Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly patients: a matched case-control study in 178 patients

Clinical outcomes and cost comparison of laparoscopic versus open surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients over 80 years

PURPOSE

The growth of Singapore's geriatric population, coupled with the rise in colorectal cancer (CRC), has increased the number of colorectal surgeries performed on elderly patients. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and costs of laparoscopic versus open elective colorectal resections in elderly CRC patients over 80 years.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgery Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) identified patients over 80 years undergoing elective colectomy and proctectomy between 2018 and 2021. Patient demographics, length of stay (LOS), 30-day postoperative complications, and mortality rates were analysed. Cost data in Singapore dollars were obtained from the finance database. Univariate and multivariate regression models were used to determine cost drivers. The 5-year overall survival (OS) for the entire octogenarian CRC cohort with and without postoperative complications was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier curves.

RESULTS

Of the 192 octogenarian CRC patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 2018 and 2021, 114 underwent laparoscopic resection (59.4%), while 78 underwent open surgery (40.6%). The proportion of proctectomy cases was similar between laparoscopic and open groups (24.6% vs. 23.1%, P = 0.949). Baseline characteristics, including Charlson Comorbidity Index, albumin level, and tumour staging, were comparable between both groups. Median operative duration was 52.5 min longer in the laparoscopic group (232.5 vs. 180.0 min, P < 0.001). Both groups had no significant differences in postoperative complications and 30-day and 1-year mortality rates. Median LOS was 6 days in the laparoscopic group compared to 9 days in the open group (P < 0.001). The mean total cost was 11.7% lower in the laparoscopic group (S$25,583.44 vs. S$28,970.85, P = 0.012). Proctectomy (P = 0.024), postoperative pneumonia (P < 0.001) and urinary tract infection (P < 0.001), and prolonged LOS > 6 days (P < 0.001) were factors contributing to increased costs in the entire cohort. The 5-year OS of octogenarians with minor or major postoperative complications was significantly lower than those without complications (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic resection is associated with significantly reduced overall hospitalization costs and decreased LOS compared to open resection among octogenarian CRC patients, with comparable postoperative outcomes and 30-day and 1-year mortality rates. The extended operative time and higher consumables costs from laparoscopic resection were mitigated by the decrease in other inpatient hospitalization costs, including ward accommodation, daily treatment fees, investigation costs, and rehabilitation expenditures. Comprehensive perioperative care and optimised surgical approach to mitigate the impact of postoperative complications can improve survival in elderly patients undergoing CRC resection.

Variations in colorectal cancer pattern of care by age and comorbidity in South Australia

BACKGROUND

Advanced age is associated with decreased likelihood of colorectal cancer treatment. Here, we investigated the extent to which comorbidities are accountable for this lesser treatment.

METHODS

Using population-based datasets, the pattern of care among CRC cases in South Australia during 2004-2013 was investigated. Models were used to investigate associations of age with each treatment type, and differences in these associations were explored by comorbidity and cancer site.

RESULTS

The presence of comorbidity was associated with a significantly weaker relationship of age with surgery and chemotherapy. The association of age with surgery also varied for colon and rectal primary cancer sites. Individual comorbidity types varied in their associations with each treatment category. For example, dementia was associated with less chemotherapy provision, however, it was not significantly related to the likelihood of surgery.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the association of age with surgical treatment differed significantly by the CRC subsite. Comorbidity moderated the negative association of age with chemotherapy, and less so, with extent of surgery. Results were novel in indicating associations of multiple individual comorbidity types with CRC treatment modalities. The data suggest that different individual comorbidity types may have different effects on treatment and should be studied separately.

Is laparoscopic surgery safe for elderly patients with diverticulitis? A national database study

PURPOSE

Laparoscopy is the preferred approach to elective surgery for diverticulitis and is increasingly common in the emergent setting. Although diverticulitis is most prevalent among older adults, little is known about the safety of laparoscopy for elderly patients with diverticulitis. This study aims to compare 30-day outcomes of a laparoscopic versus open approach for diverticulitis among elderly patients undergoing elective and urgent/emergent surgery.

METHODS

Patients ≥ 65 years who underwent surgery for diverticulitis from 2015 to 2019 were identified from the ACS-NSQIP database. Elective and non-elective groups were analyzed separately. Coarsened exact matching matched laparoscopic and open patients 1:1 based on preoperative factors to minimize selection bias by creating comparable cohorts. Short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 15,316 patients were included, 69.2% female and 88% White, with a mean age of 72.7 ± 6.1 years. Approximately half (50.9%) of cases were laparoscopic and 60.6% were elective. After matching, laparoscopy was associated with lower 30-day morbidity in both the elective (OR, 0.47; 95%CI, 0.38-0.58) and non-elective (OR, 0.76; 95%CI, 0.58-0.98) cohorts. Laparoscopic surgery in both cohorts was associated with fewer surgical site infections (SSIs) (elective, OR 0.43; 95%CI, 0.33-0.57; non-elective, OR, 0.66; 95%CI, 0.44-0.98) and shorter length of stay (LOS) (elective, mean difference, 1.7 days; 95%CI, 1.5-1.9; non-elective, mean difference, 1.2 days; 95%CI, 0.43-2.1).

CONCLUSION

Elderly patients undergoing both elective and non-elective laparoscopic surgery for diverticulitis have less 30-day morbidity, SSIs, and shorter LOS compared to an open approach. Therefore, laparoscopy for elderly patients is safe in elective surgery and in select emergent cases as well.

Survival Impact of Nephroureterectomy for De Novo Stage IV Nonmetastatic and Metastatic Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma

Background

Whether nephroureterectomy (NU) provides survival benefits in patients with stage IV upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) remains unclear. We compared the effect of chemotherapy (CT) alone with that of CT combined with NU (CT + NU) on the overall survival (OS) of patients with stage IV nonmetastatic UTUC (nmUTUC) and metastatic UTUC (mUTUC).

Patients and Methods

This multicenter retrospective cohort study included the data of patients with UTUC undergoing CT alone or CT + NU from the Chang Gung Cancer Database (2002-2015) and followed them until August 2017. OS and hazard ratios (HRs) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model, respectively.

Results

This study included 308 patients with stage IV UTUC, comprising 139 with nmUTUC and 169 with mUTUC. Moreover, 91 (74.6%) patients with nmUTUC and 31 (25.4%) patients with mUTUC received NU. The CT + NU group had a higher 3-year OS rate (41.0.% vs 16.7%, p < 0.001), longer median OS duration (20.7 vs 9.0 months, p < 0.001), and lower risk of death (HR, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.66; p < 0.001) than did the CT-alone group. Similarly, patients with mUTUC who underwent CT + NU had a longer median OS duration (25.0 vs 7.8 months, p < 0.001) and lower risk of death (HR, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.59; p < 0.001) than did those who received CT alone.

Conclusion

Compared with CT alone, NU + CT can provide survival benefits to patients with nonmetastatic and metastatic stage IV UTUC.

Age and comorbidities do not affect short-term outcomes after laparoscopic rectal cancer resection in elderly patients. A multi-institutional cohort study in 287 patients

Postoperative complications and mortality rates after rectal cancer surgery are higher in elderly than in non-elderly patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether, like in open surgery, age and comorbidities affect postoperative outcomes limiting the benefits of a laparoscopic approach. Between April 2011 and July 2020, data of 287 patients with rectal cancer submitted to laparoscopic rectal resection from different institutions were collected in an electronic database and were categorized into two groups: < 75 years and ≥ 75 years of age. Perioperative data and short-term outcomes were compared between these groups. Risk factors for postoperative complications were determined on multivariate analysis, including age groups and previous comorbidities as variables. Seventy-seven elderly patients had both higher ASA scores (p < 0.001) and cardiovascular disease rates (p = 0.02) compared with 210 non-elderly patients. There were no significative differences between groups in terms of overall postoperative complications (p = 0.3), number of patients with complications (p = 0.2), length of stay (p = 0.2) and death during hospitalization (p = 0.9). The only independent variables correlated with postoperative morbidity were male gender (OR 2.56; 95% CI 1.53-3.68, p < 0.01) and low-medium localization of the tumor (OR 2.12; 75% CI 1.43-4.21, p < 0.01). Although older people are more frail patients, short-term postoperative outcomes in patients ≥ 75 years of age were similar to those of younger patients after laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Elderly patients benefit from laparoscopic rectal resection as well as non-elderly patient, despite advanced age and comorbidities.

The Trends in Adoption, Outcomes, and Costs of Laparoscopic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer in the Elderly Population

BACKGROUND

The elderly constitute the majority of both colorectal cancer and surgical volume. Despite established safety and feasibility, laparoscopy may remain underutilized for colorectal cancer resections in the elderly. With proven benefits, increasing laparoscopy in elderly colorectal cancer patients could substantially improve outcomes. Our goal was to evaluate utilization and outcomes for laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in the elderly.

METHODS

A national inpatient database was reviewed for elective inpatient resections for colorectal cancer from 2010 to 2015. Patients were stratified into elderly (≥ 65 years) and non-elderly cohorts (< 65 years), then grouped into open or laparoscopic procedures. The main outcomes were trends in utilization by approach and total costs, length of stay (LOS), readmission, and complications by approach in the elderly. Multivariable regression models were used to control for differences across platforms, adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic adoption for colorectal cancer in the elderly increased gradually until 2013, then declined, with simultaneously increasing rates of open surgery. Laparoscopy significantly improved all primary outcomes compared to open surgery (all p < 0.01). From the adjusted analysis, laparoscopy reduced complications by 30%, length of stay by 1.99 days, and total costs by $3276/admission. Laparoscopic patients were 34% less likely to be readmitted; when readmitted, the episodes were less expensive when index procedure was laparoscopic.

CONCLUSION

The adoption of laparoscopy for colorectal cancer surgery in the elderly is slow and even declining recently. In addition to the clinical benefits, there are reduced overall costs, creating a tremendous value proposition if use can be expanded.

PRECIS

This national contemporary study shows the slow uptake and recent decline in adaption of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in the elderly, despite the benefits in clinical outcomes and costs found. This data can be used to target education, regionalization, and quality improvement efforts in this expanding population.

Clinical characteristics and prognosis of elderly patients with colorectal cancer: Comparison between surgical resection and supportive care

Elderly colorectal cancer (CRC) patients tend to avoid standard treatment, especially curative surgical resection, because of concerns about surgical complications or underlying diseases. This study is intended to compare clinical characteristics and prognosis between patients who had undergone surgical resection and received supportive care, and to evaluate the usefulness of surgical treatment in elderly patients.A total of 114 patients aged ≥80 years who were diagnosed with CRC were analyzed retrospectively. Of these patients, 73 patients underwent surgical resection for malignancy and 41 patients received supportive care. Clinicopathological factors and overall survival (OS) rates were compared.The surgical resection group had better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status, and a lower stage than did the supportive-care group. The 3-year OS rate of the surgical group was significantly higher than that of the supportive-care group (60.7% vs 9.1%, P < .001). In extremely elderly patients (age ≥85 years), the surgical group showed a better 3-year OS rate than did the supportive-care group (73.9% vs 6.3%, P < .001), although Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and ASA physical status were not different. The post-operative mortality rate was 2.7%. In the analysis of risk factors related to survival, surgical resection was a good prognostic factor.Surgical treatment in elderly CRC patients showed a survival benefit, even in the extremely elderly patients. Surgical resection for CRC in elderly patients can be considered to improve survival.

Outcomes following emergency colorectal cancer presentation in the elderly

AIM

Colorectal cancer is predominantly a disease of the elderly and up to 30% of these patients will present as an emergency. We compared the outcomes of 'elderly' patients presenting to our unit with a colorectal cancer emergency over a 10-year period with those of a 'younger' cohort.

METHODS

A single centre retrospective review of colorectal cancer emergencies between 1 April 2007 and 1 April 2017 was performed. Patients were separated into two cohorts: 'young' (< 75 years) and 'elderly' (≥ 75 years). Data collected included demographics, disease status, treatment and outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 341 patients (< 75 years: n = 154; ≥ 75 years: n = 187) presented as a colorectal cancer emergency. Significantly fewer 'elderly' patients underwent curative surgical procedures (72% vs 49%, P < 0.0001) or received adjuvant chemotherapy (56% vs 21%, P < 0.0001). 'Elderly' patients had significantly more postoperative cardio-respiratory complications (7% vs 36%, P < 0.0001), but despite this there was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (7% vs 12%) and survival rates at 1 year (75% vs 74%) or 3 years (56% vs 49%). Elderly patients treated with best supportive care had a median overall survival of just 62 (range 1-955) days.

CONCLUSION

Patients ≥ 75 years presenting as a colorectal cancer emergency were significantly less likely to undergo emergency curative surgery or receive adjuvant chemotherapy than those < 75 years. However, the 30-day mortality, 1- and 3-year survival rates for patients undergoing curative surgery were comparable.

Advantage of laparoscopy surgery for elderly colorectal cancer patients without compromising oncologic outcome

Background

Laparoscopic surgery has achieved significant results in elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). In this study, we compared the short-term and long-term outcomes of open surgery and laparoscopic surgery in patients with CRC aged above 75 years at a single tertiary medical center.

Methods

We analyzed 967 patients who underwent curative resection for primary colorectal adenocarcinoma without distant metastasis between January 2009 and December 2015, in a single institution. Of the enrolled patients, 305 underwent laparoscopic surgery, and 662 received open laparotomy surgery.

Results

Compared to the patients who underwent open surgery, those who received laparoscopic surgery had significantly shorter postoperative stay (10.3 vs. 13.5 days p < 0.001) and similar postoperative morbidity (p = 0.354) and mortality (p = 0.082). In the laparoscopy cohort, six of 305 patients were converted to open surgery and one died. The long-term overall survival, cancer-specific survival, and recurrence rate were similar between both cohorts in each stage.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic surgery is suitable for elderly patients owing to shorter postoperative stay, similar long-term outcomes with open surgery, and acceptable low conversion rates. For long-term overall and oncological outcomes, the results of laparoscopic surgery were similar to that of open surgery in each TNM stage.

Impact of laparoscopic approach on the short-term outcomes of elderly patients with colorectal cancer: a nationwide Italian experience

INTRODUCTION

The laparoscopic approach is increasingly adopted in colorectal cancer surgery; however, its role in elderly patients is controversial. We sought to examine the relationship between age and short-term outcomes following laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

Data of patients 65 + years old who underwent laparoscopic surgery for CRC between 2002 and 2014 were retrieved from the administrative National Italian Hospital Discharge Dataset. Patients were divided into three age categories (65-74, 75-84, and 85  +). The impact of age on length of stay, 30-day readmission, in-hospital mortality, and postoperative complications was evaluated.

RESULTS

During the study period, 47,704 patients underwent laparoscopic surgery for CRC. The median postoperative length of stay was 9 days, and 30-day readmission and in-hospital mortality were 4.4% and 0.9%, respectively. Age was found to be an independent risk factor of prolonged length of stay and increased in-hospital mortality. With respect to patients in 65-74 years age category, patients aged 75-84 years and those aged 85 + years had a higher risk of complications (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.36-1.50, and OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.83-2.17, respectively). However, no statistically significant association was found between age and anastomotic leakage or surgical site infection (p = 0.29, and p = 0.58, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CRC who underwent laparoscopic surgery, age was found to be an independent risk factor for prolonged length of stay, in-hospital mortality, and global postoperative complications. These findings should be considered when planning laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients.

Laparoscopic complete mesocolic excision with D3 lymph node dissection for right colon cancer in elderly patients

Complete mesocolic excision (CME) with D3 lymph node dissection is considered an oncological surgery for right colon cancer. However, there is still controversy for extensive oncological surgery in elderly patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic CME with D3 lymph node dissection for right colon cancer in elderly patients. Patients who underwent laparoscopic right colectomy, from 2004 to 2014, were divided into Groups A (age ≥ 70 years, n = 80) or B (age < 70 years, n = 127). Short and long-term outcomes were analysed. Basic demographics and short-term surgical outcomes were similar between groups. Among pathological outcomes, the mean number of harvested lymph nodes was significantly less in Group A. Adjuvant chemotherapy refusal rate was significantly higher in Group A. Overall and recurrence-free survival were similar between groups. We found laparoscopic CME with D3 lymph node dissection is a safe and feasible surgical option for right colon cancer in elderly patients.

Minimally invasive surgery in the geriatric patient with colon cancer

As the global population ages, the number of geriatric patients requiring surgery for colon cancer would inevitably increase. Radical oncological surgery in the elderly colorectal cancer patient has been recognized to be associated with a higher rate of postoperative complications and mortality compared to the young. While less aggressive management options may be reasonable in patients with limited life expectancy and significant comorbidities, many elderly patients have preserved function despite their chronological age. The advances in minimally invasive surgery (MIS) now provide a feasible means of achieving safe oncological treatment for these geriatric patients. This review focuses on the evidence behind MIS in the geriatric patient with colon cancer.

Laparoscopic vs open colorectal cancer surgery in elderly patients: short- and long-term outcomes and predictors for overall and disease-free survival

Background

Colorectal cancer is common in elderly patients. Laparoscopy is widely used to approach this kind of disease. This study was to examine short-term outcomes and long-term survival for laparoscopic and open surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

Methods

From January 2007 to December 2018, patients with colorectal cancer older than 80 operated at China National Cancer Center were included in the study. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize the adverse effects. The clinical data between open and laparoscopic surgery was compared, and the effect of factors on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) was analyzed by Cox proportional hazard model.

Results

Ninety-three pairs were selected after PSM. Patients in laparoscopic group had less intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, time to first flatus, time to oral feeding, postoperative hospital stay, and higher retrieved lymph node (P < 0.05). The OS and DFS rates were similar (P > 0.05), besides the CEA level, III/IV stage, and perineural invasion were independent predictors of survival (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

In elderly patients with colorectal cancer, laparoscopic surgery had better short-term outcomes than open surgery. CEA level, III/IV stage, and perineural invasion were reliable predictors for OS and DFS.

Radical Treatment of Rectal Cancer in Elderly Is Feasible than Feared: Results from a Tertiary Care Centre

The thought of subjecting an elderly patient with rectal cancer to protocol-based neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NACTRT), surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy is sought with fear due to their multiple comorbidities and impaired functional status associated with the process of ageing. Hence, many a times the treatment is compromised and it is a fact that this subgroup of patients is underrepresented in most of the clinical trials. This study was aimed at analysing the perioperative and oncologic outcomes after protocol-based treatment of rectal cancer in the elderly patients, defined here as those with age ≥70 years. Prospective analysis of medical records of rectal cancer patients was done who were ≥70 years of age and were diagnosed and treated at Regional Cancer Centre (RCC), Thiruvanathapuram from 2008 to 2012. In this 5-year period, a total of 339 rectal cancer patients underwent surgery as part of multimodality treatment with curative intent. Of them, 75 patients were ≥70 years of age. Half of them had one or more comorbidities (54%) and majority were locally advanced at presentation (77%). Forty-seven (62%) cases received NACTRT and all of them tolerated RT dose (50.4 Gy) without modification. Anterior resection (AR) was performed in 48 (64%) and abdominoperineal resection (APR) in remaining. Diverting stoma was made in four; of which three remained permanent. Two colostomies were performed for delayed leaks. Three patients (4%) died within 30 days due to leak, sepsis and cardiopulmonary causes. Two thirds (49/75) received adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) but only 55% of them (27/49) could complete all the cycles without dose modification. The median survival was 28 months. The 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall (OS) were 80.1 and 83.9%, respectively. There were 11 distant recurrences including two locoregional recurrences. The morbidity and mortality of multimodality therapy is reasonable to proceed with radical treatment with curative intent in the elderly patients with rectal cancer.

Is There Any Reason Not to Perform Standard Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision?

The curative treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer is currently based on chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision (TME). Laparoscopy has developed considerably because of obvious clinical benefits such as reduced pain and shorter hospital stay. Recently, several prospective randomized clinical trials with long-term follow-up have showed that laparoscopy is noninferior to laparotomy with the same oncologic outcomes in terms of survival and local control rate. However, laparoscopic TME remains a challenging procedure requiring a high level of expertise and a long learning curve to ensure an adequate and safe resection. The only relative contraindication of laparoscopic rectal surgery is T4 rectal cancer extended beyond the plane of TME. In this situation, it is reasonable to consider an open resection to avoid an uncomplete resection. In obese and elderly patients, laparoscopic TME also provides the same benefits as in nonobese and younger patients but may be more difficult to achieve. This review summarizes current knowledge on the place of laparoscopic TME in the treatment of rectal cancer.

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in patients over 80 years of age: the morbidity outcomes

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between patients under 60 years of age and older patients over 80 years of age who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery with colorectal cancer.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 519 colorectal patients who underwent laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal adenocarcinoma between January 2007 and December 2012 was collected and categorized into 2 groups of patients, those under 60 years of age (n = 404) and those over 80 years of age (n = 115).

Results

The group of patients over 80 years of age had a significantly higher ASA physical status classification (P < 0.001), more preoperative comorbidities (P < 0.001), had a tendency towards more tumors in a colonic location (P = 0.034), and more advanced American Joint Committee on Cancer TNM stage (P = 0.001). A higher proportion of right hemicolectomy and abdominoperineal resection was performed and more transfusions were required in the group of patients over 80 years of age (P = 0.002 and P = 0.001, respectively). There were no significant differences in operative time, conversion rate, resection margins, and numbers of harvested lymph nodes, hospital stay, and morbidity between the 2 groups. No postoperative mortality was found in the present study. The 3-year DFS for over 80 years age group and under 60 years age group were 73.5% and 73.9%, respectively (P = 0.770).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery was effective and safe for elderly patients over 80 years of age and resulted in postoperative outcomes similar to those in younger patients. The postoperative morbidity after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery was not increased in over 80 years of age.

Evaluation of short-term outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients aged over 75 years old: a multi-institutional study (YSURG1401)

BACKGROUND

The short-term outcomes of laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colorectal cancer (LAC) have not been fully evaluated in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to compare the short term surgical outcomes of LAC between the patients older than 75 years and those with non-elderly patients.

METHODS

This retrospective multi-institutional study selected patients who underwent LAC between April 2013 and March 2014 at Yokohama City University Hospital and its related general hospitals. The patients were categorized into two groups: elderly patients (>75 years of age: group A) and non-elderly patients (<75 years of age: group B). Surgical outcomes and post operative complications were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients were evaluated in the present study. Eighty-four patients were classified into group A, and 153 into group B. Preoperative clinicopathological outcomes demonstrated no significant differences except for the ASA score. When comparing the surgical outcomes between group A and group B, the rate of conversion to open procedure (3.6% vs 5.2%, P = 0.750), median operation time (232 min vs 232 min, P = 0.320), median blood loss (20 ml vs 12 ml, P = 0.350). The differences were not significantly different in the surgical outcomes. The incidences of > grade 2 post operative surgical complications were similar between two groups ((19.0% vs 15.7%, p = 0.587). No mortality was observed in this study. The length of postoperative hospital stay was also similar (10 days vs 10 days, p = 0.350).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study suggested that LAC is safe and feasible, regardless of the age of the patient, especially for elderly patients who may be candidates for colon cancer surgery.

Long-term outcomes of colorectal endoscopic submucosal dissection in elderly patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The safety and efficacy of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) in elderly patients remain unclear. The aim of this study is to clarify the short- and long-term outcomes of colorectal ESD in elderly patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 482 consecutive patients with 501 colorectal lesions treated with ESD from February 2005 to December 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups: an elderly group (≥ 75 years of age) and a non-elderly group (< 75 years of age). Short-term outcomes of interest were procedure time, complication rate, hospital stay, en bloc resection rate, and non-curative resection rate. Long-term outcomes of interest were disease-specific survival, and overall survival rates in the elderly group (51 patients) and non-elderly group (92 patients) were also analyzed.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to short-term outcomes. Two patients in each group required emergency surgery. Of the patients who underwent non-curative resection, 7/12 (58%) in the elderly group and 15/23 (65%) in the non-elderly group underwent additional surgery. The 5-year disease-specific survival rates in the elderly and non-elderly groups were both 100%, and the corresponding 5-year overall survival rates were 86.3 and 93.5%, respectively (p = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term outcomes after colorectal ESD were equivalent in both groups, and all patients showed favorable long-term outcomes. Considering the benign prognosis of lesions resected with ESD, preoperative screening of comorbidities is essential to improve overall survival.

Laparoscopy could be the best approach to treat colorectal cancer in selected patients aged over 80 years: Outcomes from a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of treating elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) is of concern. This study aimed to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of elective laparoscopic vs. open surgery to treat CRC in very elderly patients.

METHODS

All patients aged >80 years and who had undergone a colectomy for CRC without metastasis between July 2005 and April 2012 were considered for inclusion. Demographic, clinical, operative, and postoperative data, plus overall and disease-free survival rates, were retrospectively collected and compared between two groups of patients that underwent an open procedure (OP group) or laparoscopy (LG).

RESULTS

123 patients were enrolled (55 OPG, 68 LG). Median age was similar between the groups (84 vs. 83 years, respectively; NS). Duration of surgery was significantly lower in OPG (170 vs. 200min; p=0.030). Overall mortality at 3 months was 8.3%: it tended to be greater in the OPG (16.5% vs. 1.5%, NS). Morbidity was significantly greater in the OPG compared to the LG (52.7% vs. 27.5%; p=0.021), resulting in significantly longer hospital stay (12 vs. 8 days, respectively; p<0.001). Pathological findings were similar between the two groups. Cumulative overall survival rates at 3 and 5 years were significantly greater after laparoscopy (85% and 72%) compared to open surgery (58.2% and 48%, respectively; p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that laparoscopy is safe and could increase overall survival compared to open surgery in elderly patients suffering from CRC.

SUMMARY

This retrospective study compared the short- and longer-term outcomes of patients aged >80 years and undergoing elective laparoscopic or open surgery for CRC between 2005 and 2012.

Is the benefit of laparoscopy maintained in elderly patients undergoing rectal cancer resection? An analysis of 446 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

Several studies showed that age is significantly associated with impaired outcomes after open colorectal surgery. However, very few data exist on laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to assess operative results of laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery according to age.

METHODS

From 2005 to 2014, 446 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic rectal cancer resection were identified from a prospective database. Five groups were defined: age <45 (n = 44), 45-54 (n = 80), 55-64 (n = 166), 65-74 (n = 95) and ≥75 years (n = 61).

RESULTS

Elderly patients presented significantly higher ASA score (p = 0.004), higher Charlson comorbidity index (p < 0.0001) and more frequent cardiovascular, pulmonary (p < 0.0001) and neurological (p = 0.03) comorbidities. Overall postoperative morbidity rate was similar between groups (34-35-37-43-43 %, p = 0.70). Medical morbidity slightly increased with age (14-9-14-19-26 %, p = 0.06), but there was no significant difference regarding clinical anastomotic leakage, surgical morbidity, major morbidity (Dindo ≥3), cardiopulmonary complications and length of hospital stay. In multivariate analysis, age was not an independent factor for postoperative morbidity, unlike ASA score ≥3 (p = 0.039), neoadjuvant radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy (p = 0.034) and operative time ≥240 min (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that laparoscopic rectal cancer resection might safely be performed irrespective of age.

Morbidity after laparoscopic and open rectal cancer surgery: a comparative analysis of morbidity in octogenarians and younger patients

AIM

Although the oncological adequacy of laparoscopic rectal resection (LR) appears equivalent to open resection (OR), its benefit is controversial in the elderly. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of LR on morbidity and mortality in octogenarians.

METHOD

This was a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent rectal surgery for cancer between 2003 and 2013 in a teaching hospital. The primary aim of the study was to assess the influence of surgical approach on mortality and morbidity of rectal resection in patients ≥ 80 years old. Regression analysis was performed to control the effect of covariables on the clinical outcome.

RESULTS

Of 408 patients 203 were in the LR group and 205 in the OR group including 303 (74.3%) less than 80 years and 105 (25.7%) over 80 years. The mortality was lower in the LR group compared with the OR group for patients under 80 years (0% vs 4.6%; P = 0.049) and no different in the over 80 group (11.5% vs 9.4%; P = 0.859). In younger patients, the OR group showed longer hospital stay (9 vs 7 days; P < 0.001) and more complications (44.1% vs 29.8%; P = 0.042). Medical complications were more frequent in LR group than OR group octogenarians (40.4% vs 20.8%; P = 0.009) as well as grade C anastomotic leakage (13.8 vs 10.7; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

LR for rectal cancer showed clinical advantages in patients under 80 years and was as safe as OR in patients over 80 years, although the advantages of laparoscopic surgery were lost in the elderly group due to a higher rate of medical complications. OR may be an option in elderly patients with important comorbidities.

Is laparoscopic surgery really effective for the treatment of colon and rectal cancer in very elderly over 80 years old? A prospective multicentric case-control assessment

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery (LCS) for colon and rectal cancer in the very elderly over 80 years old.

METHODS

We performed a prospective multicentric analysis comparing patients over 80 years (Group A) and patients between 60 and 69 years (Group B) undergoing LCS for cancer from January 2008 to December 2013. Colon and rectal cancers were analyzed separately. Comorbidity and complications were classified using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the Clavien-Dindo system, respectively. Oncological parameters included tumor-free margins, number of lymph nodes harvested and circumferential resection margin.

RESULTS

Group A included 96 and 33 patients, and Group B 220 and 82 for colon and rectal cancers, respectively. Groups were similar except for ASA score and CCI, as expected. There was no significant difference in operative time [colon; rectum] (180[IQR 150-200] vs 180[150-210] min; NS-180[160-210] vs 180[165-240] min; NS), estimated blood loss (50[25-75] vs 50[25-120] mL; NS-50[0-150] vs 50[25-108.7] mL; NS) and conversion rate (2.1 vs 2.7 %; NS-3.0 vs 2.4 %; NS). Timing of first stool (3[2-3.25] vs 3[2-5] dd; NS-3[2-4] vs 3[2-5] dd; NS), length of stay (7[6-8] vs 7[6-8] dd; NS-8[8-9] vs 8[7-9] dd; NS) and readmission rate (1.0 vs 0.45 %; NS-6.1 vs 1.2 %; NS) were similar. Tumor-free margins were appropriate, and positivity of CRM is poor (6.1 vs 4.9; NS). We did not record significant differences in complications rate (47.9 vs 43.6 %; NS-63.6 vs 52.4 %; NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is effective for the treatment of colorectal cancer even in the very elderly. Age is not a risk factor or a limitation for LCS.

Impact of intraoperative blood loss on morbidity and survival after radical surgery for colorectal cancer patients aged 80 years or older

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the effect of intraoperative blood loss (IBL) on short- and long-term outcomes of colorectal cancer surgery for very elderly patients.

METHODS

We acquired the data of consecutive patients aged 80 years or older who underwent elective radical surgery for stage I to III colorectal cancer between January 2003 and December 2007 in 41 institutions. The patients were divided into high and low IBL groups, and the differences in postoperative morbidity and survival between the two groups were primarily assessed. Eleven factors were treated as potential confounders in multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 1554 patients were eligible for this study, with an age range of 80-103 years. Median IBL was 71 ml (interquartile range, 25 to 200 ml), and 412 patients had IBL ≥200 ml. Morbidity was 46% among patients with IBL ≥200 ml, compared with 30 % among those with IBL <200 ml (p < 0.001). Patients with IBL ≥200 ml had worse overall survival rates and recurrence-free survival rates at 1, 3, and 5 years than those with IBL <200 ml. In multivariate analyses, IBL ≥200 ml was identified as an independent risk factor for postoperative adverse events (odds ratio (OR) 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.86), overall survival (hazard ratio (HR) 1.34, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.72), and recurrence-free survival (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.62).

CONCLUSION

The degree of IBL is significantly associated with postoperative morbidity and survival in very elderly colorectal cancer patients.

Short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in the elderly: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and validity of laparoscopic colorectal surgery for elderly patients. We compared the short and long-term postoperative outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients aged ≥75 years (elderly patients; EP) and <75 years (relatively younger patients; RP).

METHODS

Clinicopathological data and short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer were compared between the EP (n = 53) and RP groups (n = 155).

RESULTS

In the EP group, patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists score II (p = 0.047) and medical comorbidity rate (EP vs RP: 83.0% vs 56.8%, p < 0.001), especially for cardiovascular disease (64.2% vs 37.5%, p < 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (20.8% vs 9.7%, p = 0.044), were significantly higher than those in the RP group. Regarding the clinical characteristics, the ratio of right colectomy (50.9% vs 25.3%, p < 0.001) and pathological tumor grade T4 (18.9% vs 7.7%, p = 0.044) were significantly higher in the EP group. There was no significant difference in the variation of pathological stage between the two groups. In the postoperative course, there were no significant differences regarding short-term postoperative outcomes between the EP and RP groups, including that for timing of oral diet tolerance (3.9 days vs 3.5 days, p = 0.073), first flatus (2.3 days vs 2.0 days, p = 0.636), first bowel movement (3.3 days vs 3.7 days, p = 0.153), ambulation after surgery (1.7 days vs 1.5 days, p = 0.081), postoperative hospital stay (10.5 days vs 10.8 days, p = 0.469), and incidence of postoperative complications (20.8% vs 15.5%, p = 0.385), respectively. Regarding the long-term outcomes, there were no significant differences in recurrence-free survival (RFS) (5-year RFS, 74.0% vs 85.2%, p = 0.091) and overall survival (OS) (5-year OS, 81.8% vs 90.1%, p = 0.112) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly patients was safe and well-tolerated in comparison with the relatively younger patients.

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer is safe and has survival outcomes similar to those of open surgery in elderly patients with a poor performance status: subanalysis of a large multicenter case-control study in Japan

BACKGROUND

It remains controversial whether open or laparoscopic surgery should be indicated for elderly patients with colorectal cancer and a poor performance status.

METHODS

In those patients aged 80 years or older with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or greater who received elective surgery for stage 0 to stage III colorectal adenocarcinoma and had no concomitant malignancies and who were enrolled in a multicenter case-control study entitled "Retrospective study of laparoscopic colorectal surgery for elderly patients" that was conducted in Japan between 2003 and 2007, background characteristics and short-term and long-term outcomes for open surgery and laparoscopic surgery were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 398 patients included, 295 underwent open surgery and 103 underwent laparoscopic surgery. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics between open surgery and laparoscopic surgery patients, except for previous abdominal surgery and TNM stage. The median operation duration was shorter with open surgery (open surgery, 153 min; laparoscopic surgery, 202 min; P < 0.001), and less blood loss occurred with laparoscopic surgery (median open surgery, 109 g; median laparoscopic surgery, 30 g; P < 0.001). An operation duration of 180 min or more (odds ratio, 1.97; 95 % confidence interval, 1.17-3.37; P = 0.011) and selection of laparoscopic surgery (odds ratio, 0.41; 95 % confidence interval, 0.22-0.75; P = 0.003) were statistically significant in the multivariate analysis for postoperative morbidity. Moreover, laparoscopic surgery did not result in an inferior overall survival rate compared with open surgery (log-rank test P = 0.289, 0.278, 0.346, 0.199, for all-stage, stage 0-I, stage II, and stage III disease, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients with a poor performance status is safe and not inferior to open surgery in terms of overall survival.

Laparoscopic or open hemicolectomy for elderly patients with right colon cancer? A retrospective analysis

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the short-term surgical outcomes of laparoscopically-assisted right hemicolectomy (LRH) and open right hemicolectomy (ORH) in elderly patients. Patients and methods-Results. Seventy-five patients underwent right hemicolectomy for cancer during the study period, with 41 patients aged ≥ 70 years old. Twenty-four patients underwent ORH and seventeen patients had a LRH (58% vs 42%).We found no differences between ORH and LRH in terms of mean operative time :89,5 minutes in open vs 80 minutes in laparoscopic group and return of bowel function (2,76 vs 2,54 days). Also the length of hospital stay did not differ significantly between the two groups (8,5 days in ORH vs 7 days in LRH - p 0,06). Postoperative morbidity was higher in ORH (25% vs 5%) though not statistically significant and the incidence of anastomotic leakage was similar between the two groups (8% vs 5%).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic RH in an elderly population is feasible and safe. However, we found no evidence to suggest that it is better than open RH and think that the decision regarding the method of operation should reflect surgeon expertise, patient co-morbidities and the necessity to perform extended resections.

Laparoscopic vs open partial colectomy in elderly patients: Insights from the American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database

AIM

To compare the outcomes between the laparoscopic and open approaches for partial colectomy in elderly patients aged 65 years and over using the American College of Surgeons - National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database.

METHODS

The ACS NSQIP database for the years 2005-2011 was queried for all patients 65 years and above who underwent partial colectomy. 1:1 propensity score matching using the nearest- neighbor method was performed to ensure both groups had similar pre-operative comorbidities. Outcomes including post-operative complications, length of stay and mortality were compared between the laparoscopic and open groups. χ(2) and Fisher's exact test were used for discrete variables and Student's t-test for continuous variables. P < 0.05 was considered significant and odds ratios with 95%CI were reported when applicable.

RESULTS

The total number of patients in the ACS NSQIP database of the years 2005-2011 was 1777035. We identified 27604 elderly patients who underwent partial colectomy with complete data sets. 12009 (43%) of the cases were done laparoscopically and 15595 (57%) were done with open. After propensity score matching, there were 11008 patients each in the laparoscopic (LC) and open colectomy (OC) cohorts. The laparoscopic approach had lower post-operative complications (LC 15.2%, OC 23.8%, P < 0.001), shorter length of stay (LC 6.61 d, OC 9.62 d, P < 0.001) and lower mortality (LC 1.6%, OC 2.9%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Even after propensity score matching, elderly patients in the ACS NSQIP database having a laparoscopic partial colectomy had better outcomes than those having open colectomies. In the absence of specific contraindications, elderly patients requiring a partial colectomy should be offered the laparoscopic approach.

Treatment of colorectal cancer in the elderly

Colorectal cancer has a high incidence, and approximately 60% of colorectal cancer patients are older than 70, with this incidence likely increasing in the near future. Elderly patients (> 70-75 years of age) are a very heterogeneous group, ranging from the very fit to the very frail. Traditionally, these patients have often been under-treated and recruited less frequently to clinical trials than younger patients, and thus are under-represented in publications about cancer treatment. Recent studies suggest that fit elderly patients can be treated in the same way as their younger counterparts, but the treatment of frail patients with comorbidities is still a matter of controversy. Many factors should be taken into account, including fitness for treatment, the wishes of the patient and family, and quality of life. This review will focus on the existing evidence for surgical, oncologic, and palliative treatment in patients over 70 years old with colorectal cancer. Careful patient assessment is necessary in order to individualize treatment approach, and this should rely on a multidisciplinary process. More well-designed controlled trials are needed in this patient population.

Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection in Octogenarian Patients: Is it Safe? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The population older than 80 years has been increasing. A significant proportion of colorectal diseases that require colorectal resection occur in very elderly patients. However, the benefits of laparoscopy remain controversial in octogenarians. A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational study was performed to compare clinical outcomes between laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection in octogenarians.The PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases from the years 1990 to 2015 were searched for studies that compare surgical outcomes between laparoscopic and open colorectal resection in octogenarians (≥80 years old).Seven eligible studies including 528 laparoscopic and 484 open colorectal resections were identified. Laparoscopic approach was associated with lower rate of mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, P = 0.03), overall complications (OR 0.54, P < 0.001), and prolonged ileus (OR 0.56, P = 0.009), quicker bowel function return (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.50, P< 0.001), and shorter length of hospital stay (SMD -0.47, P = 0.007). No differences were found in anastomotic leak (OR 1.16, P = 0.72), respiratory complication (OR 0.60, P = 0.07), and reoperation (OR 0.85, P = 0.69).Laparoscopic colorectal resection is as safe as open approach, and the short-term outcomes appear to be more favorable in octogenarians.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in learning curve: Role of implementation of a standardized technique and recovery protocol. A cohort study

BACKGROUND

Despite the proven benefits, laparoscopic colorectal surgery is still under utilized among surgeons. A steep learning is one of the causes of its limited adoption. Aim of the study is to determine the feasibility and morbidity rate after laparoscopic colorectal surgery in a single institution, "learning curve" experience, implementing a well standardized operative technique and recovery protocol.

METHODS

The first 50 patients treated laparoscopically were included. All the procedures were performed by a trainee surgeon, supervised by a consultant surgeon, according to the principle of complete mesocolic excision with central vascular ligation or TME. Patients underwent a fast track recovery programme. Recovery parameters, short-term outcomes, morbidity and mortality have been assessed.

RESULTS

Type of resections: 20 left side resections, 8 right side resections, 14 low anterior resection/TME, 5 total colectomy and IRA, 3 total panproctocolectomy and pouch. Mean operative time: 227 min; mean number of lymph-nodes: 18.7. Conversion rate: 8%. Mean time to flatus: 1.3 days; Mean time to solid stool: 2.3 days. Mean length of hospital stay: 7.2 days. Overall morbidity: 24%; major morbidity (Dindo-Clavien III): 4%. No anastomotic leak, no mortality, no 30-days readmission.

CONCLUSION

Proper laparoscopic colorectal surgery is safe and leads to excellent results in terms of recovery and short term outcomes, even in a learning curve setting. Key factors for better outcomes and shortening the learning curve seem to be the adoption of a standardized technique and training model along with the strict supervision of an expert colorectal surgeon.

Efficacy of laparoscopic resection in elderly patients with colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

The perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly patients were compared with those of open surgery in elderly patients and those of laparoscopic surgery in nonelderly patients to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic surgery in elderly patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS

The data of the patients who underwent surgical resection for colorectal cancer between January 2007 and September 2012 were retrospectively collected. The clinical backgrounds and outcomes of elderly patients (≥ 70 years of age) who underwent laparoscopic surgery (EL group) were compared with those of elderly patients who underwent open surgery (EO group) and those of nonelderly patients (< 70 years of age) who underwent laparoscopic surgery (NL group).

RESULTS

Compared with the EO group, the EL group showed significantly less blood loss (15 versus 100 ml), fewer postoperative complications (10.7 versus 36.7 %), earlier resumption of an oral diet (4 versus 5 days) and shorter postoperative hospital stays (16 versus 28 days). A case-matched analysis showed similar results. All perioperative outcomes were equivalent between the EL and NL groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in elderly patients with cancer was not only superior to open surgery in elderly patients, but also equivalent to laparoscopic surgery in nonelderly patients in terms of the postoperative outcomes.

Is laparoscopic colorectal surgery beneficial for elderly patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Elderly patients who undergo major abdominal surgery are potentially at a higher risk of perioperative mortality and postoperative complications. Although laparoscopic surgery has been widely accepted as a less invasive surgical procedure for colorectal diseases, the benefits for elderly patients have not been validated.

AIM

To compare postoperative outcomes and long-term survival between laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in the elderly population.

METHODS

A literature search was electronically performed to identify all studies comparing postoperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open colorectal resections in the elderly population. Primary outcomes were postoperative mortality and complications, and the secondary outcome was long-term survival.

RESULTS

Overall, 30 studies (70,946 patients) met our inclusion criteria. Laparoscopic surgery was significantly associated with a decreased risk of perioperative mortality [odds ratio (OR), 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45-0.68; P < 0.01] and postoperative complications (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.48-0.63; P < 0.01) compared with open surgery. There was no significant difference in long-term survival between the two procedures (OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.72-1.07; P = 0.31).

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the elderly population has significant advantages in terms of short-term outcomes. Aggressive application of laparoscopic colorectal surgery should be considered for the elderly population.

Cause of death the first year after curative colorectal cancer surgery; a prolonged impact of the surgery in elderly colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The 1-year mortality after colorectal cancer surgery is high and explains age related differences in colorectal cancer survival. To gain better insight in its etiology, cause of death for these patients was studied.

METHODS

All 1924 patients who had a resection for stage I-III colorectal cancer from 2006 to 2008 in the Western region of the Netherlands were identified. Data were merged with cause of death data from the Central Bureau of Statistics Netherlands. To calculate excess mortality as compared to the general population, national data were used.

RESULTS

Overall 13.2% of patients died within the first postoperative year. One-year mortality increased with age. It was as high as 43% in elderly patients that underwent emergency surgery. In 75% of patients, death was attributed to the colorectal cancer. In 25% of all patients, registered deaths were attributed to postoperative complications. Elderly patients with comorbidity more frequently died due to complications (p < 0.01). Death of other causes was similar to background mortality according to age group.

CONCLUSION

In the presently studied cohort of patients that died within one year of surgery, cause of death was predominantly attributed to colorectal cancer. However, because it is not to be expected that in this cohort the number of deaths from recurrences is very high, the excess 1-year mortality indicates a prolonged impact of the surgery, especially in elderly patients. Therefore, in these patients we should focus on limiting the physiological impact of the surgery and be more involved in the post-hospital period.

[Personalized treatment of colorectal cancer in old age]

The incidence of colorectal cancer in elderly patients is rising. Due to changing demographics the topic of personalized treatment of colorectal cancer in old age is of growing importance for interdisciplinary tumor therapy. Besides the oncological results for this group of patients, aspects of risk consideration for treatment, quality of life and the personal conception of life become more relevant. This report covers the changes in comorbidities associated with old age and illustrates the impact on therapeutic strategies and results. Furthermore, it exemplifies potential individual adaption of standardized therapy regimens in multimorbid patients and provides information on possible strategies to improve treatment outcome.

Laparoscopic colon resections with discharge less than 24 hours

Laparoscopic colon surgery that incorporates multimodal perioperative care may allow patients to be discharged within the first 24 hours.

Background and Objectives:

A short hospital stay is one of the main advantages of laparoscopic surgery. Previous studies have shown that after a multimodal fast-track process, the hospital length of stay can be shortened to between 2 and 5 days. The objective of this review is to show that the hospital length of stay can, in some cases, be reduced to <24 hours.

Methods:

This study retrospectively reviews a surgeon's experience with laparoscopic surgery over a 12-month period. Seven patients were discharged home within 24 hours after minimally invasive laparoscopic surgical treatment, following a modified fast-track protocol that was adopted for perioperative care.

Results:

Of the 7 patients, 4 received laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for malignant disease and 3 underwent sigmoid colectomies for recurrent diverticulitis. The mean hospital stay was 21 hours, 47 minutes; the mean volume of intraoperative fluid (lactated Ringer) was 1850 mL; the mean surgical blood loss was only 74.3 mL; the mean duration of surgery was 118 minutes; and the patients were ambulated and fed a liquid diet after recovery from anesthesia. The reviewed patients had functional gastrointestinal tracts and were agreeable to the timing of discharge. On the follow-up visit, they showed no adverse consequences such as bleeding, infection, or anastomotic leak.

Conclusion:

Laparoscopic colon surgery that incorporated multimodal perioperative care allowed patients to be discharged within the first 24 hours. Careful postoperative outpatient follow-up is important in monitoring complications such as anastomotic leak, which may not present until postoperative day 5.

Open versus laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in the elderly population

AIM: To compare short term outcomes of elective laparoscopic and open right hemicolectomy (RH) in an elderly population.

METHODS: All patients over the age of 70 undergoing elective RH at Ninewells Hospital and Perth Royal Infirmary between January 2006 and May 2011 were included in our analysis. Operative details, hospital length of stay, morbidity and mortality was collected by way of proforma from a dedicated prospective database. An extracorporeal anastomosis was performed routinely in the laparoscopic group. The primary endpoints for analysis were morbidity and mortality. Our secondary endpoints were operative duration, length of hospital stay and discharge destination.

RESULTS: Two hundred and six patients were included in our analysis. One hundred and twenty-five patients underwent an open resection and 81 patients had a laparoscopic resection. The mean operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (139 ±

36 min vs 197 ± 53 min, P = 0.001). The mean length of hospital stay was similar in both groups (11.2 ± 7.8 d vs 9.6 ± 10.7 d, P = 0.28). The incidence of post-operative morbidities was 27% in the open group and 38% in the laparoscopic group (P = 0.12). Overall in-hospital mortality was 0.8% in open procedures vs 1% in laparoscopic.

CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic RH was associated with a significantly longer operative time compared to open RH. In our study, laparoscopic RH was not associated with reduced post-operative morbidity or significantly shorter length of hospital stay.

Safety and feasibility of a laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection in elderly patients

Purpose

The aim of this study is to assess the effects of age on the short-term outcomes of a laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer in elderly (≥75 years old), as compared with younger (<75 years old), patients.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer between January 2007 and December 2009 was performed. There were two groups: age <75 years old (group A) and age ≥75 years old (group B). The perioperative outcomes between group A and group B were compared.

Results

The study included 824 patients in group A and 92 patients in group B. The body mass index (BMI) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score were significantly different between group B and group A (BMI: 22.5 vs. 23.5, P = 0.002; ASA score: 1.88 vs. 1.48, P = 0.001). Mean operating times were similar between the groups (325.4 minutes vs. 351.6 minutes, P = 0.07). We observed a higher overall complication rate in group B than in group A (12.0% vs. 6.2%, P = 0.047), but the number of severe complications of Accordion Severity Classification ≥3 (those that required an invasive procedure) was not significantly different between the two groups (6.5% vs. 3.4%, P = 0.142). There was no significant difference in the length of hospital stay (13.0 days vs. 12.0 days, P = 0.053).

Conclusion

Although the elderly patients had a significantly higher overall postoperative complication rate, no significant difference was seen in either the number of severe complications of Accordion Severity Classification ≥3 or in the length of hospital stay. A laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection in elderly patients, especially those aged 75 years or older, is safe and feasible.

Robotic surgical staging for endometrial and cervical cancers in medically ill patients

OBJECTIVES

Patients with high anesthesiological risk due to old age, obesity and severe co-morbidities alone or in combination are considered as poor candidates for extensive surgical staging procedures, especially if through minimally invasive approach. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic surgical staging of endometrial and cervical cancers in the medically ill patient.

METHODS

Between 07-2007 and 12-2012, consecutive patients scheduled for staging for endometrial or cervical cancer were directed towards robotic staging and divided into two groups according to their starting score in the American Society for Anaesthesiologists (ASA): Group 1 (ASA 1-2) and Group 2 (ASA ≥3).

RESULTS

Overall, 169 (71.9%) patients had ASA 1-2 whereas 66 (28.1%) had ASA ≥3. ASA ≥3 were older (p<0.0001) with a greater proportion of co-morbidities (p<0.0001), as well as of Class II (4.7% vs 19.7%; p=0.0007) and Class III obesity (2.4% vs 31.8%; p<0.0001). No differences were found between groups in terms of operative time, blood loss, intra- and post-operative complications, conversion rate and hospitalization. No differences were recorded either in terms of staging procedures performed or in terms of number of pelvic (p=0.72) and para-aortic (p=0.86) lymph nodes retrieved.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite theoretical concerns about the performance of robotic surgery in patients with high anesthesiological risk, our experience showed that robotics is a feasible, safe and viable option for the management of endometrial and cervical cancers also in this more vulnerable group of patients.

Comparative outcomes of rectal cancer surgery between elderly and non-elderly patients: a systematic review

Elderly people represent almost all patients diagnosed with and treated for rectal cancer, and this trend is likely to become more apparent in the future. Surgical management and treatment decisions for this disease are becoming increasingly complex, but only a few reports deal specifically with older patients. In this systematic review, we provide an overview of published studies of outcomes after curative surgery for rectal cancer in elderly people (>70 years). We identified 48 studies providing information about postoperative results, survival, surgical approach, stoma formation, functional results, and quality of life after rectal resection for cancer. We found that advanced chronological age should not, by itself, exclude patients from curative rectal surgery or from other surgical options that are available for younger patients. Although overall survival is lower in elderly patients than in younger patients, cancer-specific survival does not decrease with age. However, the level of evidence for most studies was weak, emphasising the need for high-quality clinical trials for this population.

Is 30-day mortality an appropriate measure of risk in elderly patients undergoing elective colorectal resection?

AIM

The study aimed to define mortality in the elderly following elective colorectal resection and to identify the most meaningful postoperative period to report mortality rates in this group of patients.

METHOD

A systematic review was undertaken to identify studies that reported on mortality in the elderly following elective colorectal resection. Searches of MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed databases were carried out by two independent reviewers and the results were collated. Two reviewers conducted literature searches independently and the third reviewer acted as an arbiter in case of discordance.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and thirty-six studies published in 2000 or later were identified in the search. Studies were excluded if they included emergency surgery, included patients receiving surgery before 1995, or did not comment on mortality in an elderly age group. Seventeen studies were finally included in the review. Thirty-day or postoperative mortality rates varied from 0 to 13.3%. Short-term mortality was low in elderly patients selected for minimal access surgery. National population and registry observational audits reported higher short-term mortality rates than most small case series or cohort studies. One national audit demonstrated that a significant mortality risk persists for up to 1 year after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Historical case series suggest that 30-day mortality following colorectal resection in the elderly is low. The reliability of 30-day mortality measures to reflect surgical success in this cohort is, however, questionable as a significant proportion of patients die in the months following surgery.

Evaluation of laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery in elderly patients more than 70 years old: an evaluation of 727 patients

BACKGROUND

With longer life expectancy, surgeons can expect to operate on older patients. Laparoscopic colorectal (LC) surgery has been demonstrated to be superior to open surgery. Controversy persists, however, regarding benefits of LC in the elderly due to increase in operative time. The aim of our study was to compare short-term outcomes of LC versus open colorectal (OC) surgery in elderly patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients ≥70 years old that underwent elective LC between 2005 and 2008 were compared with controls who underwent OC. Data was extracted from a prospectively collected database.

RESULTS

Seven hundred and twenty-seven patients underwent colorectal resection in this study period (LC n = 225, OC n = 502). The laparoscopic arm was characterised by shorter incisions (LC 6.0 cm vs. OC 12.0 cm, p < 0.001) but longer operating times (LC 125 min vs. OC 85 min, p < 0.001). Median use of narcotics and length of stay were significantly shorter in the laparoscopic group (LC 2 days vs. OC 3 days, p < 0.001 and LC 6 days vs. OC 7 days, p < 0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference in median recovery of bowel function (LC 4 days vs. OC 4 days, p = 0.14) and post-operative morbidity (p = 0.725). Thirty-day mortality was significantly lower in the laparoscopic arm (LC 1.3% vs. OC 4.6%, p = 0.03)

CONCLUSION

This is the largest series from a single institution comparing LC and OC in elderly patients. In our series, LC in elderly patients was safe and not associated with a higher morbidity. LC was also associated with less narcotic use and shorter length of stay.

Outcome analysis of elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic resection rectopexy for rectal prolapse

PURPOSE

For treatment of rectal prolapse, abdominal approaches are generally offered to younger patients, whereas perineal, less invasive procedures are considered more beneficial in the elderly. The aim of this study was to analyze whether laparoscopic resection rectopexy (LRR) is suitable for older patients.

PATIENTS/METHODS

Patients who received LRR for rectal prolapse were selected from a prospective laparoscopic colorectal surgery database. Perioperative and long-term outcome were compared between patients <75 years old (group A) and ≥75 years old (group B).

RESULTS

Of 154 patients, 111 were in group A and 43 in group B. There was one conversion that occurred in group B. Overall mortality rate was 1.3% (n = 2). Both patients were in group B (group B, 4.7%; p = 0.079). Differences in major and minor complications between the groups were not significant. Rates of improvement for incontinence were 62.7% (group A) and 66.7% (group B; p = 0.716); for constipation, the rates were 78.9% (group A) and 73.3% (group B; p = 0.832). All recurrences occurred in group A (n = 10; overall, 10.3%; group A, 13%). After exclusion of patients who had previously received perineal prolapse surgery, recurrence rate was 3.3% overall (group A, 4.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the benefits of LRR for rectal prolapse in elderly patients. Age per se is not a contraindication for LRR. Elderly patients encounter complications slightly more frequently (although not statistically significant) than younger patients. Therefore, a very careful patient selection in the elderly is of paramount importance. However, the long-term outcome does not seem to differ between younger and elderly patients.

Principles of surgical oncology in the elderly

Elderly patients constitute the largest group in oncologic medical practice, despite the fact that in solid cancers treated operatively, many patients are denied standard therapies and where such decision making is based solely on age. The “natural” assumptions that we have are often misleading; namely, that the elderly cannot tolerate complex or difficult procedures, chemotherapy, or radiation schedules; that their overall predictable medical health determines survival (and not the malignancy); or that older patients typically have less aggressive tumors. Clearly, patient selection and a comprehensive geriatric assessment is key where well-selected cases have the same cancer-specific survival as younger cohorts in a range of tumors as outlined including upper and lower gastrointestinal malignancy, head and neck cancer, and breast cancer. The assessment of patient fitness for surgery and adjuvant therapies is therefore critical to outcomes, where studies have clearly shown that fit older patients experience the same benefits and toxicities of chemotherapy as do younger patients and that when normalized for preexisting medical conditions,that older patients tolerate major operative procedures designed with curative oncological intent. At present, our problem is the lack of true evidence-based medicine specifically designed with age in mind, which effectively limits surgical decision making in disease-based strategies. This can only be achieved by the utilization of more standardized, comprehensive geriatric assessments to identify vulnerable older patients, aggressive pre-habilitation with amelioration of vulnerability causation, improvement of patient-centered longitudinal outcomes, and an improved surgical and medical understanding of relatively subtle decreases in organ functioning, social support mechanisms and impairments of health-related quality of life as a feature specifically of advanced age.