU readmissions and poorer QoL following pelvic exenteration. Nutrition screening, assessment and optimisation of management are essential in this patient cohort to improve patient outcomes. Future studies are needed to measure the effect of interventions and identify the most beneficial model of care for this complex patient group.

Multivisceral Resection of Advanced Pelvic Tumors: From Planning to Implementation

Pelvic exenteration involves radical multivisceral resection for locally advanced and recurrent pelvic tumors. Advances in tumor staging, oncological therapies, preoperative patient optimization, surgical techniques, and critical care medicine have permitted the safe expansion of pelvic exenterative surgery at specialist units. It is now understood that in carefully selected patients, 5-year survival can exceed 60% following pelvic exenteration, and that very low mortality figures and an optimum postexenteration quality of life are possible. In the present review, we provide a contemporary summary of the current state of the art in pelvic exenterative surgery following all key phases of the treatment pipeline from patient staging and tumor assessment, to treatment planning and surgery.

Cost-analysis of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in patients with peritoneal malignancy: An Australian perspective with global application

BACKGROUND

Cost-effective cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) for treatment of patients with peritoneal malignancy remains an ongoing financial challenge for healthcare systems, hospitals and patients. This study aims to describe the detailed in-hospital costs of CRS and HIPEC compared with an Australian Activity Based Funding (ABF) system, and to evaluate how the learning curve, disease entities and surgical outcomes influence in-hospital costs.

METHODS

A retrospective descriptive costing review of all CRS and HIPEC cases undertaken at a large public tertiary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia from April 2017 to June 2019. In-hospital cost variables included staff, critical care, diagnosis, operating theatre, and other costs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to investigate the differences between actual cost and the provision of funding, and potential factors associated with these costs.

RESULTS

Of the 118 CRS and HIPEC procedures included in the analyses, the median total cost was AU$130,804 (IQR: 105,744 to 153,972). Provision of funding via the ABF system was approximately one-third of the total CRS and HIPEC costs (p < 0.001). Surgical staff proficiency seems to reduce the total CRS and HIPEC costs. Surgical time, length of intensive care unit and hospital stay are the main predictors of total CRS and HIPEC costs.

CONCLUSION

Delivery of CRS and HIPEC is expensive with high variability. A standard ABF system grossly underestimates the specific CRS and HIPEC funding required with supplementation essential to sustaining this complex highly specialised service.

Evolution of pelvic exenteration surgery- resectional trends and survival outcomes over three decades

OBJECTIVE

To examine the changes in exenterative surgery over three decades analysing oncological outcomes and whether changes in surgical approach have led to improved patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Advances in surgical technology, perioperative care and pattern of disease recurrence have coincided with an evolutionary change in exenterative surgery.

METHODS

A review of a prospectively maintained databases of pelvic exenteration surgery from 1988 to 2018  at two high volume specialised institutions. The total cohort was divided into three major time points (1988-2004, 2005-2010 and 2011 to 2018) to allow comparative analysis. Primary endpoints were overall survival in primary and recurrent disease at each time point. Secondary endpoints included anastomotic leak, blood transfusion, ileus, wound infection rates and evolution of case complexity. Data were analysed using R with a p < 0.05 considered significant.

RESULTS

Six hundred and seventy patients underwent exenterative surgery. In 2011-2018 there was an increase in resection of recurrent malignancy with a continuous increase in GI malignancies resected over each time period(p < 0.001,<0.01) and a reduction in gynaecological malignancy(p < 0.001). A significant increase in sacrectomy, pelvic sidewall resection and ileal conduit reconstruction was observed (p < 0.01,<0.001).In 2005-2010 patients had increased rates of ileus and anastomotic leak(p < 0.05). Patients undergoing resection for primary disease had improved overall survival at time points 1988-2004 and 2011-2018 compared to those with recurrent disease(p = 0.007,<0.001). Overall survival was significantly improved in patients with primary versus recurrent disease(p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

There has been a significant improvement in survival in patients undergoing pelvic exenteration surgery from primary disease. Case complexity has increased without significant morbidity.

Cohort study of long-term survival and quality of life following pelvic exenteration

BACKGROUND

Pelvic exenteration (PE) is the preferred treatment available for selected patients diagnosed with locally advanced or recurrent cancer confined to the pelvis. Currently, the majority of the literature reports only on short-term survival and quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes. The aim of this prospective cohort study was to describe long-term survival and QoL outcomes following PE.

METHODS

This was a cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing PE from 1994 to 2016 at a major teaching hospital in Sydney, Australia. From 2008, consenting patients were also included in a prospective QoL study. Main outcomes were long-term survival and QoL assessed with SF-36® and FACT-C questionnaires. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Some 515 patients underwent PE for locally advanced or recurrent cancer. The cumulative 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were 48·6 and 37·8 per cent respectively. The survival estimates were significantly higher for patients with advanced primary rectal cancer (P = 0·045) and those in whom a clear resection margin was achieved (P < 0·001). Some 287 patients were enrolled into the QoL study. Response rates at baseline, 6 months and 5 years were 92·0, 70·0 and 33 per cent respectively. Patients had recovered to their preoperative QoL status by 6 months and, among survivors, QoL remained essentially unchanged during the 5-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent PE owing to advanced primary rectal cancer or achieved a clear resection margin had a greater chance of survival. Overall, QoL returned to baseline within 6 months after surgery.

Randomized controlled trial of colonic stent insertion in non-curable large bowel obstruction: a post hoc cost analysis

AIM

In view of the increasing burden on the healthcare system, this study aims to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of the management of incurable large bowel obstruction comparing the cost of a stent vs surgery.

METHOD

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at two major teaching hospitals in Australia between September 2006 and November 2011. Fifty-six patients with malignant incurable large bowel obstruction were randomized to stent insertion or surgical decompression, of whom 52 were included in the final analysis. Data were collected at all points during the patient journey and quality of life data were obtained by patient surveys. All data points were analysed and a cost-effectiveness study was performed to compare the costs between the two treatment groups.

RESULTS

Stenting as a procedure was significantly more expensive than surgery (A$4462.50 vs A$3251.50; P < 0.001). Post-procedure stay for stented patients was significantly lower (median 7 vs 11 days; P = 0.03). Combined costs of stent group ward stay, multidisciplinary team discussion and complication management were significantly lower (P = 0.013). Overall cost difference between the two treatment groups was A$3902.44 (P = 0.101). European Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) scores for the first 4 weeks gave mean area under the curve adjusted weeks of 2.411 vs 2.271 for the stent and surgery groups respectively (P = 0.603). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between the surgery and the stent group was $22 955.53 in favour of stenting.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with stenting is cheaper than open surgery and provides quicker discharge from hospital.

Feasibility and acceptability of PrE-operative Physical Activity to improve patient outcomes After major cancer surgery: study protocol for a pilot randomised controlled trial (PEPA Trial)

BACKGROUND

There is a need for evidence of the effectiveness of pre-operative exercise for patients undergoing major cancer surgery; however, recruitment to such trials can be challenging. The PrE-operative Physical Activity (PEPA) Trial will establish the feasibility and acceptability of a pre-operative exercise programme aimed to improve patient outcomes after cytoreductive surgery and pelvic exenteration. The secondary aim is to obtain pilot data on the likely difference in key outcomes (post-operative complications, length of hospital stay, post-operative functional capacity and quality of life) to inform the sample size calculation for the substantive randomised clinical trial.

METHODS/DESIGN

Twenty patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and pelvic exenteration at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney will be recruited and randomly allocated (1:1 ratio) to either 2 to 6 weeks' pre-operative exercise programme (intervention group) or usual care (control group). Those randomised to the intervention group will receive up to six individualised, 1-h physiotherapy sessions (including aerobic and endurance exercises, respiratory muscle exercises, stretching and flexibility exercises), home exercises (instruction and recommendations on how to progress the exercises at home) and encouragement to be more active by using an activity tracker to measure the number of steps walked daily. Patients allocated to the control group will not receive any specific advice about exercise training. Feasibility will be assessed with consent rates to the study, and for the intervention group, retention and adherence rates to the exercise programme. Acceptability of the exercise programme will be assessed with a semi-structured questionnaire. The following measures of the effectiveness of the intervention will be collected at baseline (2 to 6 weeks pre-operative), a week before surgery, during hospital stay and pre hospital discharge: post-operative complication rates (Clavien-Dindo), post-operative functional capacity (Six-minute Walk Test) and quality of life (SF-36v2®) and length of hospital stay. Functional status will be additionally measured using Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing (CPET), at baseline and within a week before surgery.

DISCUSSION

The PEPA Trial will provide important information about the feasibility and acceptability of a pre-operative exercise programme for patients undergoing major cancer surgery. Data from the PEPA Trial will be used to inform the design, methodology and to calculate sample size required for a larger, definitive trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ID: ACTRN12617001129370 . Registered on 1 August 2017.

The Evolution of Pelvic Exenteration Practice at a Single Center: Lessons Learned from over 500 Cases

Considerable progress has been made in the management of patients with locally advanced or recurrent cancers of the pelvis over the past 60 years since the inception of pelvic exenteration. Early progress in pelvic exenteration was marred by the high surgical mortality and morbidity, which drew scepticism from the broader surgical community. Subsequent evolution in the procedure hinged on establishing surgical safety and a better understanding of outcome predictors. Surgical mortality from pelvic exenteration is now comparable to that of elective resection for primary colorectal cancers. The importance of a clear resection margin is also now well established in providing durable local control and predicting long-term survival that, in turn, has driven the development of novel surgical techniques for pelvic side wall resection, en bloc sacrectomy, and pubic bone resection. A tailored surgical approach depending on the location of the tumor with resection of contiguously involved organs, yet preserving uninvolved organs to minimize unnecessary surgical morbidity, is paramount. Despite improved surgical and oncological outcomes, surgical morbidity following pelvic exenteration remains high with reported complication rates ranging between 20% and 80%. Extended antibiotic prophylaxis and preemptive parenteral nutrition in the immediate postoperative period may reduce septic and nutritional complications. A high index of suspicion is needed in the early diagnosis and management of complications that may avoid prolonged duration of hospitalization. An acceptable quality of life has been reported among patients after pelvic exenteration. Further research into novel chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and reconstructive options are currently underway and are needed to further improve outcomes.