Oncologic long-term outcomes of emergency versus elective resection for colorectal cancer

Large Bowel Obstruction: Etiologies, Diagnosis, and Management

Large bowel obstructions (LBOs) often require urgent surgical intervention. Diagnosis relies on astute history and physical examination, as well as imaging with computed tomography (CT) scan for stable patients. Because of the high mortality associated with colonic perforation in patients with LBOs, decisive surgical decision-making is needed for optimal outcomes. This review seeks to provide an overview of the etiologies of LBO, diagnosis, and general management principles, as well as specific management for the most common etiologies, including colorectal cancer and strictures.

High-risk rural surgical patients and poor access to elective colorectal cancer surgery: insight for multilevel intervention for rural America

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of death in rural America. Rural populations are large and heterogeneous, yet patient-related drivers of inequities in CRC access are understudied. This study aimed to identify vulnerable rural populations at lower odds of undergoing elective CRC surgery.

METHODS

Evaluation of the Policy Map and United States Census Bureau identified factors associated with poor surgical access in the most populous states (by total rural population). To assess whether these identified factors were associated with reduced access to elective CRC surgery, the 2007 to 2020 National Inpatient Sample was used to evaluate 69,212 hospitalizations of rural patients undergoing CRC surgery. Rural was defined as counties with a population of <250,000. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed predictors of elective CRC surgery. Patient- and hospital-level factor interactions were specified a priori.

RESULTS

More than 72% of hospitalizations of rural patients were elective. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that older age, multimorbidity, Black race, Latino-Hispanic ethnicity, Medicaid insurance, and rural hospitals predicted lower odds of elective CRC surgery. On interaction analyses, high-risk patients were less likely to undergo elective CRC surgery in urban facilities relative to rural.

CONCLUSION

In this large study of rural dwellers, ethnoracial minorities, elders, and Medicaid beneficiaries had profoundly less access to elective CRC surgery, especially when care was received in urban settings. Future studies should focus on exploring actionable social drivers of health in these rural populations. Findings underscore the need for multilevel interventions to enhance rural access to equitable and quality surgical cancer care.

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on the Clinical and Pathologic Characteristics of Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Multicenter Study in South Korea

Purpose

The COVID-19 pandemic has influenced various aspects of colorectal cancer (CRC) patient care, including diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes. This study assesses the pandemic's impact on CRC patients.

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of medical records for CRC patients who underwent surgery at five hospitals affiliated with Hallym University from January 2017 to December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: the pre-COVID group (2017-2019) and the COVID group (2020-2022).

Results

Among 2038 patients, 987 (48.4%) were in the pre-COVID group, and 1051 (51.6%) were in the COVID group. The COVID group had more patients with two or more comorbidities (P < 0.001) and a higher incidence of rectal cancer (P = 0.010). While the rates of laparoscopic surgeries were similar, the COVID group had increased emergency surgeries (P = 0.005) and diversion procedures (P = 0.002). Additionally, the COVID group faced more overall complications (P < 0.001) and severe complications (Grade III-V, P = 0.004). There was a rise in lymphovascular invasion (P < 0.001) and T4 stage tumors (P < 0.001) within the COVID group. Despite these differences, both groups had similar 2-year overall survival rates (P = 0.409).

Conclusion

Although patients treated during the COVID period experienced more frequent stoma formation, complications, and adverse prognostic factors, there were no differences in short-term oncologic outcomes, which was likely due to the follow-up period being insufficient to detect differences in OS.

Emergency Resection for Colonic Cancer Has an Independent and Unfavorable Effect on Long-Term Oncologic Outcome

BACKGROUND

Long-term outcomes in patients undergoing emergency versus elective resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) remain controversial. This study aims to assess short- and long-term outcomes of emergency versus elective CRC surgery.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing emergency or elective colonic resections for CRC from January 2013 to December 2017 were included. Primary outcome was long-term survival. As secondary outcomes, we sought to analyze potential differences on postoperative morbidity and concerning the oncological standard of surgical resection. The Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard model were used to compare survival between the groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 225 CRC patients were included. Of these 192 (85.3%) had an elective and 33 (14.7%) an emergency operation. Emergency indications were due to obstruction, perforation, or bleeding. Patients in the emergency group had higher ASA score (p = 0.023), higher Charlsson comorbidity index (CCI, p = 0.012), and were older than those in the elective group, with median age 70 (IQR 63-79) years and 78 (IQR 68-83) years, for elective and emergency, respectively (p = 0.020). No other preoperative differences were observed. Patients in the emergency group experienced significantly more major complications (12.1% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.037), more anastomotic leakage (12.1% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.001), need for reoperation (12.1% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.021), and postoperative mortality (2 patients vs. 0, p < 0.001). No differences in terms of final pathological stage, nor in accuracy of lymphadenectomy were observed. Overall survival was significantly worse in case of emergency operation, with estimated median 41 months vs. not reached in elective cases (p < 0.001). At the multivariate analysis, emergency operation was confirmed as independent unfavorable determinant of survival (with hazard rate HR = 1.97, p = 0.028), together with age (HR = 1.05, p < 0.001), postoperative major morbidity (HR = 3.18, p = 0.012), advanced stage (HR = 5.85, p < 0.001), and need for transfusion (HR = 2.10, p = 0.049).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative morbidity and mortality were increased in emergency versus elective CRC resections. Despite no significant differences in terms of accuracy of resection and pathological stages, overall survival was significantly worse in patients who underwent emergency procedure, and independent of other determinants of survival.

Colorectal Oncologic Emergencies: Recognition, Management, and Outcomes

Colorectal cancer is the third most frequent type of malignancy in the United States, and the age at diagnosis is decreasing. Although the goal of screening is focused on prevention and early detection, a subset of patients inevitably presents as oncologic emergencies. Approximately 15% of patients with colorectal cancer will present as surgical emergencies, with the majority being due to either colonic perforation or obstruction. Patients presenting with colorectal emergencies are a challenging cohort, as they often present at an advanced stage with an increase in T stage, lymphovascular invasion, and metachronous liver disease.

Early Experiences With Bundled Payments for Care Improvement for Major Bowel Surgery

BACKGROUND

Bundled Payment (BP) models are becoming more common in surgery. We share our early experiences with Bundled Payments for Care Improvement for major bowel surgery.

METHODS

Patients undergoing major bowel surgery between January and October 2021 were identified using Medicare Severity-Diagnosis Related Group (MS-DRG) codes. Major drivers of cost in a BP model are reported and compared to the Fee-For-Service (FFS) payment model.

RESULTS

A total of 202 cases (173 FFS vs 29 BP) were analyzed. The mean BP cost per Clinical Episode was $28,340. Eleven patients (38%) in the BP model had costs greater than the Target Price. The drivers of cost in the BP model were 59% acute care facility, 17% physician services, 9% post-acute care facilities, 8% other, and 7% readmissions. Clinical Episode of care costs varied considerably by MS-DRG case complexity. Robotic surgery increased costs by 35% (mean increase $3724, P < .01). The 90-day readmission rate was 17% for a mean cost of $11,332 per readmission. Three patients (10%) were discharged to a skilled nursing facility at an average cost of $11,009, while fifteen patients (52%) received home health services at a mean cost of $2947. Acute care facility costs were similar in the BP vs FFS groups (mean difference $1333, P = .22).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing major bowel surgery are a heterogeneous population. Physicians are ideally positioned to deliver high-value, patient-centered care and are crucial to the success of a BP model. The post-acute care setting is a key component of improving efficiency and quality of care.

Management of obstructed colorectal carcinoma in an emergency setting: An update

Colorectal carcinoma is common, particularly on the left side. In 20% of patients, obstruction and ileus may be the first clinical manifestations of a carcinoma that has advanced (stage II, III or even IV). Diagnosis is based on clinical presentation, plain abdominal radiogram, computed tomography (CT), CT colonography and positron emission tomography/CT. The best management strategy in terms of short-term operative or interventional and long-term oncological outcomes remains unknown. For the most common left-sided obstruction, the first choice should be either emergency surgery or endoscopic decompression by self-expendable metal stents or tubes. The operative plan should be either one-stage or two-stage resection. One-stage resection with on-table bowel decompression and irrigation can be accompanied or not accompanied by proximal defunctioning stoma (colostomy or ileostomy). Primary anastomosis is more convenient but has increased risks of anastomotic leakage and morbidity. Two-stage resection (Hartmann's procedure) is safer and the most widely used despite temporally affecting quality of life. Damage control surgery in high-risk frail patients is less frequently performed since it can be successfully substituted with endoscopic stenting or tubing. For the less common right-sided obstruction, one-stage surgical resection is more beneficial than endoscopic decompression. The role of minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or robotic) is a subject of debate. Emergency laparoscopic-assisted management is advantageous to some extent but requires much expertise due to inherent difficulties in dissecting the distended colon and the risk of rupture and subsequent septic complications. The decompressing stent as a bridge to elective surgery more substantially decreases the risks of morbidity and mortality than emergency surgery for decompression and has equivalent medium-term overall survival and disease-free survival rates. Its combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiation may have a positive effect on long-term oncological outcomes. Management plans are crucial and must be individualized to better fit each case.

Patient Factors Affecting Inpatient Mortality Following Colorectal Cancer Resection

BACKGROUND

Our objective is to identify factors for inpatient death in patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer (CRC).

STUDY DESIGN

Unmatched 1:3 case-control study of surgically resected CRC at a tertiary care institution between 2004 and 2018. Variables for multivariate analysis were selected using tetrachoric correlation followed by a least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) penalized regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients were included (N = 35 patients who died inpatient, N = 105 patients who did not die). Patients who died were older, had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), higher rates of preoperative anemia, hypoalbuminemia, emergency surgeries, blood transfusion, postoperative vasopressor requirement, anastomotic leak, and postoperative ICU admission than patients who underwent surgical resection without inpatient mortality. Anemia (aOR = 8.62, 1.44-91.58), emergency admission (aOR = 5.71, 1.46-24.36), and ICU admission (aOR 45.51, 8.31-448.4) significantly predicted inpatient mortality when controlled for CCI and hypoalbuminemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Surprisingly, it appears that pre-existing anemia and perioperative factors are more important in predicting inpatient mortality of patients undergoing CRC surgery than baseline comorbidity or nutritional status.

Assessing Changes in Colon Cancer Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Four-Year Analysis at a Romanian University Hospital

This retrospective study investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the surgical management of patients with colon cancer in a tertiary University Hospital in Timisoara, Romania. Data from 867 patients who underwent surgical interventions for this condition between 26 February 2019 and 25 February 2023 were meticulously analyzed to evaluate substantial shifts in the management and outcomes of these patients in comparison to the pre-pandemic era. The results reveal a substantial decrease in elective surgical procedures (p < 0.001) and a significant increase in emergency interventions (p < 0.001). However, postoperative mortality did not show significant variations. Of concern is the diagnosis of patients at more advanced stages of colon cancer, with a significant increase in Stage IV cases in the second year of the pandemic (p = 0.045). Average hospitalization durations recorded a significant decrease (p < 0.001) during the pandemic, and an inverse correlation between patient age and surgery duration was reported (p = 0.01, r = -0.088). This analysis provides a comprehensive perspective on how the pandemic has influenced the management of colon cancer, highlighting significant implications for the management and outcomes of these patients.

Oncological outcomes of elective versus emergency surgery for colon cancer: A tertiary academic center experience

Background

In this study, we aimed to identify the oncological outcomes in colon cancer patients who underwent elective versus emergency curative resection.

Methods

All patients who underwent curative resection for colon cancer between July 2015 and December 2019 were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups based on the presentation into elective and emergency groups.

Results

A total of 215 patients with colon cancer were admitted and underwent curative surgical resection. Of those, 145 patients (67.4%) were elective cases, and 70 (32.5%) were emergency cases. Family history of malignancy was positive in 44 patients (20.5%) and significantly more common in the emergency group (P = 0.016). The emergency group had higher T and TNM stages (P = 0.001). The 3-year survival rate was 60.9% and significantly less in the emergency group (P = 0.026). The mean duration from surgery to recurrence, 3-year disease-free survival, and overall survival were 1.19, 2.81, and 3.11, respectively.

Conclusion

Elective group was associated with better 3-year survival, longer overall, and 3-year disease-free survival compared to the emergency group. The disease recurrence rate was comparable in both groups, mainly in the first two years after curative resection.

Colorectal neoplastic emergencies in immunocompromised patients: preliminary result from the Web-based International Register of Emergency Surgery and Trauma (WIRES-T trial)

Association of advanced age, neoplastic disease and immunocompromission (IC) may lead to surgical emergencies. Few data exist about this topic. Present study reports the preliminary data from the WIRES-T trial about patients managed for colorectal neoplastic emergencies in immunocompromised patients. The required data were taken from a prospective observational international register. The study was approved by the Ethical Committee with approval n. 17575; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03643718. 839 patients were collected; 753 (80.7%) with mild-moderate IC and 86 (10.3%) with severe. Median age was 71.9 years and 73 years, respectively, in the two groups. The causes of mild-moderate IC were reported such malignancy (753-100%), diabetes (103-13.7%), malnutrition (26-3.5%) and uremia (1-0.1%), while severe IC causes were steroids treatment (14-16.3%); neutropenia (7-8.1%), malignancy on chemotherapy (71-82.6%). Preoperative risk classification were reported as follow: mild-moderate: ASA 1-14 (1.9%); ASA 2-202 (26.8%); ASA 3-341 (45.3%); ASA 4-84 (11.2%); ASA 5-7 (0.9%); severe group: ASA 1-1 patient (1.2%); ASA 2-16 patients (18.6%); ASA 3-41 patients (47.7%); ASA 4-19 patients (22.1%); ASA 5-3 patients (3.5%); lastly, ASA score was unavailable for 105 cases (13.9%) in mild-moderate group and in 6 cases (6.9%) in severe group. All the patients enrolled underwent urgent/emergency surgery Damage control approach with open abdomen was adopted in 18 patients. Mortality was 5.1% and 12.8%, respectively, in mild-moderate and severe groups. Long-term survival data: in mild-moderate disease-free survival (median, IQR) is 28 (10-91) and in severe IC, it is 21 (10-94). Overall survival (median, IQR) is 44 (18-99) and 26 (20-90) in mild-moderate and severe, respectively; the same is for post-progression survival (median, IQR) 29 (16-81) and 28, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed as the only factor influencing mortality in mild-moderate and severe IC is the ASA score. Colorectal neoplastic emergencies in immunocompromised patients are more frequent in elderly. Sigmoid and right colon are the most involved. Emergency surgery is at higher risk of complication and mortality; however, management in dedicated emergency surgery units is necessary to reduce disease burden and to optimize results by combining oncological and acute care principles. This approach may improve outcomes to obtain clinical advantages for patients like those observed in elective scenario. Lastly, damage control approach seems feasible and safe in selected patients.

Case report: POLE (P286R) mutation in a case of recurrent intestinal leakage and its treatment

In recent years, although new drugs and molecular markers have been used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer, there has been little progress in the immunotherapy of advanced colon cancer. The development of sequencing and multiomics technology helps us classify patients more accurately, and then find patients who may benefit from immunotherapy. The development of this advanced technology and immunotherapy based on new targets may herald a new era in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. It is well known that colorectal cancer with dmmr/msi-h phenotype is sensitive to immunotherapy, yet the POLE mutation is the MSS phenotype in colorectal tumors but is also an effective target for immunotherapy. This paper describes a case of recurrent intestinal leakage that required multiple surgical procedures. A high-grade colon adenocarcinoma was identified on surgical histopathology after 18 months, and bevacizumab combined with oxaliplatin and capecitabine proved ineffective against this cancer. An analysis of gene expression indicated that POLE (P286R) mutation, TMB 119.333 mutation per 100 MB, and immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment had a significant impact. This case reminds us that the existence of malignant tumors should be considered for patients with repeated intestinal leakage, and emphasizes the importance of gene detection in the treatment of malignant tumors and the significance of POLE mutations in colorectal cancer.

Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survival between emergency and elective surgery for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to summarize relevant data from previous reports and perform a meta-analysis to compare short-term surgical outcomes and long-term oncological outcomes between emergency and elective surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase databases, and relevant data were extracted. Postoperative morbidity, hospital mortality within 30 days, postoperative recovery, overall survival (OS), and relapse-free survival (RFS) were compared using a fixed or random-effect model.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies involving 353,686 participants were enrolled for this systematic review and meta-analysis, and 23.5% (83,054/353,686) of CRC patients underwent emergency surgery. The incidence of emergency presentations in CRC patients ranged from 2.7 to 38.8%. The lymph node yield of emergency surgery was comparable to that of elective surgery (WMD:0.70, 95%CI: - 0.74,2.14, P = 0.340; I² = 80.6%). Emergency surgery had a higher risk of postoperative complications (OR:1.83, 95%CI:1.62-2.07, P < 0.001; I² = 10.6%) and hospital mortality within 30 days (OR:4.62, 95%CI:4.18-5.10, P < 0.001; I² = 42.9%) than elective surgery for CRC. In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, emergency surgery was significantly associated with poorer RFS (HR: 1.51, 95%CI:1.24-1.83, P < 0.001; I² = 58.9%) and OS(HR:1.60, 95%CI: 1.47-1.73, P < 0.001; I² = 63.4%) of CRC patients. In addition, the subgroup analysis for colon cancer patients revealed a pooled HR of 1.73 for OS (95%CI:1.52-1.96, P < 0.001), without the evidence of significant heterogeneity (I² = 21.2%).

CONCLUSION

Emergency surgery for CRC had an adverse impact on short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survival. A focus on early screening programs and health education was warranted to reduce emergency presentations of CRC patients.

Trends in emergency colorectal surgery: a 7-year retrospective single-centre cohort study

BACKGROUND

Emergency colorectal resections carry a higher morbidity and mortality than elective surgery. The use of minimally invasive surgery has now become widespread in elective colorectal surgery, with improved patient outcomes. Laparoscopy is being increasingly used for emergency colorectal resections, but its role is still being defined. Our aim was to observe the uptake of laparoscopy for emergency colorectal surgery in our centre.

METHOD

A retrospective single-centre cohort study was performed using local National Emergency Laparotomy Audit data from January 2014-December 2020. All patients who had a colorectal resection were included. Trends in the number and type of resections were recorded. Primary outcome was the proportion of cases started and completed laparoscopically. Secondary outcomes included rate of conversion to open, length of stay and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total 523 colorectal resections were performed. The number of cases attempted and completed laparoscopically steadily increased over the study period (28.3% to 63.3% and 16.3% to 35.4%, respectively). The mean rate of conversion to open was 43.8%. The greatest expansion in laparoscopy was for cases of intestinal obstruction, perforation and peritonitis, and for those undergoing Hartmann's procedure and right hemicolectomy. 30‑day mortality for cases completed laparoscopically was much lower than those converted or started with open surgery (2.1% vs 11.7% and 17.5%, respectively). Laparoscopic approach was independently associated with reduced length of stay.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopy has been successfully adopted for emergency colorectal resections in our centre, with half of cases felt to be suitable for minimally invasive surgery.

Laparoscopic versus open Hartmann reversal: a propensity score matching analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes between laparoscopic Hartmann reversal (LHR) and open Hartmann reversal (OHR) in patients who had undergone Hartmann surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

The patients who underwent Hartmann reversal (HR) at the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from Jun 2013 to Jun 2022 were retrospectively enrolled. The LHR group and the OHR group were compared using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 89 patients who underwent Hartmann reversal (HR) were enrolled in this study. There were 48 (53.9%) patients in the LHR group and 41 (46.1%) patients in the OHR group. After 1:1 ratio PSM, no difference in baseline information remained (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in operation time, blood loss, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complications (p > 0.05) before and after PSM. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, pre-operative albumin < 42.0 g/L was an independent risk factor (p = 0.013 < 0.05, OR = 0.248, 95% CI = 0.083-0.741) for the HR-related complications; however, LHR/OHR was not a predictive risk factor (p = 0.663, OR = 1.250, 95% CI = 0.500-3.122).

CONCLUSION

Based on the current evidence, although there was no difference in short-term prognosis, LHR still had some advantages considering that it was less invasive to the patient.

Perioperative outcomes of emergency and elective colorectal surgery: a bi-institutional study

BACKGROUND

Emergency colorectal surgery tends to be associated with poorer outcomes compared to elective colorectal surgery. This study assessed the morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing emergency and elective colorectal resection in two metropolitan hospitals.

METHODS

Patients were identified retrospectively from two institutions between April 2018 and July 2020. Baseline, operative and postoperative parameters were collected for comparative analysis between emergency and elective surgery groups. A binary logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

During the study period, 454 patients underwent colorectal resection, 135 were emergency cases (29.74%) and 319 were elective cases (70.26%). Compared with elective resections, patients undergoing emergency resections were observed to have a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of III to IV (53.33% vs. 38.56%) (P = 0.004). The mortality rate was similar between the emergency and elective group (1.48% vs. 0.63%, P = 0.369). The overall complication rate was higher in patients undergoing emergency resections (64.44% vs. 36.68%, P < 0.001), but the major complication rate was similar between groups (12.59% vs. 10.34%, P = 0.484). Independent predictors for postoperative complications included emergency surgery (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.77, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.66 to 4.61) and an ASA Score of III to IV (OR 2.87, 95% CI: 1.84 to 4.47).

CONCLUSION

The overall complication rate was higher in patients undergoing emergency colorectal resection, however, rates of major complications and mortality were similar between groups. Higher complication rates reflect advanced disease pathology in patients who are more comorbid.

Clinical presentation, management, screening and surveillance for colorectal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic

Management of colorectal cancer (CRC) was severely affected by the changes implemented during the pandemic, and this resulted in delayed elective presentation, increased emergency presentation, reduced screening and delayed definitive therapy. This review was conducted to analyze the impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on management of CRC and to identify the changes made in order to adapt to the pandemic. We performed a literature search in PubMed, Medline, Index Medicus, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Reference Citation Analysis (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/) and Google Scholar using the following keywords in various combinations: Colorectal cancer, elective surgery, emergency surgery, stage upgrading, screening, surveillance and the COVID-19 pandemic. Only studies published in English were included. To curtail the spread of COVID-19 infection, there were modifications made in the management of CRC. Screening was limited to high risk individuals, and the screening tests of choice during the pandemic were fecal occult blood test, fecal immunochemical test and stool DNA testing. The use of capsule colonoscopy and open access colonoscopy was also encouraged. Blood-based tests like serum methylated septin 9 were also encouraged for screening of CRC during the pandemic. The presentation of CRC was also affected by the pandemic with more patients presenting with emergencies like obstruction and perforation. Stage migration was also observed during the pandemic with more patients presenting with more advanced tumors. The operative therapy of CRC was altered by the pandemic as more emergencies surgeries were done, which may require exteriorization by stoma. This was to reduce the morbidity associated with anastomosis and encourage early discharge from the hospital. There was also an initial reduction in laparoscopic surgical procedures due to the fear of aerosols and COVID-19 infection. As we gradually come out of the pandemic, we should remember the lessons learned and continue to apply them even after the pandemic passes.

A nomogram model for predicting prognosis of obstructive colorectal cancer

Background

The prognosis of obstructive colorectal cancer (oCRC) is worse than that of nonobstructive colorectal cancer. However, no previous study has established an individualized prediction model for the prognosis of patients with oCRC. We aimed to screen the factors that affect the prognosis of oCRC and to use these findings to establish a nomogram model that predicts the individual prognosis of patients with oCRC.

Methods

This retrospective study collected data of 181 patients with oCRC from three medical hospitals between February 2012 and December 2017. Among them, 129 patients from one hospital were used as the training cohort. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used in this training cohort to select independent risk factors that affect the prognosis of oCRC, and a nomogram model was established. The other 52 patients from two additional hospitals were used as the validation cohort to verify the model.

Results

Multivariate analysis showed that carcinoembryonic antigen level (p = 0.037, hazard ratio [HR] = 2.872 [1.065–7.740]), N stage (N1 vs. N0, p = 0.028, HR = 3.187 [1.137–8.938]; N2 vs. N0, p = 0.010, HR = 4.098 [1.393–12.051]), and surgical procedures (p = 0.002, HR = 0.299 [0.139–0.643]) were independent prognostic factors of overall survival in patients with oCRC. These factors were used to construct the nomogram model, which showed good concordance and accuracy.

Conclusion

Carcinoembryonic antigen, N stage, and surgical method are independent prognostic factors for overall survival in patients with oCRC, and the nomogram model can visually display these results.

COVID-19 and the emergency presentation of colorectal cancer

AIM

The COVID-19 pandemic led to widespread disruption of colorectal cancer services during 2020. Established cancer referral pathways were modified in response to reduced diagnostic availability. The aim of this paper is to assess the impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer referral, presentation and stage.

METHODS

This was a single centre, retrospective cohort study performed at a tertiary referral centre. Patients diagnosed and managed with colorectal adenocarcinoma between January and December 2020 were compared with patients from 2018 and 2019 in terms of demographics, mode of presentation and pathological cancer staging.

RESULTS

In all, 272 patients were diagnosed with colorectal adenocarcinoma during 2020 compared with 282 in 2019 and 257 in 2018. Patients in all years were comparable for age, gender and tumour location (P > 0.05). There was a significant decrease in urgent suspected cancer referrals, diagnostic colonoscopy and radiological imaging performed between March and June 2020 compared with previous years. More patients presented as emergencies (P = 0.03) with increased rates of large bowel obstruction in 2020 compared with 2018-2019 (P = 0.01). The distribution of TNM grade was similar across the 3 years but more T4 cancers were diagnosed in 2020 versus 2018-2019 (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that a relatively short-term impact on the colorectal cancer referral pathway can have significant consequences on patient presentation leading to higher risk emergency presentation and surgery at a more advanced stage. It is therefore critical that efforts are made to make this pathway more robust to minimize the impact of other future adverse events and to consolidate the benefits of earlier diagnosis and treatment.

Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction

Large bowel obstruction is a serious and potentially life-threatening surgical emergency which is associated with high morbidity and mortality rate. The most common etiology is colorectal cancer which accounts for over 60% of all large bowel obstructions. Proper assessment, thoughtful decision-making and prompt treatment is necessary to decrease the high morbidity and mortality which is associated with this entity. Knowledge of the key elements regarding the presentation of a patient with a large bowel obstruction will help the surgeon in formulating an appropriate treatment plan for the patient. Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the various treatment options available is necessary when caring for these patients. This chapter will review the presentation of patients with malignant large bowel obstruction, discuss the various diagnostic modalities available, as well as discuss treatment options and the various clinical scenarios in which they are most appropriately utilized.

Palliative Care in Colorectal Cancer

Approximately 25% of patients present with liver metastases at the time of the first diagnosis and up to 50% will further develop recurrence in the liver during their disease course. Traditionally approached surgically, by resection of the primitive tumor or stoma, the management to incurable stage IV colorectal cancer patients has significantly changed over the last three decades and is nowadays multidisciplinary, with a pivotal role played by chemotherapy. Most patients with stage IV colorectal cancer have a poor prognosis, but numerous palliative modalities are available today. When a cure is no longer possible, treatment is directed toward providing symptomatic relief. Good symptom management in oncology is associated with improved patient and family quality of life, greater treatment compliance, and may even offer survival advantages.

Association of County-Level Social Vulnerability with Elective Versus Non-elective Colorectal Surgery

INTRODUCTION

A person's community, or lived environment, may play an important role in achieving optimal health outcomes. The objective of the current study was to assess the association of county-level vulnerability with the probability of having a non-elective colon resection. We hypothesized that individuals from areas with a high social vulnerability would be at greater risk of non-elective colon resection compared with patients from low social vulnerability areas.

METHODS

Patients aged 65-99 who underwent a colon resection for a primary diagnosis of either diverticulitis (n = 11,812) or colon cancer (n = 33,312) were identified in Medicare Part A and Part B for years 2016-2017. Logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate differences in probability of undergoing an elective versus non-elective operation from counties relative to county-level social vulnerability index (SVI). Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, mortality, readmission, and index hospitalization expenditure.

RESULTS

Among 45,124 patients, 11,812 (26.2%) underwent a colon resection for diverticulitis, while 33,312 (73.8%) had a resection for colon cancer; 31,012 (68.7%) patients had an elective procedure (diverticulitis n = 7291 (61.7%) vs. cancer n = 23,721 (71.2%)), while 14,112 (31.3%) had an emergent operation (diverticulitis n = 4521 (38.3%) vs. cancer n = 9591 (28.8%)). Patients with a high SVI were more likely to undergo an emergent colon operation compared with low SVI patients (43.7% vs. 40.4%) (p < 0.001). The association of high SVI with increased risk of an emergent colon operation was similar among patients with diverticulitis (emergent: low SVI 37.2% vs. high SVI 40.4%) or colon cancer (emergent: low SVI 26.0% vs. high SVI 29.9%) (both p < 0.05). On multivariable analyses, risk-adjusted probability of undergoing an urgent/emergent operation remained associated with SVI (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients residing in vulnerable communities characterized by a high SVI were more likely to undergo a non-elective colon resection for either diverticulitis or colon cancer. Patients from high SVI areas had a higher risk of postoperative complications, as well as index hospitalization expenditures; however, there were no differences in mortality or readmission rates.

Colorectal cancer: Greater neo-angiogenesis, less perforation, worst oncological outcomes

Little attention has been paid to the anatomopathological factors and pathophysiologic mechanisms involved in CRC perforation. Perforation is one of the most serious complications occurring up to 11% of the cases and may also be the first manifestation of the tumor. Differentiation and angiogenesis have an important role in the tumor perforation mechanism. On the one hand, a greater expression of vascularization optimizes the supply of oxygen to the tumor and thus entails a lower necrotic wall rate and thus of perforation, on the other it is associated with a lower rate of differentiation and hence to a more aggressive cancer cells.

Recurrence Risk after Radical Colorectal Cancer Surgery-Less Than before, But How High Is It?

Simple Summary

Evidence indicates that recurrence risk after colon cancer today is less than it was when trials performed decades ago showed that adjuvant chemotherapy reduces the risk and prolong disease-free and overall survival. After rectal cancer surgery, local recurrence rates have decreased but it is unclear if systemic recurrences have. After a systematic review of available literature reporting recurrence risks after curative colorectal cancer surgery we report that the risks are lower today than they were in the past and that this risk reduction is not solely ascribed to the use of adjuvant therapy. Adjuvant therapy always means overtreatment of many patients, already cured by the surgery. Fewer recurrences mean that progress in the care of these patients has happened but also that the present guidelines giving recommendations based upon old data must be adjusted. The relative gains from adding chemotherapy are not altered, but the absolute number of patients gaining is less.

Abstract

Adjuvant chemotherapy aims at eradicating tumour cells sometimes present after radical surgery for a colorectal cancer (CRC) and thereby diminish the recurrence rate and prolong time to recurrence (TTR). Remaining tumour cells will lead to recurrent disease that is usually fatal. Adjuvant therapy is administered based upon the estimated recurrence risk, which in turn defines the need for this treatment. This systematic overview aims at describing whether the need has decreased since trials showing that adjuvant chemotherapy provides benefits in colon cancer were performed decades ago. Thanks to other improvements than the administration of adjuvant chemotherapy, such as better staging, improved surgery, the use of radiotherapy and more careful pathology, recurrence risks have decreased. Methodological difficulties including intertrial comparisons decades apart and the present selective use of adjuvant therapy prevent an accurate estimate of the magnitude of the decreased need. Furthermore, most trials do not report recurrence rates or TTR, only disease-free and overall survival (DFS/OS). Fewer colon cancer patients, particularly in stage II but also in stage III, today display a sufficient need for adjuvant treatment considering the burden of treatment, especially when oxaliplatin is added. In rectal cancer, neo-adjuvant treatment will be increasingly used, diminishing the need for adjuvant treatment.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic during Spain's state of emergency on the diagnosis of colorectal cancer

INTRODUCTION

We evaluate the impact of COVID-epidemic in colorectal cancer (CRC) diagnosis during Spain's state of emergency.

METHODS

We compared newly diagnosed patients with patients diagnosed in the same period of 2019.

RESULTS

A new diagnosis of CRC decreased 48% with a higher rate of patients diagnosed in the emergency setting (12.1% vs. 3.6%; p = .048) and a lower rate diagnosed in the screening program (5.2% vs. 33.3%; p = .000).

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer patients have been diagnosed with CRC, with a higher rate of patients diagnosed in an emergency setting.

The challenges in colorectal cancer management during COVID-19 epidemic

It has been over 2 months since the start of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. The epidemic stage of COVID-19 has brought great challenges to the diagnosis and management of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Symptoms, such as fever and cough caused by cancer, and the therapeutic process (including chemotherapy and surgery) should be differentiated from some COVID-19 related characteristics. Besides, clinical workers should not only consider the therapeutic strategy for cancer, but also emphasize COVID-19's prevention. Moreover, the detailed therapeutic regimens of CRC patients may be different from the usual. Also, treatment principles may various for CRC patients with or without severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, as well as patients with or without an emergency presentation. In this paper, we want to discuss the above-mentioned problems based on previous guidelines, the current working status and our experiences, to provide a reference for medical personnel.