Search

Rationale, aims and objectives The burden of illness from colorectal cancer (CRC) can be reduced by improving the quality of care. Identifying appropriate quality measures is the first step in this direction. We identified process measures currently available to assess the quality of diagnosis and management of CRC. We also evaluated the extent to which these measures are ready to be implemented in clinical practice, and identified areas for future research. Methods We searched MEDLINE®, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and relevant grey literature. We identified 3771 abstracts and reviewed 74 articles that included quality measures for diagnosis or management of CRC. Measures from traditional quality improvement literature, and from epidemiological and other studies that included quality measures as part of their research agenda, were considered. In addition, we devised a summary rating scale (IST) to appraise the extent of a measure’s importance and usability, scientific acceptability and extent of testing. Results The coverage of general process measures in CRC is extensive. Most measures are important, but need to be developed and field-tested. The best available measures relate to pathology and chemotherapy. No measures are available for assessing quality of management of stage IV rectal cancer and hepatic metastasis; chemotherapy for stage II colon cancer; and procedure notes. Conclusions There is an urgent need to refine existing measures and to develop scientifically accurate quality measures for a comprehensive assessment of the quality of CRC care. The role of the federal government and professional societies is critical in pursuing this goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

INTRODUCTION: Temporary loop ileostomies have become widely used in colorectal surgery. Subsequent ileostomy closure has traditionally required hospital admission with observation until return of bowel function. On the basis of clinical observation, the authors hypothesized that loop ileostomy closure may be performed safely without prolonged in-hospital observation. METHODS: A protocol for 23-hour observation after loop ileostomy closure was implemented at a single institution and applied to 28 patients at an ambulatory surgery facility. Patient outcomes were reviewed and results compared with a cohort of 30 patients undergoing loop ileostomy closure before introduction of the protocol. RESULTS: The study and control groups were statistically similar in age, gender, diseases, and duration after original operation. Twenty-eight patients underwent loop ileostomy closure, and all were discharged the following day. Two patients were admitted for nausea and vomiting within 48 hours after closure and remained in the hospital for two and four days, respectively. One of these patients was readmitted 12 days after surgery with an abdominal abscess that was drained percutaneously. The mean cost per patient in the study group was $2,665. For the control population, the mean hospital stay was 2.9 days. Return of bowel function was delayed in two patients, resulting in prolonged hospital stays of six and eight days, respectively. Two patients were readmitted after discharge for nausea and vomiting. The mean cost per cohort patient was $3,811. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing loop ileostomy closure may be discharged safely after overnight observation without increased complications or hospital readmissions. This practice significantly reduces the use of hospital resources and decreases economic cost without compromising care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy after resection is the standard of care for stage III colon cancer, yet many patients omit chemotherapy. We aimed to describe the impact of delayed chemotherapy on overall survival across multiple time points.Study Design: The 2006 to 2014 National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried for patients with single primary stage III adenocarcinoma of the colon. Patients were grouped by receipt and timing of chemotherapy from resection date: chemotherapy omitted, <6 weeks, 6 to 8 weeks, 8 to 12 weeks, 12 to 24 weeks, and >24 weeks. Subgroup analyses were performed for those with comorbidities and those who had postoperative complications. Overall survival was compared using Cox proportional hazard modeling, adjusting for patient, tumor, and facility characteristics.Results: In total, 72,057 patients were included; 20,807 omitted chemotherapy, 22,705 received it at <6 weeks, 15,412 between 6 and 8 weeks, 9,049 between 8 and 12 weeks, 3,595 between 12 and 24 weeks, and 489 at >24 weeks after resection. Compared with patients who omitted chemotherapy, patients who received chemotherapy at <6 weeks (hazard ratio [HR] 0.44), 6 to 8 weeks (HR 0.45), 8 to 12 weeks (HR 0.52), 12 to 24 weeks (HR 0.61), and >24 weeks (HR 0.68) had superior overall survival (p < 0.001). This survival benefit was preserved across subgroups (p < 0.001).Conclusions: After resection of stage III colon cancer, patients should receive adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 to 8 weeks for maximal benefit. However, chemotherapy should be offered to patients who are outside the optimal window, who have significant comorbidities, or who have had a complication more than 24 weeks from resection to improve the overall survival compared with omitting chemotherapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adjuvant chemotherapy regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) routinely include bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF). We have identified a correlation between bevacizumab and fistula formation after resection of advanced CRC. Study Design: Patients undergoing treatment with bevacizumab for metastatic CRC after 2005 were identified and reviewed. Of 222 consecutive patients, 9 patients treated with bevacizumab subsequently developed fistulas. These patients'' charts were reviewed with attention to diagnosis, timing of operation relative to bevacizumab therapy, location of fistula, and fistula treatment. Results: Of the 9 identified patients (9 of 222, 4.1%), 6 had rectal cancer, 2 had colon cancer, and 1 had synchronous CRC. Fistulas were most commonly anal or perineal (6 of 9, 66.7%) and colovesicular (3 of 9, 33%). On average, bevacizumab was initiated 23.6 months after the initial operation; complications occurred 3.9 months after starting bevacizumab. Nearly uniformly, cessation of bevacizumab led to fistula healing; however, 3 patients (33%) required fecal diversion. Conclusions: Bevacizumab is the most common antiangiogenesis agent used for treatment of metastatic CRC. Previous adverse events associated with bevacizumab treatment include venous thromboembolism, poor wound healing, and spontaneous bowel perforation. In this report, late postoperative development of fistulas occurred relatively soon after initiation of bevacizumab and usually spontaneously resolved with cessation of bevacizumab treatment. Based on the timing of fistula development relative to operation and initiation of bevacizumab, fistulas are likely secondary to bevacizumab therapy rather than postsurgical complications. Bevacizumab-induced fistulas occur in a small, but significant proportion of CRC patients and must be recognized early. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]