5 research outputs found

    Colorectal Cancer Stage at Diagnosis Before vs During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Italy

    Get PDF
    IMPORTANCE Delays in screening programs and the reluctance of patients to seek medical attention because of the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 could be associated with the risk of more advanced colorectal cancers at diagnosis. OBJECTIVE To evaluate whether the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic was associated with more advanced oncologic stage and change in clinical presentation for patients with colorectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This retrospective, multicenter cohort study included all 17 938 adult patients who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer from March 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021 (pandemic period), and from January 1, 2018, to February 29, 2020 (prepandemic period), in 81 participating centers in Italy, including tertiary centers and community hospitals. Follow-up was 30 days from surgery. EXPOSURES Any type of surgical procedure for colorectal cancer, including explorative surgery, palliative procedures, and atypical or segmental resections. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was advanced stage of colorectal cancer at diagnosis. Secondary outcomes were distant metastasis, T4 stage, aggressive biology (defined as cancer with at least 1 of the following characteristics: signet ring cells, mucinous tumor, budding, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, and lymphangitis), stenotic lesion, emergency surgery, and palliative surgery. The independent association between the pandemic period and the outcomes was assessed using multivariate random-effects logistic regression, with hospital as the cluster variable. RESULTS A total of 17 938 patients (10 007 men [55.8%]; mean [SD] age, 70.6 [12.2] years) underwent surgery for colorectal cancer: 7796 (43.5%) during the pandemic period and 10 142 (56.5%) during the prepandemic period. Logistic regression indicated that the pandemic period was significantly associated with an increased rate of advanced-stage colorectal cancer (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95%CI, 1.01-1.13; P = .03), aggressive biology (OR, 1.32; 95%CI, 1.15-1.53; P < .001), and stenotic lesions (OR, 1.15; 95%CI, 1.01-1.31; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This cohort study suggests a significant association between the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and the risk of a more advanced oncologic stage at diagnosis among patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer and might indicate a potential reduction of survival for these patients

    Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

    Get PDF
    Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

    Experimental behavior of masonry vaults strengthened with thin extradoxal or intradoxal layer of fiber reinforced lime mortar

    No full text
    6noThe results of a first experimental research program on masonry vaults strengthened by means of glass fiber meshes embedded in a thin layer of lime mortar (Glass Fiber-Reinforced Mortar - GFRM), are herein presented. The tests were designed to reproduce the pattern of a transverse horizontal load proportional to the vault self-weight. The typical simplified loading patterns generally used for the experimental tests concern concentrated vertical loads at the crown section or at 1/4 of the span, but some numerical investigations evidenced that these configurations are not able to reproduce the actual behavior and the effectiveness of the reinforcement. So, a specific rig was designed to apply the horizontal load pattern. Solid brick masonry barrel vaults were considered (thickness 120 mm, arch span 4000 mm, arch rise/radius = 0.75). Three quasi-static cyclic tests were performed: the first concerned an unreinforced vault, the second a vault reinforced with GFRM at the extrados and the third reinforced at the intrados surface with the same technique. The experimental results demonstrated the technique effectiveness and the important increment of ductility of the vaults.reservedmixedGattesco, N.; Boem, I.; Gubana, A.; Menegon, D.; Bello, N.; Dudine, A.Gattesco, Natalino; Boem, Ingrid; Gubana, A.; Menegon, D.; Bello, N.; Dudine, A

    Excisional hemorrhoidectomy versus dearterialization with mucopexy for the treatment of grade III hemorrhoidal disease: the EMODART3 multicenter study

    No full text
    Background: Over the past few decades, several surgical approaches have been proposed to treat hemorrhoids. Objective: This multicenter study aimed to compare transanal hemorrhoidal artery ligation and conventional excisional hemorrhoidectomy for grade III hemorrhoidal disease. Design: Multicenter retrospective study. Settings: Any center belonging to the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery in which at least 30 surgical procedures per year for hemorrhoidal disease were performed was able to join the study. Patients: Clinical data from patients with Goligher's grade III hemorrhoidal disease who underwent excisional hemorrhoidectomy or hemorrhoidal artery ligation were retrospectively analyzed after a 24-month follow-up period. Main outcome measures: The primary aims were to evaluate the adoption of 2 different surgical techniques and to compare them in terms of symptoms, postoperative adverse events, and recurrences at a 24-month follow-up. Results: Data from 1681 patients were analyzed. The results of both groups were comparable in terms of postoperative clinical score by multiple regression analysis and matched case-control analysis. Patients who underwent excisional hemorrhoidectomy had a significantly higher risk of postoperative complication (adjusted OR = 1.58; p = 0.006). A secondary analysis highlighted that excisional hemorrhoidectomy performed with new devices and hemorrhoidal artery ligation reported a significantly lower risk for complications than excisional hemorrhoidectomy performed with traditional monopolar diathermy. At the 24-month follow-up assessment, recurrence was significantly higher in the hemorrhoidal artery ligation group (adjusted OR = 0.50; p = 0.001). A secondary analysis did not show a higher risk of recurrences based on the type of device. Limitations: The retrospective design and the self-reported nature of data from different centers. Conclusions: Hemorrhoidal artery ligation is an effective option for grade III hemorrhoidal disease; however, it is burdened by a high risk of recurrences. Excisional hemorrhoidectomy performed with newer devices is competitive in terms of postoperative complications

    Effect of centre volume on pathological outcomes and postoperative complications after surgery for colorectal cancer: results of a multicentre national study

    No full text
    Background: The association between volume, complications and pathological outcomes is still under debate regarding colorectal cancer surgery. The aim of the study was to assess the association between centre volume and severe complications, mortality, less-than-radical oncologic surgery, and indications for neoadjuvant therapy.Methods: Retrospective analysis of 16,883 colorectal cancer cases from 80 centres (2018-2021). Outcomes: 30-day mortality; Clavien-Dindo grade >2 complications; removal of >= 12 lymph nodes; non-radical resection; neoadjuvant therapy. Quartiles of hospital volumes were classified as LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, and VERY HIGH. Independent predictors, both overall and for rectal cancer, were evaluated using logistic regression including age, gender, AJCC stage and cancer site.Results: LOW-volume centres reported a higher rate of severe postoperative complications (OR 1.50, 95% c.i. 1.15-1.096, P = 0.003). The rate of >= 12 lymph nodes removed in LOW-volume (OR 0.68, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.85, P = 12 lymph nodes removed was lower in LOW-volume than in VERY HIGH-volume centres (OR 0.57, 95% c.i. 0.41-0.80, P = 0.001). A lower rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with HIGH (OR 0.66, 95% c.i. 0.56-0.77, P < 0.001), MEDIUM (OR 0.75, 95% c.i. 0.60-0.92, P = 0.006), and LOW (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.52-0.94, P = 0.019) volume centres (vs. VERY HIGH).Conclusion: Colorectal cancer surgery in low-volume centres is at higher risk of suboptimal management, poor postoperative outcomes, and less-than-adequate oncologic resections. Centralisation of rectal cancer cases should be taken into consideration to optimise the outcomes
    corecore