Impact of age on outcome after colorectal cancer surgery in the elderly - a developing country perspective

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major source of morbidity and mortality in the elderly population and surgery is often the only definitive management option. The suitability of surgical candidates based on age alone has traditionally been a source of controversy. Surgical resection may be considered detrimental in the elderly solely on the basis of advanced age. Based on recent evidence suggesting that age alone is not a predictor of outcomes, Western societies are increasingly performing definitive procedures on the elderly. Such evidence is not available from our region. We aimed to determine whether age has an independent effect on complications after surgery for colorectal cancer in our population.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A retrospective review of all patients who underwent surgery for pathologically confirmed colorectal cancer at Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi between January 1999 and December 2008 was conducted. Using a cut-off of 70 years, patients were divided into two groups. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics and postoperative complications and 30-day mortality were compared. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed with clinically relevant variables to determine whether age had an independent and significant association with the outcome.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 271 files were reviewed, of which 56 belonged to elderly patients (≥ 70 years). The gender ratio was equal in both groups. Elderly patients had a significantly higher comorbidity status, Charlson score and American society of anesthesiologists (ASA) class (all p < 0.001). Upon multivariate analysis, factors associated with more complications were ASA status (95% CI = 1.30-6.25), preoperative perforation (95% CI = 1.94-48.0) and rectal tumors (95% CI = 1.21-5.34). Old age was significantly associated with systemic complications upon univariate analysis (p = 0.05), however, this association vanished upon multivariate analysis (p = 0.36).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Older patients have more co-morbid conditions and higher ASA scores, but increasing age itself is not independently associated with complications after surgery for CRC. Therefore patient selection should focus on the clinical status and ASA class of the patient rather than age.</p

Preoperative serum carcinoembryonic antigen, albumin and age are supplementary to UICC staging systems in predicting survival for colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgical treatment

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aim of this study was to determine influence of prognostic factors in addition to UICC staging systems, on cancer-specific and overall survival rates for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) undergoing surgical treatment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Between January 1996 and December 2006, a total of 1367 CRC patients who underwent surgical treatment in Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital were analyzed. We retrospectively investigated clinicopathologic features of these patients. All patients were followed up intensively, and their outcomes were investigated completely.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 1367 CRC patients, there were seven hundred and fifty-seven males (55.4%) and 610 (44.6%) females. The median follow-up period was 60 months (range, 3–132 months). A multivariate analysis identified that low serum albumin level (<it>P </it>= 0.011), advanced UICC stage (<it>P </it>< 0.001), and high carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level (<it>P </it>< 0.001) were independent prognostic factors of cancer-specific survival. Meanwhile, a multivariate analysis showed age over 65 years (<it>P </it>< 0.001), advanced UICC stage (<it>P </it>< 0.001), and high CEA level (<it>P </it>< 0.001) were independent prognostic factors of overall survival. Furthermore, combination of UICC stage, serum CEA and albumin levels as predictors of cancer-specific survival showed that the poorer the prognostic factors involved, the poorer the cancer-specific survival rate. Likewise, combination of UICC stage, age and serum CEA level as predictors of overall survival showed that the poorer the prognostic factors involved, the poorer the overall survival rate. Of these prognostic factors, preoperative serum CEA level was the only significant prognostic factor for patients with stage II and III CRCs in both cancer-specific and overall survival categories.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Preoperative serum albumin level, CEA level and age could prominently affect postoperative outcome of CRC patients undergoing surgical treatment. In addition to conventional UICC staging system, it might be imperative to take these additional characteristics of factors into account in CRC patients prior to surgical treatment.</p

The impact of age on post-operative outcomes of colorectal cancer patients undergoing surgical treatment

BACKGROUND: the purpose of study was to evaluate the impact of age on outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: patients on hospital database treated for colorectal cancer during the period 1995 – 2002 were divided into two groups: Group 1 – patients of 75 years or older (n = 154), and Group 2 – those younger than 75 years (n = 532). RESULTS: In Group 1, for colon cancers, proximal tumors were significantly more common (23% vs. 13.5%, p < 0.05), complicated cases were more frequent (46 % vs. 33%, p = 0.002), bowel obstruction more common at presentation (40% vs. 26.5%, p = 0.001), and more frequent emergency surgery required (24% vs. 14%, p = 0.003). Postoperative overall morbidity was higher in the elderly group, but with no differences in surgical complications rate. Overall 5 year survival was 39% vs. 55% (p = 0.0006) and cancer related 5 year survival was 44% vs. 62% (p = 0.0006). Multivariate Cox analysis showed that age was not an independent risk factor for postoperative mortality. CONCLUSION: Preoperative complications and co-morbidities, more advanced disease, and higher postoperative nonsurgical complication rates adversely affect postoperative outcomes after surgery for colorectal cancer in the elderly

COVID-19. Pandemic surgery guidance

Abstract – Based on high quality surgery and scientific data, scientists and surgeons are committed to protecting patients as well as healthcare staff and hereby provide this Guidance to address the special issues circumstances related to the exponential spread of the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during this pandemic. As a basis, the authors used the British Intercollegiate General Surgery Guidance as well as recommendations from the USA, Asia, and Italy. The aim is to take responsibility and to provide guidance for surgery during the COVID-19 crisis in a simplified way addressing the practice of surgery, healthcare staff and patient safety and care. It is the responsibility of scientists and the surgical team to specify what is needed for the protection of patients and the affiliated healthcare team. During crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, the responsibility and duty to provide the necessary resources such as filters, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) consisting of gloves, fluid resistant (Type IIR) surgical face masks (FRSM), filtering face pieces, class 3 (FFP3 masks), face shields and gowns (plastic ponchos), is typically left up to the hospital administration and government. Various scientists and clinicians from disparate specialties provided a Pandemic Surgery Guidance for surgical procedures by distinct surgical disciplines such as numerous cancer surgery disciplines, cardiothoracic surgery, ENT, eye, dermatology, emergency, endocrine surgery, general surgery, gynecology, neurosurgery, orthopedics, pediatric surgery, reconstructive and plastic surgery, surgical critical care, transplantation surgery, trauma surgery and urology, performing different surgeries, as well as laparoscopy, thoracoscopy and endoscopy. Any suggestions and corrections from colleagues will be very welcome as we are all involved and locked in a rapidly evolving process on increasing COVID-19 knowledg

Minimally invasive surgery and cancer: controversies part 1

Perhaps there is no more important issue in the care of surgical patients than the appropriate use of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for patients with cancer. Important advances in surgical technique have an impact on early perioperative morbidity, length of hospital stay, pain management, and quality of life issues, as clearly proved with MIS. However, for oncology patients, historically, the most important clinical questions have been answered in the context of prospective randomized trials. Important considerations for MIS and cancer have been addressed, such as what are the important immunologic consequences of MIS versus open surgery and what is the role of laparoscopy in the staging of gastrointestinal cancers? This review article discusses many of the key controversies in the minimally invasive treatment of cancer using the pro–con debate format