Better survival for patients with colon cancer operated on by specialized colorectal surgeons - a nationwide population-based study in Sweden 2007-2010

Impact of surgical specialization on long-term survival after emergent colon cancer resections

BACKGROUND

The impact of surgical specialization on long-term survival in patients undergoing emergent colon cancer resections remains unclear.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis was conducted on all patients who underwent emergent colon cancer resections at a secondary care hospital between 2010 and 2020. The most senior surgeon performing the procedures was classified as colorectal surgeon (CS) or non-colorectal surgeon (NCS). NCS was further divided into acute care surgeons (ACSs) or general surgeons (GSs). Overall survival (OS) and cancer-free survival (CFS) were compared in patients operated by surgeons with different specializations.

RESULTS

A total of 235 emergent resections were performed during the study period, of which 99 (42%) were performed by CS and 136 (58%) by NCS. In adjusted Cox regression analyses, OS and CFS were similar in patients operated on by CS and NCS (hazard ratio (HR) for OS: 1.02 (0.72-1.496), p = 0.899 and HR for CFS: 0.91 (0.61-1.397), p = 0.660). Similarly, OS and CFS were equivalent in patients operated by ACS and CS (HR for OS: 1.10 (0.75-1.62), p = 0.629 and HR for CFS: 1.24 (0.80-1.92), p = 0.343). However, patients operated by GS had significantly shorter OS and CFS (HR for OS: 1.78 (1.05-3.00), p = 0.031 and HR for CFS: 1.83 (1.02-3.26), p = 0.041) compared with those operated by ACS and CS.

CONCLUSION

Long-term survival after emergent colon cancer resections was similar in patients operated on by CS and NCS, and the subgroup of ACS, indicating equivalent comparable surgical quality. The less favorable poorer survival observed for patients operated on by GS may possibly be due to less frequent exposure to colorectal and emergent surgery.

Impact of Surgeon Specialization on Outcomes in Emergency Colorectal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal emergencies represent a large proportion of acute general surgical workload and carry significant mortality.

OBJECTIVE

Identify the influence of surgeon specialization on mortality and other outcomes in emergency colorectal surgery.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic searches of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Cochrane electronic databases were performed for studies published from January 1, 1990, to August 27, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies investigating outcomes in emergency colorectal surgery for adults, comparing colorectal against noncolorectal surgeon specialization, were included. Exclusion criteria were: 1) publications studying primarily pediatric populations; 2) studies incorporating patients who had undergone surgery before 1990; and 3) studies only published in abstract form or non-English language.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were rates of anastomotic leak, reintervention, primary anastomosis, and laparoscopic approach.

RESULTS

Of 7676 studies identified, 155 were selected for full-text review and 21 were included for quantitative analysis. Eleven studies showed improved 30-day (OR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.60-0.68; p < 0.0001) and in-hospital mortality (OR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49-0.89; p = 0.007) with colorectal specialization. There was a significantly higher rate of primary anastomosis (OR 2.95; 95% CI, 2.02-4.31; p < 0.0001) and use of laparoscopic surgery (OR 2.38; 95% CI, 1.42-4.00; p = 0.001) among specialized colorectal surgeons. Specialization was also associated with a significant reduction in any stoma formation (OR 0.52; 95% CI, 0.28-0.98; p = 0.04). No significant difference was observed for anastomotic leak (OR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.45-1.07; p = 0.10) or reintervention rates (OR 0.78; 95% CI, 0.55-1.10; p = 0.16).

LIMITATIONS

Heterogeneity exists within the included patient populations and definitions of colorectal specialization observed in different countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency colorectal surgery undertaken by specialized colorectal surgeons is associated with significantly improved postoperative mortality, lower rates of stoma formation, and increased rates of primary anastomosis and minimally invasive surgery.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42022300541.

Effect of a colorectal bundle in an entire healthcare region in Switzerland: results from a prospective cohort study (EvaCol study)

INTRODUCTION

Standardization has the potential to serve as a measure to mitigate complication rates. The objective was to assess the impact of standardization by implementing a colorectal bundle (CB), which comprises nine elements, on the complication rates in left-sided colorectal resections.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective, multicentre, observational, cohort trial was conducted in Switzerland at nine participating hospitals. During the control period, each patient was treated in accordance with the local standard protocol at their respective hospital. In the CB period, all patients were treated in accordance with the CB. The primary endpoint was the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI) at 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 1141 patients were included (723 in the No CB group and 418 in the CB group). The median age was 66 years, and 50.6% were female. Median CCI before and after CB implementation was 0.0 (interquartile range [IQR]: 0.0-20.9). A hurdle model approach was used for the analysis. The CB was not associated with the presence or severity of complications. Older age (odds ratio [OR] 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.03), surgery for malignancy (OR 1.34, 95% CI: 1.01-1.92), emergency surgery (OR 2.19, 95% CI: 1.31-3.41), elevated nutritional risk score (OR 1.13, 95% CI: 1.01-1.24), and BMI (OR 1.04, 95% CI: 1.00-1.06) were associated with higher odds of postoperative complications. In a supplementary per-protocol analysis, for each additional item of the CB fulfilled, the odds of anastomotic leakage (AL) were 24% lower (OR 0.76, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

Dedicated teams can establish high-quality colorectal services in a network of hospitals with a joint standard. The study can serve as a model for other healthcare settings to conduct and implement quality improvement programs. The consistent implementation of the CB items can reduce the occurrence of AL.

Pattern of colorectal surgery and long-term survival: 10-year experience from a single center

BACKGROUND

The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has increased in recent decades, and ranks fourth among males and third among females in China. Surgical resection remains the most important treatment modality for curative intent in CRC. Several studies found that surgeon volumes and specialization appeared to be associated with improved overall survival (OS). Moreover, numerous reports have suggested that specialization and minimally invasive surgery have gained increased popularity in CRC surgery. However, few studies have specifically examined the role and long-term survival of all stage CRC in a real-world study.

AIM

To evaluate the effect of surgeon specialization on survival changes and minimally invasive surgery utilization in a real world study.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis on the association between surgeon specialization and OS between 2008 and 2013 in Zhongshan Hospital CRC database was performed. Standard demographic, clinicopathologic, surgical and follow-up data were obtained from the CRC database. Surgeon specialty was categorized as colorectal surgeon (CS) and general surgeon (GS). CRC patients who underwent primary surgical resection were enrolled.

RESULTS

A total of 5141 CRC patients who underwent primary surgical resection between 2008 and 2013 were evaluated, 1748 (34.0%) of these by CS. The percentage of minimally invasive procedures in the CS group showed an increasing trend. There was no benefit associated with surgeon specialization for stage I, II and IV patients. Surgeon specialization exhibited a significant association with OS solely among stage III patients, with 5-year OS rates of 76% and 67% for the CS and GS groups, respectively (P < 0.01). Further analyses found that surgeon specialization was significantly associated with survival only in stage III rectal patients, and the 5-year OS rate in the CS group and GS group was 80% and 67%, respectively (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Surgeon specialization is associated with improved OS after primary surgery in stage III rectal patients. An appropriate surgical technique, perioperative program and adjuvant therapy may contribute to survival benefit in these patients.

Colorectal Cancer Outcomes: A Comparative Review of Resource-Limited Settings in Low- and Middle-Income Countries and Rural America

Background/Objectives: Colorectal cancer remains a significant global health challenge, particularly in resource-limited settings where patient-centered outcomes following surgery are often suboptimal. Although more prevalent in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), segments of the United States have similarly limited healthcare resources, resulting in stark inequities even within close geographic proximity. Methods: This review compares and contrasts colorectal cancer outcomes in LMICs with those in resource-constrained communities in rural America, utilizing an established implementation science framework to identify key determinants of practice for delivering high-quality colorectal cancer care. Results: Barriers and innovative, community-based strategies aimed at improving patient-centered outcomes for colorectal cancer patients in low resource settings are identified. We explore innovative approaches and community-based strategies aimed at improving patient-centered outcomes, highlighting the newly developed colorectal surgery fellowship in Sub-Saharan Africa as a model of innovation in this field. Conclusions: By exploring these diverse contexts, this paper proposes actionable solutions and strategies to enhance surgical care of colorectal cancer and patient outcomes, ultimately aiming to inform global health practices, inspire collaboration between LMIC and rural communities, and improve care delivery across various resource settings.

Complete mesocolic excision and extended lymphadenectomy: Where should we stand?

Debate regarding the risks and merits of complete mesocolic excision and extended lymphadenectomy is ongoing, particularly for right-sided colon cancers. In this article, we hope to provide a succinct yet encompassing review of the relevant literature. We posit that complete mesocolic excision with D3 dissection is indicated in select patients with colon cancers, particularly those distal to the cecum.

What are heads of department looking for in new general surgeons in Aotearoa New Zealand?

BACKGROUND

Training pathways vary significantly after completion of the general surgery surgical education and training (SET) program due to increasing sub-specialization. Aotearoa New Zealand requires a diverse range of general surgeons. Appointment of new consultant surgeons can be an opaque process; trainees are often uncertain how to tailor their training to that required by potential employers. Heads of departments (HODs) are influential in new appointments, and their opinions on desirable candidate attributes are valuable.

METHODS

An online survey was conducted in March 2023. All public hospital general surgery HODs were invited to participate. The survey sought opinions on the importance of attributes, skills and experience when appointing a new consultant general surgeon.

RESULTS

The response rate was 70% (14/20) including 6 of 7 HODs from tertiary hospitals and 8 of 13 from secondary hospitals. The top three desirable factors were all personal attributes (being a team player, having a strong work ethic, and good interpersonal skills). 10 of 14 respondents disagreed that SET completion alone is sufficient without the need for further training. Most respondents preferred at least 2 years of fellowship training, except for trauma and endocrine surgery, where 1 year was frequently considered sufficient. Only one respondent agreed formal research training is highly valued.

CONCLUSION

Trainees would be wise to obtain training desired by the majority of HODs while building an individualized profile of attributes, skills and experience tailored to hospitals they may wish to work in. The findings should be considered by organizations responsible for general surgical training and workforce planning.

Intraoperative Anastomotic Evaluation Methods: Rigid Proctoscopy Versus Flexible Endoscopy

INTRODUCTION

Rigid proctosigmoidoscopy (RP) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) are two modalities commonly used for intraoperative evaluation of colorectal anastomoses. This study seeks to determine whether there is an association between the endoscopic modality used to evaluate colorectal anastomoses and the rate of anastomotic leak (AL), organ space infection, and overall infectious complication.

METHODS

The 2012-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients undergoing colorectal anastomoses. Anastomotic evaluation method (RP versus FS) was identified by Current Procedural Terminologycoding and used for group classification. Outcomes measured included AL, organ space infections, and overall infection. Multivariable logistic regression analysis for predicting AL was performed.

RESULTS

We identified 7100 patients who underwent a colorectal anastomosis with intraoperative endoscopic evaluation. RP was utilized in 3397 (47.8%) and FS in 3703 (52.2%) patients. RP was used more commonly in diverticulitis (44.5% versus 36.2%, P < 0.01), while FS was used more frequently in malignancy (47.5% versus 36.7%, P < 0.01). Anastomotic evaluation with FS was associated with lower rates of organ space infection (3.8% versus 4.8%, P = 0.025) and AL (2.9% versus 3.8%, P = 0.028) compared to RP. On multivariate logistic regression modeling, anastomotic evaluation with RP was associated with a higher risk of AL (odds ratio 1.403, 95% CI 1.028-1.916, P = 0.033) compared to FS.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to FS, rigid proctosigmoidoscopic evaluation of a colorectal anastomosis was associated with an increased rate of AL and organ space infection.

Global survey on the surgical management of patients affected by colorectal cancer with synchronous liver metastases: impact of surgical specialty and geographic region

BACKGROUND

Consensus on the best surgical strategy for the management of synchronous colorectal liver metastases (sCRLM) has not been achieved. This study aimed to assess the attitudes of surgeons involved in the treatment of sCRLM.

METHODS

Surveys designed for colorectal, hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB), and general surgeons were disseminated through representative societies. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare responses between specialties and continents.

RESULTS

Overall, 270 surgeons (57 colorectal, 100 HPB and 113 general surgeons) responded. Specialist surgeons more frequently utilized minimally invasive surgery (MIS) than general surgeons for colon (94.8% vs. 71.7%, p < 0.001), rectal (91.2% vs. 64.6%, p < 0.001), and liver resections (53% vs. 34.5%, p = 0.005). In patients with an asymptomatic primary, the liver-first two-stage approach was preferred in most respondents' centres (59.3%), while the colorectal-first approach was preferred in Oceania (83.3%) and Asia (63.4%). A substantial proportion of the respondents (72.6%) had personal experience with minimally invasive simultaneous resections, and an expanding role for this procedure was foreseen (92.6%), while more evidence was desired (89.6%). Respondents were more reluctant to combine a hepatectomy with low anterior (76.3%) and abdominoperineal resections (73.3%), compared to right (94.4%) and left hemicolectomies (90.7%). Colorectal surgeons were less inclined to combine right or left hemicolectomies with a major hepatectomy than HPB and general surgeons (right: 22.8% vs. 50% and 44.2%, p = 0.008; left: 14% vs. 34% and 35.4%, p = 0.002, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The clinical practices and viewpoints on the management of sCRLM differ between continents, and between and within surgical specialties. However, there appears to be consensus on a growing role for MIS and a need for evidence-based input.

Short term results in a population based study indicate advantage for laparoscopic colon cancer surgery versus open

The aim of this study was to compare LAP with OPEN regarding short-term mortality, morbidity and completeness of the cancer resection for colon cancer in a routine health care setting using population based register data. All 13,683 patients who were diagnosed 2012-2018 and underwent elective surgery for right-sided or sigmoid colon cancer were included from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and the National Patient Registry. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, reoperation, readmission and positive resection margin (R1). Weighted and unweighted multi regression analyses were performed. There were no difference in 30-day mortality: LAP (0.9%) and OPEN (1.3%) (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.62-1.29, P = 0.545). The weighted analyses showed an increased 90-day mortality following OPEN, P < 0.001. Re-operations and re-admission were more frequent after OPEN and length of hospital stay was 2.9 days shorter following LAP (P < 0.001). R1 resections were significantly more common in the OPEN group in the unweighted and weighted analysis with P = 0.004 and P < 0.001 respectively. Therefore, the favourable short-term outcomes following elective LAP versus OPEN resection for colon cancer in routine health care indicate an advantage of laparoscopic surgery.

Who should operate patients presenting with emergent colon cancer? A comparison of short- and long-term outcome depending on surgical sub-specialization

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer presents as emergencies in 20% of the cases. Emergency resection is associated with high postoperative morbidity and mortality. The specialization of the operating team in the emergency settings differs from the elective setting, which may have an impact on outcome. The aim of this study was to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes following emergent colon cancer surgery depending on sub-specialization of the operating team.

METHODS

This is a retrospective population study based on data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry (SCRCR). In total, 656 patients undergoing emergent surgery for colon cancer between 2011 and 2016 were included. The cohort was divided in groups according to specialization of the operating team: (1) colorectal team (CRT); (2) emergency surgical team (EST); (3) general surgical team (GST). The impact of specialization on short- and long-term outcomes was analyzed.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference in 5-year overall survival (CRT 48.3%; EST 45.7%; GST 42.5%; p = 0.60) or 3-year recurrence-free survival (CRT 80.7%; EST 84.1%; GST 77.7%21.1%; p = 0.44) was noted between the groups. Neither was any significant difference in 30-day mortality (4.4%; 8.1%; 5.5%, p = 0.20), 90-day mortality (8.8; 11.9; 7.9%, p = 0.37) or postoperative complication rate (35.5%, 35.9 30.7, p = 0.52) noted between the groups. Multivariate analysis adjusted for case-mix showed no difference in hazard ratios for long-term survival or postoperative complications. The rate of permanent stoma after 3 years was higher in the EST group compared to the CRT and GST groups (34.5% vs. 24.3% and 23.9%, respectively; p < 0.0.5).

CONCLUSION

Surgical sub-specialization did not significantly affect postoperative complication rate, nor short- or long-term survival after emergent operation for colon cancer. Patients operated by emergency surgical teams were more likely to have a permanent stoma after 3 years.

The Colorectal Anastomosis: A Timeless Challenge

Colorectal anastomosis is a sophisticated problem that demands an elaborate discussion and an elegant solution. "Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it." George Santayana, Life of Reason , 1905.

Evaluation of the Introduction of a Colorectal Bundle in Left Sided Colorectal Resections (EvaCol): Study Protocol of a Multicentre, Observational Trial

Purpose

Overall complication and leak rates in colorectal surgery showed only minor improvements over the last years and remain still high. While the introduction of the WHO Safer Surgery Checklist has shown a reduction of overall operative mortality and morbidity in general surgery, only minor attempts have been made to improve outcomes by standardizing perioperative processes in colorectal surgery. Nevertheless, a number of singular interventions have been found reducing postoperative complications in colorectal surgery. The aim of the present study is to combine nine of these measures to a catalogue called colorectal bundle (CB). This will help to standardize pre-, intra-, and post-operative processes and therefore eventually reduce complication rates after colorectal surgery.

Methods

The study will be performed among nine contributing hospitals in the extended north-western part of Switzerland. In the 6-month lasting control period the patients will be treated according to the local standard of each contributing hospital. After a short implementation phase all patients will be treated according to the CB for another 6 months. Afterwards complication rates before and after the implementation of the CB will be compared.

Discussion

The overall complication rate in colorectal surgery is still high. The fact that only little progress has been made in recent years underlines the relevance of the current project. It has been shown for other areas of surgery that standardization is an effective measure of reducing postoperative complication rates. We hypothesize that the combination of effective, individual components into the CB can reduce the complication rate.

Trial registration

Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on 11/03/2020; NCT04550156.

Highlights

Purpose: Overall complications in colorectal surgery remain still highStandardizing can reduce overall operative mortality and morbidityOnly minor attempts have been made to standardize perioperative processes in colorectal surgerySingular interventions have been found reducing postoperative complicationsThe aim is to combine nine of these measures to a colorectal bundle (CB)The CB will help to reduce complication rates after colorectal surgery Methods: The observational study will be performed among nine hospitals in SwitzerlandSix month the patients will be treated according to the local standardsAfterwards patients will be treated according to the CB for another six monthsComplication rates before and after the implementation of the CB will be compared Discussion: Only little progress has been made to reduce complication rate in colorectal surgeryStandardization is an effective measure of reducing complication ratesThe combination of effective, individual components into the CB can reduce the complication rate.

Long-term survival among colorectal cancer patients in Finland, 1991–2015: a nationwide population-based registry study

Background

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence in Finland has risen steadily. Given development in cancer treatments in recent decades, disease-specific data on the long-term prognosis of patients may be obsolete. Thus, this study aimed to report 5-year disease-specific survival (DSS) and relative survival based on tumour spread and site among CRC patients diagnosed between 1991 and 2015 in Finland.

Material and methods

We conducted a population-based registry study among 59 465 CRC patients identified from the Finnish Cancer Registry.

Results

The 5-year DSS for all CRC patients was 56.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 56.3–57.1%] for 1991 through 2015. Tumour site-specific survival has improved for the period 2006–2015 versus 1991–2005 for right-sided colon cancer from 54.8% (95% CI 53.8–55.8%) to 59.9% (95% CI 58.7–61.1%), for left-sided colon cancer from 54.1% (95% CI 52.9–55.3%) to 61.0% (95% CI 59.8–62.2%) and for rectal cancer from 53.6% (95% CI 52.2–55.0%) to 62.3% (95% CI 61.3–63.3%). The 5-year relative survival for the period 2006 through 2015 was 93.6% for localised disease (stage I); 84.2% for locally advanced tumour invading adjacent structures (stage II); 68.2% for regional disease with regional lymph node metastases (stage III); and 14.0% for metastatic disease (stage IV).

Conclusions

This study confirms that survival for CRC has improved in recent decades in Finland, mirroring observations from other Western countries. However, the classification of tumour spread within the Finnish Cancer Registry differs slightly from the TNM classification, thereby limiting the generalisability of these results.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09460-0.

Differences in organization of care are associated with mortality, severe complication and failure to rescue in emergency colon cancer surgery

Background

Emergency colon cancer surgery is associated with increased mortality and complication risk, which can be due to differences in the organization of hospital care. This study aimed.

Objective

To explore which structural factors in the preoperative, perioperative and postoperative periods influence outcomes after emergency colon cancer surgery.

Methods

An observational study was performed in 30 Dutch hospitals. Medical records from 1738 patients operated in the period 2012 till 2015 were reviewed on the type of referral, intensive care unit (ICU) level, surgeon specialization and experience, duration of surgery and operating room time, blood loss, stay on specialized postoperative ward, complication occurrence, reintervention and day of surgery and linked to case-mix data available in the Dutch Colorectal Audit. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the influence of these factors on 30-day mortality, severe complication and failure to rescue (FTR), after adjustment for case-mix.

Results

Patients operated by a non-Gastro intestinal/oncology specialized surgeon have significantly increased mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.28 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.23–4.23]) and severe complication risk (OR 1.61 [95% CI 1.08–2.39]). Also, duration of stay in the operating room was significantly associated with increased risk on severe complication (OR 1.03 [95% CI 1.01–1.06]). Patients admitted to a non-specialized ward have significantly increased mortality (OR 2.25 [95% CI 1.46–3.47]) and FTR risk (OR 2.39 [95% CI 1.52–3.75]). A low ICU level (basic ICU) was associated with a lower severe complication risk (OR 0.72 [95% CI 0.52–1.00]). Surgery on Tuesday was associated with a higher mortality risk (OR 2.82 [95% CI 1.24–6.40]) and a severe complication risk (OR 1.77, [95% CI 1.19–2.65]).

Conclusion

This study identified a non-specialized surgeon and ward, operating room, time and day of surgery to be risk factors for worse outcomes in emergency colon cancer surgery.