Outcomes After Major Surgical Procedures in Octogenarians:A Nationwide Cohort Study

Introduction: Aging of the worldwide population has been observed, and postoperative outcomes could be worse in elderly patients. This nationwide study assessed trends in number of surgical resections in octogenarians regarding various major surgical procedures and associated postoperative outcomes. Methods: All patients who underwent surgery between 2014 and 2018 were included from Dutch nationwide quality registries regarding esophageal, stomach, pancreas, colorectal liver metastases, colorectal cancer, lung cancer and abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). For each quality registry, the number of patients who were 80 years or older (octogenarians) was calculated per year. Postoperative outcomes were length of stay (LOS), 30 day major morbidity and 30 day mortality between octogenarians and younger patients. Results: No increase in absolute number and proportion of octogenarians that underwent surgery was observed. Median LOS was higher in octogenarians who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer, colorectal liver metastases, lung cancer, pancreatic disease and esophageal cancer. 30 day major morbidity was higher in octogenarians who underwent surgery for colon cancer, esophageal cancer and elective AAA-repair. 30 day mortality was higher in octogenarians who underwent surgery for colorectal cancer, lung cancer, stomach cancer, pancreatic disease, esophageal cancer and elective AAA-repair. Median LOS decreased between 2014 and 2018 in octogenarians who underwent surgery for stomach cancer and colorectal cancer. 30 day major morbidity decreased between 2014 and 2018 in octogenarians who underwent surgery for colon cancer. No trends were observed in octogenarians regarding 30 day mortality between 2014 and 2018. Conclusion: No increase over time in absolute number and proportion of octogenarians that underwent major surgery was observed in the Netherlands. Postoperative outcomes were worse in octogenarians

Prognostic importance of circumferential resection margin in the era of evolving surgical and multidisciplinary treatment of rectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Circumferential resection margin is considered an important prognostic parameter after rectal cancer surgery, but its impact might have changed because of improved surgical quality and tailored multimodality treatment. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the prognostic importance of circumferential resection margin involvement based on the most recent literature. Methods: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies published between January 2006 and May 2019. Studies were included if 3- or 5-year oncological outcomes were reported depending on circumferential resection margin status. Outcome parameters were local recurrence, overall survival, disease-free survival, and distant metastasis rate. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale and Jadad score were used for quality assessment of the studies. Meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model and reported as a pooled odds ratio or hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval. Results: Seventy-five studies were included, comprising a total of 85,048 rectal cancer patients. Significant associations between circumferential resection margin involvement and all long-term outcome parameters were uniformly found, with varying odds ratios and hazard ratios depending on circumferential resection margin definition (<1 mm, ≤1 mm, otherwise), neoadjuvant treatment, study period, and geographical origin of the studies. Conclusion: Circumferential resection margin involvement has remained an independent, poor prognostic factor for local recurrence and survival in most recent literature, indicating that circumferential resection margin status can still be used as a short-term surrogate endpoint

Association Between Radiological and Patient-Reported Outcome in Adults With a Displaced Distal Radius Fracture: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: To evaluate the association between alignment, as determined by plain radiographs, and patient-reported outcome in adults with a displaced distal radius fracture. We also determined which specific radiological parameters are associated with patient-reported outcomes. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search to identify studies that evaluated the association between radiological and patient-reported outcome in adults with a displaced distal radius fracture and who had an average follow-up of at least 12 months. Radiological outcome was determined as acceptable or unacceptable reduction, defined by radiological parameters. Patient-reported outcome was assessed with the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, the Quick–Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, and the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation questionnaires. Results: Sixteen articles were included, comprising 1,961 patients with a distal radius fracture. A significant mean difference of 4.15 points in patient-reported outcomes (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.26–8.04) was found in favor of an acceptable radiological reduction. Moreover, a significant mean difference of 5.38 points in patient-reported outcomes (95% CI, 1.69–9.07) was found in favor of an acceptable dorsal angulation, and 6.72 points (95% CI, 2.16–11.29) in favor of an acceptable ulnar variance. Conclusions: An unacceptable radiological reduction is significantly associated with worse patient-reported outcomes in adults with a displaced distal radius fracture. Dorsal angulation and ulnar variance are the most important radiological parameters. Despite the statistical significance, the mean difference of each association did not meet the threshold of the minimally clinically important difference and therefore were unlikely to be clinically important. Type of study/level of evidence: Prognostic IV

Obesity as a determinant of perioperative and postoperative outcome in patients following colorectal cancer surgery: A population-based study (2009–2016)

Background: Obesity is an increasing problem worldwide that can influence perioperative and postoperative outcomes. However, the relationship between obesity and treatment-related perioperative and short-term postoperative morbidity after colorectal resections is still subject to debate. Study: Patients were selected from the DCRA, a population-based audit including 83 hospitals performing colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. Data regarding primary resections between 2009 and 2016 were eligible for analyses. Patients were subdivided into six categories: underweight, normal weight, overweight and obesity class I, II and III. Results: Of 71,084 patients, 17.7% with colon and 16.4% with rectal cancer were categorized as obese. Significant differences were found for the 30-day overall postoperative complication rate (p < 0.001), prolonged hospitalization (p < 0.001) and readmission rate (colon cancer p < 0.005; rectal cancer p < 0.002) in obese CRC patients. Multivariate analysis identified BMI ≥30 kg/m2 as independent predictor of a complicated postoperative course in CRC patients. Furthermore, obesity-related comorbidities were associated with higher postoperative morbidity, prolonged hospitalization and a higher readmission rate. No significant differences in performance were observed in postoperative outcomes of morbidly obese CRC patients between hospitals performing bariatric surgery and hospitals that did not. Conclusion: The real-life data analysed in this study reflect daily practice in the Netherlands and identify obesity as a significant risk factor in CRC patients. Obesity-related comorbidities were associated with higher postoperative morbidity, prolonged hospitalization and a higher readmission rate in obese CRC patients. No differences were observed between hospitals performing bariatric surgery and hospitals that did not

Three-Year Nationwide Experience with Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision for Rectal Cancer in the Netherlands: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison with Conventional Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision

BACKGROUND: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a relatively new and demanding technique for rectal cancer treatment. Results from national datasets are absent and comparative data with laparoscopic TME (lapTME) are scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the initial TaTME experience in the Netherlands, by comparing outcomes with conventional lapTME. STUDY DESIGN: Patients with rectal cancer who underwent curative TaTME or lapTME were selected from the nationwide and mandatory Dutch ColoRectal Audit (DCRA), between January 2015 and December 2017. Primary outcome was circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement. Secondary outcomes included operative details and short-term (<30 days) clinical course. Propensity score matching was performed for 7 factors. RESULTS: There were 3,777 patients included for analysis (TaTME, n = 416, lapTME, n = 3361). Transanal TME was performed in 38 hospitals and lapTME in 90 hospitals. Before matching, the patient category within the TaTME group was technically more challenging in terms of tumor height and preoperative threatened margins. After 1:1 matching, 396 patients were included in each group, with comparable baseline characteristics. Circumferential resection margin involvement was 4.3% after TaTME and 4.0% after lapTME (p = 1.000). Conversion rate was significantly lower in TaTME (1.5% vs 8.6%, p < 0.001). Anastomotic leak rate was not significantly different (16.5% vs 12.2%, p = 0.116). Other postoperative outcomes were also comparable between the groups. Significant independent risk factors for CRM involvement in TaTME were preoperative threatened margin on MRI (odds ratio [OR] 5.48, 95% CI 1.33 to 22.54) and conversion (OR 30.12, 95% CI 3.70 to 245.20). CONCLUSIONS: This first nationwide study shows early experience with adoption of TaTME in the Netherlands. Considering that current data represent initial TaTME experience, acceptable short-term outcomes were demonstrated when compared with the well-established lapTME

Influence of Minimally Invasive Resection Technique on Sphincter Preservation and Short-term Outcome in Low Rectal Cancer in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND: Transanal and robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision are techniques that can potentially overcome challenges encountered with a pure laparoscopic approach in patients with rectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the proportion and predictive factors of restorative procedures and subsequent short-term outcomes of 3 minimally invasive techniques to treat low rectal cancer. DESIGN: This is a nationwide observational comparative registry study. SETTINGS: Patients with rectal cancer were selected from the mandatory Dutch ColoRectal Audit. PATIENTS: Patients with low rectal cancer (≤5 cm) who underwent curative minimally invasive total mesorectal excision between 2015 and 2018 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the proportion of restorative procedure, positive circumferential resection margin, and postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 3466 patients were included for analysis, of which 33% underwent a restorative procedure. Resections were performed laparoscopically in 2845 patients, transanally in 448 patients, and were robot-assisted in 173 patients, with a proportion of restorative procedures of 28%, 66%, and 40%. The transanal approach was independently associated with a restorative procedure (OR, 4.11; 95% CI, 3.21-5.26; p &lt; 0.001). Independent risk factors for a nonrestorative procedure, irrespective of the surgical technique, were age &gt;75 years, ASA physical status ≥3, BMI &gt;30, history of abdominal surgery, clinical T4-stage, mesorectal fascia ≤1 mm, neoadjuvant therapy, and having a procedure in 2015 to 2016 versus 2017 to 2018. The circumferential resection margin involvement was similar for all 3 groups (5.4%, 5.1%, and 5.1%). Short-term postoperative complications were less favorable for the newer techniques than for the laparoscopic approach. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited because of the registry's variables and different group sizes. CONCLUSION: Patients with low rectal cancer in the Netherlands are more likely to receive a restorative procedure with a transanal approach, compared with a laparoscopic or robotic procedure. Short-term oncological outcomes are comparable between the 3 minimally invasive techniques.</p

Cross-Sectional Study on MRI Restaging After Chemoradiotherapy and Interval to Surgery in Rectal Cancer: Influence on Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

Background. The time interval between CRT and surgery in rectal cancer patients is still the subject of debate. The aim of this study was to first evaluate the nationwide use of restaging magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and its impact on timing of surgery, and, second, to evaluate the impact of timing of surgery after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on short- and long-term outcomes. Methods. Patients were selected from a collaborative rectal cancer research project including 71 Dutch centres, and were subdivided into two groups according to time interval from the start of preoperative CRT to surgery (= 14 weeks), and the long-interval group included a higher proportion of cT4 stage and multivisceral resection patients. Pathological complete response rate (n = 34 [15.2%] vs. n = 47 [18.7%], p = 0.305) and CRM involvement (9.7% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.145) did not significantly differ. Thirty-day surgical complications were similar (20.1% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.943), however no significant differences were found for local and distant recurrence rates, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Conclusions. These real-life data, reflecting routine daily practice in The Netherlands, showed substantial variability in the use and timing of restaging MRI after preoperative CRT for rectal cancer, as well as time interval to surgery. Surgery before or after 14 weeks from the start of CRT resulted in similar short- and long-term outcomes

Treatment and survival of locally recurrent rectal cancer: A cross-sectional population study 15 years after the Dutch TME trial

Introduction: Optimized treatment of primary rectal cancer might have influenced treatment characteristics and outcome of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Subgroup analysis of the Dutch TME trial showed that preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) for the primary tumour was an independent poor prognostic factor after diagnosis of LRRC. This cross-sectional population study aimed to evaluate treatment and overall survival (OS) of LRRC patients, stratified for prior preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) and intention of treatment of LRRC. Methods: All patients developing LRRC were selected from a collaborative Snapshot study on 2095 surgically treated rectal cancer patients from 71 Dutch hospitals in the year 2011. Cox proportional hazard analysis was performed to determine predictors for OS. Results: A total of 107 LRRC patients (5.1%) were included, of whom 88 (82%) underwent PRT for their primary tumour. LRRC was treated with initial curative intent in 31 patients (29%), with eventual resection in 20 patients (19%). Median OS was 22 and 8 months after curative and palliative intent treatment, respectively (p < 0.001). Initial CRM positivity and palliative intent treatment were associated with worse OS after LRRC, while prior PRT was not. Conclusions: This cross-sectional study revealed that rectal cancer patients, who underwent curative resection in the Netherlands in 2011 and subsequently developed local recurrence, were amenable for again curative intent treatment in 29%, with a corresponding median survival of 22 months. Prior PRT was not significantly associated with survival after diagnosis of LRRC

Nationwide analysis of hospital variation in preoperative radiotherapy use for rectal cancer following guideline revision

Introduction: The revised Dutch colorectal cancer guideline (2014), led to an overall decrease in preoperative radiotherapy (RT) use. This study evaluates hospital variation in RT use for resectable rectal cancer and the influence of guideline revision, including the nationwide impact of changing RT application on short term outcomes. Methods: Data of surgically resected rectal cancer patients registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit were extracted between 2011 and 2017. Patients were divided into groups based on time of guideline revision (<2014 and ≥ 2014). Primary outcome was guideline adherence at hospital level regarding RT application, stratified for three stage groups. Secondary outcomes included positive circumferential resection (CRM+) and 30-day complicated postoperative course. Results: The groups consisted of 7364 and 12,057 patients, respectively. In total, 6772 patients did not receive RT (17.6% (<2014) vs. 45.7% (≥2014), p < 0.001). The largest increase of surgery alone was observed for cT1-2N0 stage rectal cancer (35.1% vs. 91.8%, p < 0.001), with a substantial decrease in hospital variation (IQR 22.2–50.0% vs. IQR 87.6–98.0%). For cT1-3N1MRF- stage rectal cancer, a substantial amount of hospital variation in short course RT remained after guideline revision (IQR 26.8–54.1% vs. IQR 26.2–50.0%). A significant decrease in CRM+ (5.8% vs. 4.2%, p < 0.001) and complicated course (22.5% vs. 18.5%, p < 0.001) was observed. Conclusions: Radiotherapy for early-stage rectal cancer was uniformly abandoned after guideline revision, while substantial hospital variation remained for intermediate risk resectable rectal cancer in the Netherlands. The substantial nationwide decrease in the use of RT for rectal cancer treatment did not negatively impact CRM involvement