Referral pathways and outcome of patients with colorectal peritoneal metastasis (CRPM)

Introduction Traditionally patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CRPM) were offered palliative chemotherapy and best supportive care. With the introduction of cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), patients in the UK have been referred to nationally approved centres. This study describes the pattern of referral and outcomes of patients managed through one UK centre. Methods and Methods: A prospective register recorded referrals, demographics, prior treatment pathways, and specialist multidisciplinary team (MDT) decisions (2002-2015). Peritoneal cancer index (PCI) was recorded intra-operatively; complete cytoreduction was deemed when a CC0/1 was achieved. Complications were classified using NCI CTCAE. v.4. Median overall survivals (OS) were described for those treated by CRS/HIPEC and in derived estimates for patients with isolated peritoneal metastases treated by chemotherapy alone in the ARCAD trials consortium. Results Two-hundred-eighty-six patients with CRPM were referred. Despite increasing numbers of referrals annually, the proportion of patients selected for CRS/HIPEC decreased from 64.5%, to 40%, and to 37.1% for 2002–09, 2010–12, and 2013–15, respectively (p < 0.017). CRS/HIPEC was undertaken in 117 patients with a median PCI of 7 and CC0/1 achieved in 86.3%. NCI CTCAE grade 3/4 complication rates were 9.4%; 30-day mortality was 0.85%. Median OS following CRS/HIPEC was 46.0 months: that for patients not receiving CRS/HIPEC was 13.2 months. Conclusion The evolution of the national peritoneal treatment centre over 14 years has been associated with increased referral numbers, refinement of selection for major surgery, matched with achievements of low complication rates and survival advantages in selected patients compared with traditional non-surgical treatments

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Successful Management of Jejunal Perforation in Burkitt’s Lymphoma: A Case Report

Burkitt’s lymphoma (BL) is rare, rapidly growing, and highly aggressive. Urgent commencement of chemotherapy is vital to prevent complications and promote a favourable prognosis. Any factor causing a delay in the initiation of chemotherapy will affect prognosis significantly. Intestinal perforation is a well-known complication with devastating consequences. It inevitably leads to a delay in the initiation of chemotherapy. There are few reports in the literature that discuss this complication. Furthermore, there are no reports of patients that have survived intestinal perforation occurring prior to the commencement of chemotherapy. We present a case of a 55-year-old male who survived perforation of advanced sporadic BL of the jejunum occurring prior to the commencement of chemotherapy. Critical aspects of the patients care are discussed

Cost effectiveness analysis of intensive versus conventional follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer

Objective To determine the cost effectiveness of intensive follow up compared with conventional follow up in patients with colorectal cancer. Design Incremental cost effectiveness analysis recognising differences in follow up strategies, based on effectiveness data from a meta-analysis of five randomised trials. Setting United Kingdom. Main outcome measures Taking a health service perspective, estimated incremental costs effectiveness ratios for each life year gained for five trials and four trials designed for early detection of extramural recurrences (targeted surveillance). Results Based on five year follow up, the numbers of life years gained by intensive follow up were 0.73 for the five trial model and 0.82 for the four trial model. For the five trials, the adjusted net (extra) cost for each patient was £2479 (€3550; $4288) and for each life year gained was £3402, substantially lower than the current threshold of NHS cost acceptability (£30 000). The corresponding values for the four trial model were £2529 and £3077, suggesting that targeted surveillance is more cost effective. The main predictor of incremental cost effectiveness ratios was surveillance costs rather than treatment costs. Judged against the NHS threshold of cost acceptability, the predicted incremental cost threshold was ninefold and the effectiveness threshold was 3%. Conclusions Based on the available data and current costs, intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer is economically justified and should be normal practice. There is a continuing need to evaluate the efficacy of specific surveillance tools: this study forms the basis for economic evaluations in such trials

Impact of wide-scale data centre growth on power system operation with large share of renewables

The 2020 17th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), Stockholm, Sweden, 16-18 September 2020Science Foundation IrelandDepartment of Communications, Climate Action and Environmen

Impact on survival of intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials

OBJECTIVE: To review the evidence from clinical trials of follow up of patients after curative resection for colorectal cancer. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of intensive compared with control follow up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All cause mortality at five years (primary outcome). Rates of recurrence of intraluminal, local, and metastatic disease and metachronous (second colorectal primary) cancers (secondary outcomes). RESULTS: Five trials, which included 1342 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Intensive follow up was associated with a reduction in all cause mortality (combined risk ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.70 to 0.94, P=0.007). The effect was most pronounced in the four extramural detection trials that used computed tomography and frequent measurements of serum carcinoembryonic antigen (risk ratio 0.73, 0.60 to 0.89, P=0.002). Intensive follow up was associated with significantly earlier detection of all recurrences (difference in means 8.5 months, 7.6 to 9.4 months, P<0.001) and an increased detection rate for isolated local recurrences (risk ratio 1.61, 1.12 to 2.32, P=0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Intensive follow up after curative resection for colorectal cancer improves survival. Large trials are required to identify which components of intensive follow up are most beneficial