48 research outputs found

    Quality of life in patients with a perineal hernia

    Get PDF
    Introduction: Patients who develop a perineal hernia after abdominoperineal resection may experience discomfort during daily activities and urogenital dysfunction, but the impact on quality of life has never been formally assessed. Materials and methods: Patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer between 2014 and 2022 in two prospective multicenter trials were included. Primary outcome was defined as median overall scores or scores on functional and symptom scales of the following quality of life questionnaires: 5-level version of the 5-dimensional EuroQol, Short Form-36, and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire Colorectal cancer 29 and 30, Urogenital Distress Inventory-6, Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7. Results: Questionnaires were available in 27 patients with a perineal hernia and 62 patients without a perineal hernia. The 5-dimensional EuroQol score was significantly lower in patients with a perineal hernia (83 vs 87, p = 0.048), which implies a reduced level of functioning. The median scores of pain-specific domains were significantly worse in patients with a perineal hernia as measured by the SF-36 (78 vs. 90, p = 0.006), the EORTC-CR29 (17 vs. 11, p=&lt;0.001) and EORTC-C30 (17 vs. 0, p = 0.019). Also, significantly worse physical (73 vs. 100, p = 0.049) and emotional (83 vs. 100, p = 0.048) functioning based on EORTC-C30 was observed among those patients. Minimally important differences were found for role, physical and social functioning of the SF-36 and EORTC-C30. The urological function did not differ between the groups. Conclusion: A symptomatic perineal hernia can significantly worsen quality of life on several domains, indicating the severity of this complication.</p

    Impact of nutritional status and body composition on postoperative outcomes after pelvic exenteration for locally advanced and locally recurrent rectal cancer

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Pelvic exenteration for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent (LRRC) rectal cancer provides radical resection and local control, but is associated with considerable morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine risk factors, including nutritional status and body composition, for postoperative morbidity and survival after pelvic exenteration in patients with LARC or LRRC. METHODS: Patients with LARC or LRRC who underwent total or posterior pelvic exenteration in a tertiary referral centre from 2003 to 2018 were analysed retrospectively. Nutritional status was assessed using the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool (MUST). Body composition was estimated using standard-of-care preoperative CT of the abdomen. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factors for complications with a Clavien-Dindo grade of III or higher. Risk factors for impaired overall survival were calculated using Cox proportional hazards analysis. RESULTS: In total, 227 patients who underwent total (111) or posterior (116) pelvic exenteration were analysed. Major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade at least III) occurred in 82 patients (36.1 per cent). High risk of malnutrition (MUST score 2 or higher) was the only risk factor for major complications (odds ratio 3.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.76 to 9.02) in multivariable analysis. Mean follow-up was 44.6 months. LRRC (hazard ratio (HR) 1.61, 95 per cent c.i. 1.04 to 2.48) and lymphovascular invasion (HR 2.20, 1.38 to 3.51) were independent risk factors for impaired overall survival. CONCLUSION: A high risk of malnutrition according to the MUST is a strong risk factor for major complications in patients with LARC or LRRC undergoing exenteration surgery

    Salvage Abdominoperineal Resection for Squamous Cell Anal Cancer: A 30-Year Single-Institution Experience

    Get PDF
    Background: Failure of chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) results in persistent or recurrent anal SCC. Treatment with salvage abdominoperineal resection (APR) can potentially achieve cure. The aims of this study are to analyze oncological and surgical outcomes of our 30-year experience with salvage APR for anal SCC after failed CRT and identify prognostic factors for overall survival (OS). Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent salvage APR between 1990 and 2016 for histologically confirmed persistent or recurrent anal SCC after failed CRT were retrospectively analyzed. Results: Forty-seven patien

    Prognostic Implications of Lateral Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer:A Population-Based Cross-sectional Study with Standardized Radiological Evaluation after Dedicated Training

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: There is an ongoing discussion regarding the prognostic implications of the presence, short-axis diameter, and location of lateral lymph nodes. OBJECTIVE: To analyze lateral lymph node characteristics, the role of downsizing on restaging MRI, and associated local recurrence rates for patients with cT3-4 rectal cancer after MRI re-review and training. DESIGN: Retrospective population-based cross-sectional study. SETTINGS: This collaborative project was led by local investigators from surgery and radiology departments in 60 Dutch hospitals. PATIENTS: A total of 3057 patients underwent rectal cancer surgery in 2016: 1109 had a cT3-4 tumor located ≤8 cm from the anorectal junction, of whom 891 received neoadjuvant therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Local recurrence and (ipsi) lateral local recurrence rates. RESULTS: Re-review identified 314 patients (35%) with visible lateral lymph nodes. Of these, 30 patients had either only long-stretched obturator (n = 13) or external iliac (n = 17) nodes, and both did not lead to any lateral local recurrences. The presence of internal iliac/obturator lateral lymph nodes (n = 284) resulted in 4-year local recurrence and lateral local recurrence rates of 16.4% and 8.8%, respectively. Enlarged (≥7 mm) lateral lymph nodes (n = 122) resulted in higher 4-year local recurrence (20.8%, 13.1%, 0%; p &lt;.001) and lateral local recurrence (14.7%, 4.4%, 0%; p &lt; 0.001) rates compared to smaller and no lateral lymph nodes, respectively. Visible lateral lymph nodes (HR 1.8 [1.1-2.8]) and enlarged lateral lymph nodes (HR 1.9 [1.1-3.5]) were independently associated with local recurrence in multivariable analysis. Enlarged lateral lymph nodes with malignant features had higher 4-year lateral local recurrence rates of 17.0%. Downsizing had no impact on lateral local recurrence rates. Enlarged lateral lymph nodes were found to be associated with higher univariate 4-year distant metastasis rates (36.4% vs 24.4%; p = 0.021), but this was not significant in multivariable analyses (HR 1.3 [0.9-1.]) and did not worsen overall survival. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the retrospective design and total number of patients with lateral lymph nodes. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of lateral local recurrence due to (enlarged) lateral lymph nodes was confirmed, but without the prognostic impact of downsizing after neoadjuvant therapy. These results point toward the incorporation of primary lateral lymph node size into treatment planning. See Video Abstract.</p

    Evaluation of National Surgical Practice for Lateral Lymph Nodes in Rectal Cancer in an Untrained Setting

    Get PDF
    Background: Involved lateral lymph nodes (LLNs) have been associated with increased local recurrence (LR) and ipsi-lateral LR (LLR) rates. However, consensus regarding the indication and type of surgical treatment for suspicious LLNs is lacking. This study evaluated the surgical treatment of LLNs in an untrained setting at a national level. Methods: Patients who underwent additional LLN surgery were selected from a national cross-sectional cohort study regarding patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery in 69 Dutch hospitals in 2016. LLN surgery consisted of either ‘node-picking’ (the removal of an individual LLN) or ‘partial regional node dissection’ (PRND; an incomplete resection of the LLN area). For all patients with primarily enlarged (≥7 mm) LLNs, those undergoing rectal surgery with an additional LLN procedure were compared to those undergoing only rectal resection. Results: Out of 3057 patients, 64 underwent additional LLN surgery, with 4-year LR and LLR rates of 26% and 15%, respectively. Forty-eight patients (75%) had enlarged LLNs, with corresponding recurrence rates of 26% and 19%, respectively. Node-picking (n = 40) resulted in a 20% 4-year LLR, and a 14% LLR after PRND (n = 8; p = 0.677). Multivariable analysis of 158 patients with enlarged LLNs undergoing additional LLN surgery (n = 48) or rectal resection alone (n = 110) showed no significant association of LLN surgery with 4-year LR or LLR, but suggested higher recurrence risks after LLN surgery (LR: hazard ratio [HR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.7–3.2, p = 0.264; LLR: HR 1.9, 95% CI 0.2–2.5, p = 0.874). Conclusion: Evaluation of Dutch practice in 2016 revealed that approximately one-third of patients with primarily enlarged LLNs underwent surgical treatment, mostly consisting of node-picking. Recurrence rates were not significantly affected by LLN surgery, but did suggest worse outcomes. Outcomes of LLN surgery after adequate training requires further research.</p
    corecore