Feasibility, reliability and satisfaction of (automated) capillary carcinoembryonic antigen measurements for future home-based blood sampling:the prospective CASA-I study

Aim: Follow-up for colorectal cancer (CRC) necessitates regular monitoring of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) at the hospital. Capillary home-based blood collection, including minimally invasive techniques such as lancet sampling or an automated upper arm device (TAP-II), has the potential to replace a significant portion of hospital-based blood sampling, thereby enhancing self-reliance and quality of life. The objectives of this study were to assess the feasibility, reliability and preference for CEA blood collection. Methods: Baseline venous and capillary (by lancet and TAP-II) blood samples were collected from 102 participants, including 20 CRC patients with elevated CEA levels, 60 CRC patients undergoing postoperative outpatient monitoring and 20 healthy volunteers. The second group performed capillary blood collections at home on two consecutive follow-up appointments and subsequently sent them to the hospital. Satisfaction was assessed via patient reported outcome measures on pain, burden, ease of use and preference. Results: The Pearson's correlation test of all usable samples resulted in a linear coefficient of 0.998 (95% CI 0.997-0.998) for the TAP-II method and 0.997 (95% CI 0.996-0.998) for the lancet method, both compared to venipuncture. Following the initial blood collection, 86% of the participants (n = 102) favoured the TAP-II, rating it as the least painful and burdensome option. After two home-based blood samples, the preference for the TAP-II method persisted, with 64% of the patients endorsing its use. Conclusion: This study demonstrated the feasibility of home-based capillary sampling of CEA. The TAP-II blood collection is the most reliable method and is preferred by patients over venipuncture and lancet sampling

Local excision of rectal cancer afterchemoradiation: feasibility depends on the primary stage

Item does not contain fulltext1 september 201

COVID-19 management in nursing homes by outbreak teams (MINUTES)-study description and data characteristics:A qualitative study

OBJECTIVES: Nursing homes are hit relatively hard by the COVID-19 pandemic. Dutch long-term care (LTC) organisations installed outbreak teams (OTs) to coordinate COVID-19 infection prevention and control. LTC organisations and relevant national policy organisations expressed the need to share experiences from these OTs that can be applied directly in COVID-19 policy. The aim of the ‘COVID-19 management in nursing homes by outbreak teams’ (MINUTES) study is to describe the challenges, responses and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in Dutch nursing homes. In this first article, we describe the MINUTES Study and present data characteristics. DESIGN: This large-scale multicentre study has a qualitative design using manifest content analysis. The participating organisations shared their OT minutes and other meeting documents on a weekly basis. Data from week 16 (April) to week 53 (December) 2020 included the first two waves of COVID-19. SETTING: National study with 41 large Dutch LTC organisations. PARTICIPANTS: The LTC organisations represented 563 nursing home locations and almost 43 000 residents. RESULTS: At least 36 of the 41 organisations had one or more SARS-CoV-2 infections among their residents. Most OTs were composed of management, medical staff, support services staff, policy advisors and communication specialists. Topics that emerged from the documents were: crisis management, isolation of residents, personal protective equipment and hygiene, staff, residents’ well-being, visitor policies, testing and vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: OT meeting minutes are a valuable data source to monitor the impact of and responses to COVID-19 in nursing homes. Depending on the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, data collection and analysis will continue until November 2021. The results are used directly in national and organisational COVID-19 policy

Transanal total mesorectal excision: how are we doing so far?

Aim This subgroup analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort study aims to compare postoperative morbidity between transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME). Method The study was designed as a subgroup analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort study. Patients undergoing TaTME or LaTME for rectal cancer were selected. All patients were followed up until the first visit to the outpatient clinic after hospital discharge. Postoperative complications were classified according to the Clavien–Dindo classification and the comprehensive complication index (CCI). Propensity score matching was performed. Results In total, 220 patients were selected from the overall prospective multicentre cohort study. After propensity score matching, 48 patients from each group were compared. The median tumour height for TaTME was 10.0 cm (6.0–10.8) and for LaTME was 9.5 cm (7.0–12.0) (P = 0.459). The duration of surgery and anaesthesia were both significantly longer for TaTME (221 vs 180 min, P < 0.001, and 264 vs 217 min, P < 0.001). TaTME was not converted to laparotomy whilst surgery in five patients undergoing LaTME was converted to laparotomy (0.0% vs 10.4%, P = 0.056). No statistically significant differences were observed for Clavien–Dindo classification, CCI, readmissions, reoperations and mortality. Conclusion The study showed that TaTME is a safe and feasible approach for rectal cancer resection. This new technique obtained similar postoperative morbidity to LaTME

The effect of neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy and delayed surgery versus chemoradiation on postoperative outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer patients – A propensity score matched nationwide audit-based study

Objective: To investigate differences in postoperative outcomes between short-course radiotherapy and delayed surgery (SCRT-delay) and chemoradiation (CRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Background: Previous trials suggest that SCRT-delay could serve as an adequate neoadjuvant treatment for LARC. Therefore, in frail LARC patients SCRT-delay is recommended as an alternative to CRT. However, data on postoperative outcomes after SCRT-delay in comparison to CRT is scarce. Methods: This was an observational study with data from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (DCRA). LARC patients who underwent surgery (2014–2017) after an interval of ≥6 weeks were included. Missing values were replaced by multiple imputation. Propensity score matching (PSM), using age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, cT-stage and surgical procedure, was applied to create comparable groups. Differences in postoperative outcomes were analyzed using Chi-square test for categorical variables, independent sample t-test for continuous variables and Mann-Whitney U test for non-parametric data. Results: 2926 patients were included. In total, 288 patients received SCRT-delay and 2638 patients underwent CRT. Patients in the SCRT-delay group were older and had more comorbidities. Also, ICU-admissions and permanent colostomies were more common, as well as pulmonic, cardiologic, infectious and neurologic complications. After PSM, both groups comprised 246 patients with equivalent age, comorbidities and tumor stage. There were no differences in postoperative complications. Conclusion: Postoperative complications were not increased in LARC patients undergoing SCRT-delay as neoadjuvant treatment. Regarding treatment-related complications, SCRT-delay is a safe alternative neoadjuvant treatment option for frail LARC patients

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery versus endoscopic mucosal resection for large rectal adenomas (TREND-study)

Background: Recent non-randomized studies suggest that extended endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is equally effective in removing large rectal adenomas as transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). If equally effective, EMR might be a more cost-effective approach as this strategy does not require expensive equipment, general anesthesia and hospital admission. Furthermore, EMR appears to be associated with fewer complications. The aim of this study is to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of TEM and EMR for the resection of large rectal adenomas. Methods/design. Multicenter randomized trial among 15 hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients with a rectal adenoma 3 cm, located between 115 cm ab ano, will be randomized to a TEM- or EMR-treatment strategy. For TEM, patients will be treated under general anesthesia, adenomas will be dissected en-bloc by a full-thickness excision, and patients will be admitted to the hospital. For EMR, no or conscious sedation is used, lesions will be resected through the submucosal plane i

Seton drainage prior to transanal advancement flap repair: useful or not?

Introduction: Transanal advancement flap repair (TAFR) provides a useful tool in the treatment of high transsphincteric fistulas. Recent studies indicate that TAFR fails in one out of three patients. Until now, no definite predictive factor for failure has been identified. Although some authors have reported that preoperative seton drainage might improve the outcome of TAFR, this could not be confirmed by others. We conducted the present study to assess the influence of preoperative seton drainage on the outcome of TAFR in a relatively large series. Methods: Between December 1992 and June 2008, a consecutive series of 278 patients [M/F = 179:99, median age 46 years (range, 19-73 years)] with cryptoglandular, transsphincteric fistula, passing through the upper or middle third of the external anal sphincter underwent TAFR. Patients were recruited from the colorectal units of two university hospitals (Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, n = 211; and Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, n = 67). Baseline characteristics did not differ between the two clinics. Sixty-eight of these patients underwent preoperative seton drainage for at least 2 months and until the day of the flap repair. Results: Median healing time was 2.2 months. In patients without preoperative seton drainage, the healing rate was 63%, whereas the healing rate was 67% in patients who underwent preoperative seton drainage. This difference was not statistically significant. No differences in healing rates were found between the series from Leiden and Rotterdam. Conclusion: Preoperative seton drainage does not improve the outcome of TAFR

The CARTS study: Chemoradiation therapy for rectal cancer in the distal rectum followed by organ-sparing transanal endoscopic microsurgery

Contains fulltext : 96401.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access