Association of hospital factors and socioeconomic status with the utilization of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer over a decade

Does socioeconomic status influence the choice of surgical technique in abdominal rectal cancer surgery?

AIM

This study aimed to estimate the impact of socioeconomic status on the probability of receiving open (OPEN) or minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for curative abdominal rectal cancer resection.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with rectal cancer clinical Stage I-III during the period 2010-2021 who underwent curative abdominal resection surgery, MIS or OPEN, were included. Patients were identified in the Colorectal Cancer Database, a register-linkage based on the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Register and linked to several national Swedish health-related and demographic registers. Socioeconomic factors, sex, patient and tumour characteristics, number of previous surgical procedures and category of hospital were collected. Exposures were level of education (categorized as 6-9, 10-12, >12 years), household income (quartiles 1-4) and country of birth (Sweden, Nordic countries outside Sweden, Europe outside the Nordic countries, outside Europe), and outcome was MIS or OPEN. Multivariable logistic regression models were fitted for each exposure, adjusted for age, sex, cT and cN, level of tumour, and number of previous abdominal surgical procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 13 778 patients were included of whom 43.6% underwent MIS (n = 6007) and 56.4% OPEN (n = 7771). Highest level of education (OR for highest vs. lowest level of education 1.15; 95% CI 1.03-1.29) and highest household income quartile (OR for highest vs. lowest household income quartile 1.27; 95% CI 1.12-1.44) increased the likelihood of receiving MIS.

CONCLUSION

Despite the tax-financed healthcare system in Sweden, rectal cancer patients with the highest level of education and the highest household income had an increased probability of receiving MIS.

Rise in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Colorectal Cancer Is Associated With Adoption of Robotic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is associated with improved short-term outcomes and similar long-term oncologic outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer compared with open surgery. Although the robotic approach has ergonomic and technical benefits, how it has impacted the utilization of traditional laparoscopic surgery and minimally invasive surgery overall is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

Describe trends in open, robotic, and laparoscopic approaches for colorectal cancer resections and examine factors associated with minimally invasive surgery.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study using data from the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2020.

SETTING

Commission on Cancer-accredited US facilities.

PATIENTS

Patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic colon or rectal adenocarcinoma.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Surgical approach rates (open, robotic, and laparoscopic).

RESULTS

We identified 475,001 patients diagnosed with nonmetastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma, of whom 192,237 (40.5%) underwent open surgery, 64,945 (13.7%) underwent robotic surgery, and 217,819 (45.9%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. For colon cancer, laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery use steadily increased, with a peak prevalence of 54.0% in 2016, and total minimally invasive surgery (robotic + laparoscopic) was performed more often than open surgery from 2013 through 2020. For rectal cancer, laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery had a peak prevalence of 37.2% in 2014 and declined from 2014 through 2020; robotic surgery prevalence increased throughout the study period (5.5% in 2010, 24.7% in 2015, and 48.8% in 2020). Minimally invasive surgery use increased in facilities performing robotic surgery every year during the study period. For both colon and rectal cancer, the use of open surgery decreased across all facilities throughout the study period.

LIMITATIONS

This study used the National Cancer Database, which may not be generalizable to non-Commission on Cancer institutions.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally invasive surgery steadily increased across all facilities from 2010 through 2020. Open resections declined, laparoscopic resections plateaued, and robotic resections increased for colon and rectal cancer. Minimally invasive surgery increases may be driven by increases in robot-assisted surgery. See Video Abstract.

EL AUMENTO DE LA CIRUGA MNIMAMENTE INVASIVA PARA EL CNCER COLORRECTAL SE ASOCIA CON LA ADOPCIN A LA CIRUGA ROBTICA

ANTECEDENTES:La cirugía mínimamente invasiva se asocia con mejores resultados a corto plazo y resultados oncológicos similares a largo plazo para pacientes con cáncer colorrectal en comparación con la cirugía abierta. Aunque el abordaje robótico tiene beneficios ergonómicos y técnicos, no está claro cómo ha afectado la utilización de la cirugía laparoscópica tradicional y la cirugía mínimamente invasiva en general.OBJETIVO:Describir las tendencias en los abordajes abiertos, robóticos y laparoscópicos para las resecciones de cáncer colorrectal y examinar los factores asociados con la cirugía mínimamente invasiva.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo utilizando datos de la Base de Datos Nacional del Cáncer desde 2010 hasta 2020.ESCENARIO:Centros estadounidenses acreditados por la Comisión sobre el Cáncer.PACIENTES:Pacientes diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma de colon o recto no metastásico.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Tasas de abordaje quirúrgico (abierto, robótico, laparoscópico).RESULTADOS:Identificamos 475.001 pacientes con diagnóstico de adenocarcinoma colorrectal no metastásico, de los cuales 192.237 (40,5%) se sometieron a cirugía abierta, 64.945 (13,7%) se sometieron a cirugía robótica y 217.819 (45,9%) se sometieron a cirugía laparoscópica. Para el cáncer de colon, el uso de cirugía mínimamente invasiva laparoscópica aumentó de manera constante, con una prevalencia máxima del 54,0% en 2016, y la cirugía mínimamente invasiva total (robótica + laparoscópica) se realizó con mayor frecuencia que la cirugía abierta desde 2013 hasta 2020. Para el cáncer de recto, la cirugía mínimamente invasiva laparoscópica tuvo una prevalencia máxima del 37,2% en 2014 y disminuyó desde 2014 hasta 2020; La prevalencia de la cirugía robótica aumentó durante el período de estudio (5,5 % en 2010, 24,7 % en 2015, 48,8 % en 2020). El uso de cirugía mínimamente invasiva aumentó en los centros que realizan cirugía robótica cada año durante el período de estudio. Tanto para el cáncer de colon como para el cáncer de recto, el uso de cirugía abierta disminuyó en todos los centros durante el período de estudio.LIMITACIONES:Se utilizó la base de datos nacional sobre el cáncer, que puede no ser generalizable a instituciones que no pertenecen a la Comisión sobre el Cáncer.CONCLUSIONES:La cirugía mínimamente invasiva aumentó de manera constante en todos los centros entre 2010 y 2020. Las resecciones abiertas disminuyeron, las resecciones laparoscópicas se estabilizaron y las resecciones robóticas aumentaron para el cáncer de colon y recto. Los aumentos de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva pueden estar impulsados por aumentos en la cirugía asistida por robot. (Traducción--Ingrid Melo ).

Risk factor of postoperative pulmonary complications after colorectal cancer surgery: an analysis of nationwide inpatient sample

To investigate the incidence rate, risk factors, and clinical implications of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery (CRC). The study extracted data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) between 2010 and 2019. Patients' data were analyzed to identify predictors of PPCs, and the association between possible factors and PPCs were also assessed. A total of 169,067 CRC surgery patients were included and 15,494 (9.16%) were diagnosed with PPCs in the study. Our study found that age, gender, number of comorbidities, type and location of hospital, and certain preoperative comorbidities, such as fluid and electrolyte disorders (odd ratio [OR] 2.53), coagulopathy (OR 2.16), congestive heart failure (OR 1.91), and chronic pulmonary disease (OR 1.57) were the risk factors of PPCs. In addition, postoperative complications, such as continuous mechanical ventilation (OR 8.18), sepsis (OR 4.46), deep vein thrombosis (OR 4.17) and shock (OR 4.07) were the most important risk factors of PPCs. PPCs prolonged the length of hospital stay (14 days vs. 6 days) and led to a higher mortality rate (13.04% vs. 1.20%). Optimizing perioperative care practices are essential steps to reduce the incidence rate of PPCs in CRC patients.

One year follow-up of the colon cancer patient cohort treated with a novel miniaturized robotic-assisted surgery device (mRASD)

BACKGROUND

With the proven benefits of minimally invasive surgery, there is steady growth in robotic surgery use and interest in novel robotic platforms. A miniaturized Robotic-Assisted Surgery Device (mRASD) has been in clinical use under a multi-center, investigational device exemption (IDE) study for right and left colectomy. The goal of this work was to report the short-term and 12-month outcomes specifically for the cohort of colon cancer patients that underwent surgery using the mRASD.

METHOD

From the IDE study that included both benign and malignant diseases, long-term follow-up was only conducted for patients with colon cancer. The main outcome measures were the oncologic quality metrics (Overall Survival, OS and Disease-free Survival, DFS). Secondary outcomes included incidence of intra-operative, device-related, and procedure-related adverse events. Frequency statistics were performed to assess the measures of central tendency and variability in short (within 30 days) and long-term (1-year) outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty total patients underwent a colectomy with mRASD; 17 (57%) were diagnosed with a malignancy and included in this analysis. The mean patient age was 59.9 ± 13.2 years. There were no intraoperative or device-related adverse events. In 100% of cases (n = 17), the primary dissection was completed and hemostasis maintained using the mRASD, and negative margins were achieved. At 30 days postoperatively, the major complication rate was 6%, and there was one unplanned reoperation for anastomotic leak. At one-year follow-up, the OS and DFS rates were 100 and 94%, respectively. In one patient, omental implants were discovered at the time of surgery, and the patient opted to not undergo additional therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The first experience with mRASD for colectomy in colon cancer demonstrated technical effectiveness and an acceptable surgical safety profile in line with other minimally invasive procedures. The study continues to monitor disease recurrence and survival outcomes in this cohort.

Lower Socioeconomic Status Predicts Greater Obstacles to Care: Using Outpatient Cholecystectomy as a Model Cohort

BACKGROUND

Patients with low socioeconomic status (SES) are disadvantaged in terms of access to health care. A novel metric for SES is the Distressed Communities Index (DCI). This study evaluates the effect of DCI on hospital choice and distance traveled for surgery.

METHODS

A Florida database was queried for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis or chronic cholecystitis who underwent an outpatient cholecystectomy between 2016 and 2019. Patients' DCI was compared with hospital ratings, comorbidities, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and distance traveled for surgery. Stepwise logistic regression was used to determine which factors most influenced distance traveled for surgery.

RESULTS

There were 54,649 cases-81 open, 52,488 laparoscopic, and 2,080 robotic. There was no difference between surgical approach and patient's DCI group (p = 0.12). Rural patients traveled the farthest for surgery (avg 21.29 miles); urban patients traveled the least (avg 5.84 miles). Patients from distressed areas more often had surgery at one- or two-star hospitals than prosperous patients (61% vs 36.3%). Regression indicated distressed or at-risk areas predicted further travel for rural/small-town patients, while higher hospital ratings predicted further travel for suburban/urban patients.

DISCUSSION

Compared to prosperous areas, patients from distressed areas have surgery at lower-rated hospitals, travel further if they live in rural/small-town areas, but travel less if they live in suburban areas. We postulate that farther travel in rural areas may be explained by a lack of health care resources in poor, rural areas, while traveling less in suburban areas may be explained by personal lack of resources for patients with low SES.

Utilization of minimally invasive colectomy at safety-net hospitals in the United States

BACKGROUND

Prior literature has reported inferior surgical outcomes and reduced access to minimally invasive procedures at safety-net hospitals. However, this relationship has not yet been elucidated for elective colectomy. We sought to characterize the association between safety-net hospitals and likelihood of minimally invasive resection, perioperative outcomes, and costs.

METHODS

All adult (≥18 years) hospitalization records entailing elective colectomy were identified in the 2016-2020 National Inpatient Sample. Centers in the top quartile of safety-net burden were considered safety-net hospitals (others: non-safety-net hospitals). Multivariable regression models were developed to assess the impact of safety-net hospitals status on key outcomes.

RESULTS

Of ∼532,640 patients, 95,570 (17.9%) were treated at safety-net hospitals. The safety-net hospitals cohort was younger and more often of Black race or Hispanic ethnicity. After adjustment, care at safety-net hospitals remained independently associated with reduced odds of minimally invasive surgery (adjusted odds ratio 0.92; 95% confidence interval 0.87-0.97). The interaction between safety-net hospital status and race was significant, such that Black race remained linked with lower odds of minimally invasive surgery at safety-net hospitals (reference: White race). Additionally, safety-net hospitals was associated with greater likelihood of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.34, confidence interval 1.04-1.74) and any perioperative complication (adjusted odds ratio 1.15, confidence interval 1.08-1.22), as well as increased length of stay (β+0.26 days, confidence interval 0.17-0.35) and costs (β+$2,510, confidence interval 2,020-3,000).

CONCLUSION

Care at safety-net hospitals was linked with lower odds of minimally invasive colectomy, as well as greater complications and costs. Black patients treated at safety-net hospitals demonstrated reduced likelihood of minimally invasive surgery, relative to White patients. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the root causes of these disparities in care.

Disparities in access to minimally invasive surgery for inflammatory bowel disease and outcomes by insurance status: analysis of the 2015 to 2019 National Inpatient Sample

INTRODUCTION

Despite being the preferred modality for treatment of colorectal cancer and diverticular disease, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has been adopted slowly for treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) due to its technical challenges. The present study aims to assess the disparities in use of MIS for patients with IBD.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database from October 2015 to December 2019 was conducted. Patients < 65 years of age were stratified by either private insurance or Medicaid. The primary outcome was access to MIS and secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, complications, length of stay (LOS), and total admission cost. Univariate and multivariate regression was utilized to determine the association between insurance status and outcomes.

RESULTS

The NIS sample population included 7866 patients with private insurance and 1689 with Medicaid. Medicaid patients had lower odds of receiving MIS than private insurance patients (OR 0.85, 95% CI [0.74-0.97], p = 0.017), and experienced more postoperative genitourinary complications (OR 1.36, 95% CI [1.08-1.71], p = 0.009). In addition, LOS was longer by 1.76 days (p < 0.001) and the total cost was higher by $5043 USD (p < 0.001) in the Medicaid group. Independent predictors of receiving MIS were age < 40 years old, female sex, highest income quartile, diagnosis of ulcerative colitis, elective admission, and care at teaching hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with Medicaid are less likely to receive MIS, have longer lengths of stay, and incur higher costs for the surgical management of their IBD. Further investigations into disparities in inflammatory bowel disease care for Medicaid patients are warranted.

Uptake of robot-assisted colon cancer surgery in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The robot-assisted approach is now often used for rectal cancer surgery, but its use in colon cancer surgery is less well defined. This study aims to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted colon cancer surgery to conventional laparoscopy in the Netherlands.

METHODS

Data on all patients who underwent surgery for colon cancer from 2018 to 2020 were collected from the Dutch Colorectal Audit. All complications, readmissions, and deaths within 90 days after surgery were recorded along with conversion rate, margin and harvested nodes. Groups were stratified according to the robot-assisted and laparoscopic approach.

RESULTS

In total, 18,886 patients were included in the analyses. The operative approach was open in 15.2%, laparoscopic in 78.9% and robot-assisted in 5.9%. The proportion of robot-assisted surgery increased from 4.7% in 2018 to 6.9% in 2020. There were no notable differences in outcomes between the robot-assisted and laparoscopic approach for Elective cT1-3M0 right, left, and sigmoid colectomy. Only conversion rate was consistently lower in the robotic group. (4.6% versus 8.8%, 4.6% versus 11.6%, and 1.6 versus 5.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide study on surgery for colon cancer shows there is a gradual but slow adoption of robotic surgery for colon cancer up to 6.9% in 2020. When comparing the outcomes of right, left, and sigmoid colectomy, clinical outcomes were similar between the robotic and laparoscopic approach. However, conversion rate is consistently lower in the robotic procedures.

The Association of Rural Residence With Surgery and Adjuvant Radiation in Medicare Beneficiaries With Rectal Cancer

Purpose

Radiation therapy and surgery are fundamental site-directed therapies for nonmetastatic rectal cancer. To understand the relationship between rurality and access to specialized care, we characterized the association of rural patient residence with receipt of surgery and radiation therapy among Medicare beneficiaries with rectal cancer.

Methods and Materials

We identified fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years or older diagnosed with nonmetastatic rectal cancer from 2016 to 2018. Beneficiary place of residence was assigned to one of 3 geographic categories (metropolitan, micropolitan, or small town/rural) based on census tract and corresponding rural urban commuting area codes. Multivariable regression models were used to determine associations between levels of rurality and receipt of both radiation and proctectomy within 180 days of diagnosis. In addition, we explored associations between patient rurality and characteristics of surgery and radiation such as minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

Results

Among 13,454 Medicare beneficiaries with nonmetastatic rectal cancer, 3926 (29.2%) underwent proctectomy within 180 days of being diagnosed with rectal cancer, and 1792 (13.3%) received both radiation and proctectomy. Small town/rural residence was associated with an increased likelihood of receiving both radiation and proctectomy within 180 days of diagnosis (adjusted subhazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.02-1.30). Furthermore, small town/rural radiation patients were significantly less likely to receive IMRT (adjusted odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48-0.80) or MIS (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.66-0.97) than metropolitan patients.

Conclusions

Although small town/rural Medicare beneficiaries were overall more likely to receive both radiation and proctectomy for their rectal cancer, they were less likely to receive preoperative IMRT or MIS as part of their treatment regimen. Together, these findings clarify that among Medicare beneficiaries, there appeared to be a similar utilization of radiation resources and time to radiation treatment regardless of rural/urban status.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in the Era of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Treatment of Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robotic) surgery (MIS) for colorectal cancer is associated with improved outcomes. We sought to characterize possible disparities in surgical approach and outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, colorectal adenocarcinoma cases among non-Hispanic white (NHW), non-Hispanic Black (NHB), and Hispanic patients were identified using the National Cancer Database (2010-2017). Logistic and Poisson regressions, generalized logit models, and Cox proportional hazards were used to assess outcomes, with reclassification of surgery type if converted to open.

RESULTS

NHB patients were less likely to undergo robotic surgery. After multivariable analysis, NHB patients were 6% less likely, while Hispanic patients were 12% more likely to undergo a MIS approach. Lymph node retrieval was higher (> 1.3% more, p < 0.0001) and length of stay was shorter (> 17% shorter, p < 0.0001) for MIS approaches. Unplanned readmission was lower for MIS colon cancer operations compared with open operations, but not for rectal cancer. Race/ethnicity-adjusted risk of death was lower with MIS approaches for colon as well as rectal cancer. After adjusting for surgery type, risk of death was 12% lower for NHB and 35% lower for Hispanic patients compared with NHW patients. Hispanic patients had 21% lower risk of death, while NHB patients had 12% higher risk of death than NHW patients with rectal cancer, after adjusting for surgery type.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial/ethnic disparities exist in utilization of MIS for colorectal cancer treatment, disproportionately affecting NHB patients. Since MIS has the potential to improve outcomes, suboptimal access may contribute to harmful and thus unacceptable disparities in survivorship.

Health Burdens and SES in Alabama: Using Geographic Information System to Examine Prostate Cancer Health Disparity

Socioeconomic disparities influence the risk of many diseases, including cancer. The cancer rate in Alabama is high, and the state has one of the highest rates of prostate cancer in the USA. Alabama's counties are embedded with socioeconomic disparities, politics, race, ethnicity, and oppression, among which social equity and socioeconomic status (SES) been closely associated with prostate cancer. The Geographic Information System (GIS) has become a valuable technology in understanding public health in many applications, including cancer. This study integrates Alabama's county-level prostate cancer incidence and mortality and its association with socioeconomic and health disparities. We conducted robust data mining from several data sources such as the Alabama State Cancer Profile data, Alabama Department of Health, American Cancer Society, Center for Disease Control, and National Cancer Institute. The research method is the Geographic Information System (GIS), and we employed prostate cancer data within GIS to understand Alabama's prostate cancer prevalence regarding SES. The GIS analysis indicated an apparent socioeconomic disparity between the Black Belt and Non-Black Belt counties of Alabama. The Black Belt counties' poverty rate is also remarkably higher than non-Black Belt counties. In addition, we analyzed the median household income by race. Our analysis demonstrates that the Asian background population in the state earned the highest median income compared to non-Hispanic whites and the African American population. Furthermore, the data revealed that the preexisting condition of diabetes and obesity is closely associated with prostate cancer. The GIS analysis suggests that prostate cancer incidence and mortality disparities are strongly related to SES. In addition, the preexisting condition of obesity and diabetes adds to prostate cancer incidences. Poverty also reflects inequalities in education, income, and healthcare facilities, particularly among African Americans, contributing to Alabama's health burden of prostate cancer.

The Road Less Traveled: Transportation Barriers to Cancer Care Delivery in the Rural Patient Population

Patients with cancer residing in geographically rural areas experience lower rates of preventative screening, more advanced disease at presentation, and higher mortality rates compared with urban populations. Although multiple factors contribute, access to transportation has been proposed as a critical barrier affecting timeliness and quality of health care delivery in rural populations. Patients from geographically rural regions may face a variety of transportation barriers, including lack of public transportation, limited access to private vehicles, and increased travel distance to specialized oncologic care. A search using PubMed was conducted to identify articles pertaining to transportation barriers to cancer care and tested interventions in rural patient populations. Studies demonstrate that transportation barriers are associated with delayed follow-up after abnormal screening test results, decreased access to specialized oncology care, and lower rates of receipt of guideline-concordant treatment. Low clinical trial enrollment and variability in survivorship care are also linked to transportation barriers in rural patient populations. Given the demonstrated impact of transportation access on equitable cancer care delivery, several interventions have been tested. Telehealth visits and outreach clinics appear to reduce patient travel burden and increase access to specialized care, and patient navigation programs are effective in connecting patients with local resources, such as free or subsidized nonemergency medical transportation. To ensure equal access to high-quality cancer care and reduce geographic disparities, the design and implementation of tailored, multilevel interventions to address transportation barriers affecting rural communities is critical.