Influence of Individual Surgeon Volume on Oncological Outcome of Colorectal Cancer Surgery

Three timepoint perioperative CEA levels are a prognostic factor for recurrence after adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with Stage II and III colorectal cancer

Aim

To investigate the relationship between the three timepoint perioperative CEA (ttpCEA) calculated at three timepoints and recurrence during the perioperative period in Stage II and III colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.

Methods

We performed a multi-institutional retrospective analysis of patients with Stage II and III CRC who underwent surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy from 2010 to 2020. Patient data from three facilities were used as training data, and data from three other facilities were used as validation data. The primary endpoint was the time to recurrence (TTR).

Results

A total of 538 patients were included for the training data. To validate the feasibility of ttpCEA, 329 patients were included for the validation data. Training data patients were categorized as ttpCEA low (n = 365) and ttpCEA high (n = 173). The 5-y TTR was significantly greater in the ttpCEA-low subgroup than in the ttpCEA-high subgroup (84.3% vs. 69.6%, respectively; p < 0.001). Validation data patients were categorized as ttpCEA low (n = 221) and ttpCEA high (n = 108). The 5-y TTR was significantly greater in the ttpCEA-low subgroup than in the ttpCEA-high subgroup (82.9% vs. 68.7%, respectively; p = 0.003).

Conclusion

The ttpCEA calculated from perioperative CEA levels at different timepoints was a prognostic factor for recurrence in Stage II and III CRC patients who underwent adjuvant chemotherapy according to both the training and validation data.

Exploring 6 years of colorectal cancer surgery in rural Italy: insights from 648 consecutive patients unveiling successes and challenges

The multidisciplinary management of patients suffering from colorectal cancer (CRC) has significantly increased survival over the decades and surgery remains the only potentially curative option for it. However, despite the implementation of minimally invasive surgery and ERAS pathway, the overall morbidity and mortality remain quite high, especially in rural populations because of urban - rural disparities. The aim of the study is to analyze the characteristics and the surgical outcomes of a series of unselected CRC patients residing in two similar rural areas in Italy. A total of 648 consecutive patients of a median age of 73 years (IQR 64-81) was enrolled between 2017 and 2022 in a prospective database. Emergency admission (EA) was recorded in 221 patients (34.1%), and emergency surgery (ES) was required in 11.4% of the patients. Tumor resection and laparoscopic resection rates were 95.0% and 63.2%, respectively. The median length of stay was 8 days. The overall morbidity and mortality rates were 23.5% and 3.2%, respectively. EA was associated with increased median age (77.5 vs. 71 ys, p < 0.001), increased mean ASA Score (2.84 vs. 2.59; p = 0.002) and increased IV stage disease rate (25.3% vs. 11.5%, p < 0.001). EA was also associated with lower tumor resection rate (87.3% vs. 99.1%, p < 0.001), restorative resection rate (71.5 vs. 89.7%, p < 0.001), and laparoscopic resection rate (36.2 vs. 72.6%, p < 0.001). Increased mortality rates were associated with EA (7.2% vs. 1.2%, p < 0.001), ES (11.1% vs. 2.0%, p < 0.001) and age more than 80 years (5.8% vs. 1.9%, p < 0.001). In rural areas, high quality oncologic care can be delivered in CRC patients. However, the surgical outcomes are adversely affected by a still too high proportion of emergency presentation of elderly and frail patients that need additional intensive care supports beyond the surgical skill and alternative strategies for earlier detection of the disease.

Der erfahrene Chirurg als unabhängiger Risikofaktor für die Morbidität nach Cholezystektomie. Eine multivariate Analyse von 710 Patienten

Einleitung Bei komplexeren chirurgischen Eingriffen wie der Kolonresektion, herzchirurgischen Eingriffen, arteriellen Rekonstruktionen oder Leberresektionen ist der Einfluss des Chirurgen auf die postoperative Morbidität nachgewiesen. Bei Routineeingriffen wie der Cholezystektomie liegen bislang keine Erkenntnisse zum Zusammenhang von Operateur und Morbidität vor. Insbesondere Untersuchungen bei erfahrenen Chirurgen fehlen.

Methoden Es wurden 710 konsekutive Patienten, die zwischen Januar 2014 und Dezember 2018 von erfahrenen Chirurgen (über n = 300 Cholezystektomien vor Beginn der Untersuchung, über 5 Jahre nach bestandener Facharztprüfung) cholezystektomiert wurden, untersucht. In einer univariaten Analyse wurde der Einfluss von Patientenmerkmalen, Laborparametern, chirurgischen Parametern und des Operateurs auf die postoperative Morbidität analysiert. Die Variablen mit statistischer Signifikanzen wurden dann einer multivariaten logistischen Regressionsanalyse unterzogen.

Ergebnisse Die Mortalität lag bei 5 von 710 (0,7%), die Morbidität bei 58 von 710 (8,2%). 37 von 710 Patienten erlitten eine chirurgische Komplikation, 21 von 710 Patienten eine nicht chirurgische Komplikation. Hinsichtlich der Gesamtmorbidität waren in multivariater Analyse der Kreatininwert (OR 1,29; KI 1,01–1,648; p = 0,042), GOT (OR 1,0405; KI 1–1,01; p = 0,03), offene und Konversions-Cholezystektomie (OR 4,134; KI 1,587–10,768; p = 0,004) und der individuelle Chirurg (OR bis 40,675; p = 0,001) ein unabhängiger Risikofaktor. Bei Analyse der chirurgischen Komplikationen blieben offene und Konversions-Cholezystektomie (OR 8,104; KI 3,03–21,68; p < 0,001) sowie der individuelle Chirurg (OR bis 79,69; p = 0,005) ein statistisch signifikanter unabhängiger Risikofaktor.

Schlussfolgerung Der individuelle Chirurg ist auch bei einem Routineeingriff wie der Cholezystektomie ein unabhängiger Risikofaktor für die Morbidität. Dies gilt auch für erfahrene Chirurgen mit Facharztstatus und hoher Caseload. Im Hinblick auf die Patientensicherheit und Verbesserungen der Ergebnisqualität muss daher diskutiert werden, ob eine routinemäßige risikoadjustierte Messung der individuellen Ergebnisse eines jeden Chirurgen als Basis eines gezielten Qualifizierungprogramms sinnvoll ist.

Does Fragmentation of Care in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Increase Patient Mortality?

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate health care fragmentation in patients with stage II and III rectal cancers.

BACKGROUND

Fragmentation of care among multiple hospitals may worsen outcomes for cancer patients.

METHODS

National Cancer Database was queried for adult patients who underwent radiation and surgery for locally advanced (stage II-III) rectal adenocarcinoma from 2006 to 2015. Fragmented care was defined as receiving radiation at a different hospital from surgery. Descriptive statistics characterized patients, and survival probability was plotted using the Kaplan-Meier method and a Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

A total of 37,081 patients underwent surgery and radiation for stage II-III rectal cancer from 2006 to 2015 (24,102 integrated care vs. 12,979 fragmented care). Patients who received fragmented care (hazard ratio [HR] 1.105; 95% CI 1.045-1.169) had a higher risk of mortality. Patients who received at least surgery (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.77-0.92) at academic hospitals had a lower risk of mortality. Academic hospitals had a higher proportion of patients with fragmented care (38.0 vs. comprehensive community 32.8% vs. community 33.8%, p < 0.001). Within academic hospitals, fragmented care portended worse survival (integrated academic 80.0% vs. fragmented academic 76.7%, p = 0.0002). Fragmented care at academic hospitals had increased survival over integrated care at community hospitals (fragmented academic 76.7 vs. integrated community 72.2%, p = 0.00039).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with stage II-III rectal cancer, patients who have integrated care at academic hospitals or at least surgery at academic centers had better survival. All efforts should be made to reduce care fragmentation and surgery at academic centers should be prioritized.

Canadian taTME expert collaboration (CaTaCO) position statement

INTRODUCTION

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a novel approach to surgery for rectal cancer. The technique has gained significant popularity in the surgical community due to the promising ability to overcome technical difficulties related to the access of the distal pelvis. Recently, Norwegian surgeons issued a local moratorium related to potential issues with the safety of the procedure. Early adopters of taTME in Canada have recognized the need to create guidelines for its adoption and supervision. The objective of the statement is to provide expert opinion based on the best available evidence and authors' experience.

METHODS

The procedure has been performed in Canada since 2014 at different institutions. In 2016, the first Canadian taTME congress was held in the city of Toronto, organized by two of the authors. In early 2019, a multicentric collaborative was established [The Canadian taTME expert Collaboration] which aimed at ensuring safe performance and adoption of taTME in Canada. Recently surgeons from 8 major Canadian rectal cancer centers met in the city of Toronto on December 7 of 2019, to discuss and develop a position statement. There in person, meeting was followed by 4 rounds of Delphi methodology.

RESULTS

The generated document focused on the need to ensure a unified approach among rectal cancer surgeons across the country considering its technical complexity and potential morbidity. The position statement addressed four domains: surgical setting, surgeons' requirements, patient selection, and quality assurance.

CONCLUSIONS

Authors agree transanal total mesorectal excision is technically demanding and has a significant risk for morbidity. As of now, there is uncertainty for some of the outcomes. We consider it is possible to safely adopt this operation and obtain adequate results, however for this purpose it is necessary to meet specific requirements in different domains.

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

AIM

Mortality and complication rates after surgery for colon cancer are high, especially after emergency procedures. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the importance of the formal competence of surgeons for survival and morbidity.

METHOD

The Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry prospectively records data on patients diagnosed with cancer within the colon and rectum. A cohort of patients operated on for colon cancer between 2007 and 2010 were followed 5 years after surgery. Data on postoperative morbidity, mortality and long-term survival were compared with regard to formal competency of the most senior surgeon attending the procedure.

RESULTS

This analysis includes 13 365 patients operated on for colon cancer, including 10 434 elective procedures and 2931 emergency cases. The overall 5-year survival was higher for those operated on by subspecialist colorectal surgeons compared with general surgeons (60% vs 48%; P < 0.001). Five-year survival after elective surgery was 63% vs 55% (P < 0.001) and 35% vs 31% (P < 0.05) after emergency procedures when performed by colorectal surgeons compared with general surgeons. Postoperative 30-day mortality was 3% after surgery performed by colorectal surgeons compared with 7% when performed by general surgeons. Mortality at 90 days was 6% after surgery performed by colorectal surgeons compared with 11% for patients operated on by general surgeons (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Subspecialization in colorectal surgery is associated with better outcome for patients operated on for colon cancer, and effort should be made to increase the availability of colorectal surgeons for both acute and elective colon cancer surgery.

Colorectal cancer screening behaviors of general surgeons and first-degree family members: a survey-based study

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are low in the general population and among health care providers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the CRC screening practices of general surgeons who provide specialized diagnostic testing and CRC treatment and to examine the CRC screening behaviors of their first-degree family members.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among general surgeons who attended the 21st National Surgical Congress in Turkey held from April 11th to 15th, 2018. The survey included items on demographics, screening-related attitude, CRC screening options, barriers to CRC screening, and surgeons' annual volumes of CRC cases.

RESULTS

A total of 530 respondents completed the survey. Almost one-third of the responding surgeons (29.4%, n = 156) were aged over 50 years, among whom approximately half (47.1%, n = 74) reported having undergone CRC screening and preferring a colonoscopy as the screening modality (78.4%). Among general surgeons aged 50 years and older, high-volume surgeons (≥25 CRC cases per year) were more likely to undergo screening compared with low-volume surgeons (< 25 CRC cases per year). The respondents aged below 50 years reported that 56.1% (n = 210) of their first-degree relatives were up-to-date with CRC screening, mostly with colonoscopy. Compared to low-volume surgeons aged below 50 years, high-volume surgeons' first-degree relatives were more likely to be up-to-date with CRC screening.

CONCLUSION

The survey results demonstrated that routine screening for CRC among surgeons and/or their first-degree relatives is currently not performed at the desired level. However, high-volume surgeons are more likely to participate in routine screening.

Health Care Policy and Outcomes after Colon and Rectal Surgery: What Is the Bigger Picture?-Cost Containment, Incentivizing Value, Transparency, and Centers of Excellence

Early in the 21st century, the costs of health care in the United States have spiraled out of control, where the per capita spending is $9,237 per person-the highest in the world. By 2020, an estimated 20% of GDP will be spent on health care. The issue of cost and quality is now becoming a national crisis, with ∼50% of hospitals losing money on clinical operations, forcing closure of essential critical access hospitals, and forcing health care workers to relocate or change professions. This crisis will only worsen with the graying of America, as an estimated 17% of Americans will be over the age of 65 years by the year 2020. The policy and financial structures on which these changes are based are important factors of which practicing surgeons should be aware. This review discusses recent national health care policy reform and specific topics including cost-containment legislation, value-based incentives and penalties, transparency, and centers of excellence in colorectal surgery.

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) in a single-surgeon setting: refinements of the technique during the learning phase

BACKGROUND

Transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is a safe and effective technique. We have progressively developed a systematic approach in the single-surgeon setting. The aim of this study was to compare our early vs late single-surgeon taTME experience as well as present the technical and logistical modifications that were crucial to achieve successful implementation of a taTME program.

METHODS

Review of prospectively collected data on 27 patients who had taTME in June 2015-September 2016 (early cohort) was included and compared with 43 patients who underwent taTME in October 2016-September 2017 (late cohort). Procedures were performed by a single-surgeon team at Health Sciences North (Sudbury, Ontario, Canada). Inclusion criteria were T1-3 or downstaged T4 mid- and low-rectal lesions. Cases of non-neoplastic disease were excluded. Outcomes assessed included mesorectal integrity, margin status, operative time, complications, morbidity, length of stay and 30-day readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 70 cases were included. Patients were divided into early (27 patients, 14 males; mean age 60.74 ± 9.77 years) and late (43 patients, 29 males; mean age 63.48 ± 10.85 years) cohorts. During the early phase, procedural modifications including regular takedown of the splenic flexure, intra-corporeal division of the mesentery, liberal use of a Pfannenstiel incision for extraction, abundant washing of the surgical field and regular use of the ICG technology were progressively introduced. There was no mortality nor statistically significant difference between the early and late cohort in terms of morbidity (33.3 vs 39.4% p = 0.727), anastomotic leak (14.8 vs 4.6% p = 0.19), operating time (5.05 ± 1.26 vs 4.96 ± 1.14 h p = 0.755), length of stay (4.0 ± 2.54 vs 4.81 ± 3.63 days p = 0.394) and CRM negative margin (96.3 vs. 97.7% p = 0.999), and no incomplete specimens were obtained on either cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the safety and effectiveness of single-surgeon implementation of taTME technique. Technical challenges experienced in this setting were not obstacles for further refinement and to establish a tendency towards better outcomes. Overcoming technical challenges is possible, familiarity with taTME is slow yet progressive, and improvement tends to occur with experience.

Minimum Volume Discussion in the Treatment of Colon and Rectal Cancer: A Review of the Current Status and Relevance of Surgeon and Hospital Volume regarding Result Quality and the Impact on Health Economics

BACKGROUND

To answer the question whether minimum caseloads need to be stipulated in the German S3 (or any other) guidelines for colorectal cancer, we analyzed the current representative literature. The question is important regarding medical quality as well as health economics and policy.

METHODS

A literature research was conducted in PubMed for papers concerning 'colon cancer' (CC), 'rectal cancer' (RC), and 'colorectal cancer' (CRC), with 'results', 'quality', and 'mortality' between the years 2000 and 2016 being relevant factors. We graded the recommendations as 'pro', 'maybe', or 'contra' in terms of a significant correlation between hospital volume (HV) or surgeon volume (SV) and treatment quality. We also listed the recommended numbers suggested for HV or SV as minimum caseloads and calculated and discussed the socio-economic impact of setting minimum caseloads for CRC.

RESULTS

The correlations of caseloads of hospitals or surgeons turned out to be highly controversial concerning the influence of HV or SV on short- and long-term surgical treatment quality of CRC. Specialized statisticians made the point that the reports in the literature might not use the optimal biometrical analytical/reporting methods. A Dutch analysis showed that if a decision towards minimum caseloads, e.g. >50 for CRC resections, would be made, this would exclude a lot of hospitals with proven good treatment quality and include hospitals with a treatment quality below average. Our economic analysis envisioned that a yearly loss of EUR <830,000 might ensue for hospitals with volumes <50 per year.

CONCLUSIONS

Caseload (HV, SV) definitely is an inconsistent surrogate parameter for treatment quality in the surgery of CC, RC, or CRC. If used at all, the lowest tolerable numbers but the highest demands for structural, process and result quality in the surgical/interdisciplinary treatment of CC and RC must be imposed and independently controlled. Hospitals fulfilling these demands should be medically and socio-economically preferred concerning the treatment of CC and RC patients.

Laparoscopic intersphincteric resection: indications and results

Surgical treatment of distal rectal cancer has long been based only on abdominoperineal excision, resulting in a permanent stoma and not always offering a definitive local control. Sphincter saving surgery has emerged in the last 20 years and can be offered also to patients with low lying tumours, provided that the external sphincter is not involved by the disease. An intersphincteric resection (ISR) is based on the resection of the rectum with a distal dissection proceeding into the space between the internal and the external anal sphincter. Originally described as an open procedure, it has also been developed with the laparoscopic approach, and also this technically demanding procedure is inscribed among those offered to the patient by a minimally invasive surgery. Indications have to be strict and patient selection is crucial to obtain both oncological and functional optimal results. The level of distal dissection and the extent of internal sphincter resected are chosen according to the distal margin of the tumour and is based on MRI findings: accurate imaging is therefore mandatory to better define the surgical approach. We here present our actual indications for ISR, results in terms of operative time, median hospital stay for ISR in our experience and review the updated literature.