Search

Purpose: This population-based study determined the cumulative incidence (CI) of local, regional, and distant recurrences, examined metastatic patterns, and identified risk factors for recurrence after curative treatment for CRC. Methods: All patients undergoing resection for pathological stage I–III CRC between January 2015 and July 2015 and registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry were selected (N = 5412). Additional patient record review and data collection on recurrences was conducted by trained administrators in 2019. Three-year CI of recurrence was calculated according to sublocation (right-sided: RCC, left-sided: LCC and rectal cancer: RC) and stage. Cox competing risk regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for recurrence. Results: The 3-year CI of recurrence for stage I, II, and III RCC and LCC was 0.03 vs. 0.03, 0.12 vs. 0.16, and 0.31 vs. 0.24, respectively. The 3-year CI of recurrence for stage I, II, and III RC was 0.08, 0.24, and 0.38. Distant metastases were found in 14, 12, and 16% of patients with RCC, LCC, and RC. Multiple site metastases were found often in patients with RCC, LCC, and RC (42 vs. 32 vs. 28%). Risk factors for recurrence in stage I–II CRC were age 65–74 years, pT4 tumor size, and poor tumor differentiation whereas in stage III CRC, these were ASA III, pT4 tumor size, N2, and poor tumor differentiation. Conclusions: Recurrence rates in recently treated patients with CRC were lower than reported in the literature and the metastatic pattern and recurrence risks varied between anatomical sublocations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Timely treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC) is a quality indicator in oncological care. However, patients with CRC might benefit more from preoperative optimization rather than rapid treatment initiation. The objectives of this study are (1) to determine the definition of the CRC treatment interval, (2) to study international recommendations regarding this interval and (3) to study whether length of the interval is associated with outcome. Methods: We performed a systematic search of the literature in June 2020 through MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases, complemented with a web search and a survey among colorectal surgeons worldwide. Full-text papers including subjects with CRC and a description of the treatment interval were included. Results: Definition of the treatment interval varies widely in published studies, especially due to different starting points of the interval. Date of diagnosis is often used as start of the interval, determined with date of pathological confirmation. The end of the interval is rather consistently determined with date of initiation of any primary treatment. Recommendations on the timeline of the treatment interval range between and within countries from two weeks between decision to treat and surgery, to treatment within seven weeks after pathological diagnosis. Finally, there is no decisive evidence that a longer treatment interval is associated with worse outcome. Conclusions: The interval from diagnosis to treatment for CRC treatment could be used for prehabilitation to benefit patient recovery. It may be that this strategy is more beneficial than urgently proceeding with treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Increasing evidence suggests that multimodal prehabilitation programs reduce postoperative complication rates and length of stay. Nevertheless, prehabilitation is not standard care yet, also as financial consequences of such programs are lacking. Aim of this study was to analyse clinical outcomes and effects on hospital resources if prehabilitation is implemented for patients who are planned for colorectal surgery. Patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery and who received either prehabilitation or standard care between January 2017 and March 2022 in a regional Dutch hospital were included. Outcome parameters were length of hospital stay, 30-day postoperative complications, 30-day ICU admission, readmission rates and hospital costs. A total of 196 patients completed prehabilitation whereas 390 patients received standard care. Lower overall complication rates (31 % vs 40 %, p = 0.04) and severe complication rates (20 % vs 31 %, p = 0.01) were observed in the prehabilitation group compared to standard care. Length of stay was shorter in the prehabilitation group (mean 5.80 days vs 6.71 days). In hospital cost savings were €1109 per patient, while the calculated investment for prehabilitation was €969. Implementation of a multimodal prehabilitation program in colorectal surgery reduces postoperative complication rates, length of stay and hospital costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare adhesion formation after laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer resection. Summary of Background Data: After colorectal surgery, most patients develop adhesions, with a high burden of complications. Laparoscopy seems to reduce adhesion formation, but evidence is poor. Trials comparing open- and laparoscopic colorectal surgery have never assessed adhesion formation. Methods: Data on adhesions were gathered during resection of colorectal liver metastases. Incidence of adhesions adjacent to the original incision was compared between patients with previous laparoscopic- and open colorectal resection. Secondary outcomes were incidence of any adhesions, extent and severity of adhesions, and morbidity related to adhesions or adhesiolysis. Results: Between March 2013 and December 2015, 151 patients were included. Ninety patients (59.6%) underwent open colorectal resection and 61 patients (40.4%) received laparoscopic colorectal resection. Adhesions to the incision were present in 78.9% after open and 37.7% after laparoscopic resection (P < 0.001). The incidence of abdominal wall adhesions and of any adhesion was significantly higher after open resection; the incidence of visceral adhesions did not significantly differ. The extent of abdominal wall and visceral adhesions and the median highest Zühlke score at the incision were significantly higher after open resection. There were no differences in incidence of small bowel obstruction during the interval between the colorectal and liver operations, the incidence of serious adverse events, and length of stay after liver surgery. Conclusion: Laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection is associated with a lower incidence, extent, and severity of adhesions to parietal surfaces. Laparoscopy does not reduce the incidence of visceral adhesions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Considering the relation between preoperative functional capacity and postoperative complications, enhancing patients' functional capacity before surgery with a prehabilitation program may facilitate faster recovery and improve quality of life. However, time before surgery is short, mandating a multimodal and high-intensity training approach. This study investigated feasibility and safety of a prehabilitation program for colorectal cancer. Methods : Multimodal prehabilitation was offered to patients eligible for participation and they were assigned to an intervention or control group by program availability. The prehabilitation program consisted of the following four interventions: in-hospital high-intensity endurance and strength training, high-protein nutrition and supplements, smoking cessation, and psychological support. Program attendance, patient satisfaction, adverse events, and functional capacity were determined. Results : Fifty patients participated in this study (prehabilitation 20, control 30). Program evaluation revealed a high (90%) attendance rate and high level of patient satisfaction. No adverse events occurred. Endurance and/or strength were improved. Eighty-six percent of patients with prehabilitation recovered to their baseline functional capacity 4 weeks postoperatively, 40% in the control group (P < 0.01). Conclusions : Multimodal prehabilitation including high-intensity training for colorectal cancer patients is feasible, safe, and effective. A randomized controlled trial (NTR5947) was initiated to determine whether prehabilitation may lower morbidity and mortality rates in colorectal surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The cornerstone in the treatment of colorectal cancer is surgery. A surgical event poses a significant risk of decreased functional decline and impaired health-related quality of life. Prehabilitation is defined as the multimodal preoperative enhancement of a patient's condition. It may serve as a strategy to improve postoperative outcomes. Prehabilitation requires a multidisciplinary effort of medical health care professionals and a behavioral change of the patient. Methods: The goal of prehabilitation is threefold: (1) to reduce postoperative complications, (2) to enhance and accelerate the recovery of the patient, and (3) to improve overall quality of life. In this article, we introduce the FIT model illustrating a possible framework toward the implementation of both evidence-based and tailor-made prehabilitation for patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. Results: The model is composed of three pillars: "facts" (how to screen patients and evidence on what content to prescribe), "integration" (data of own questionnaires assessing motivation of patients and specialists), and finally "tools" (which outcome measurements to use). Discussion: Developing implementable methods and defining standardized outcome instruments will help establish a solid base for patient-centered prehabilitation programs. Any party introducing prehabilitation requiring multidisciplinary teamwork and behavioral change can potentially use this framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to provide information on timing, anatomical location, and predictors for metachronous metastases of colorectal cancer based on a large consecutive series of non-selected patients. Methods: All patients operated on with curative intent for colorectal cancer ( Tany Nany Mo ) between 2003 and 2008 in the Dutch Eindhoven Cancer Registry were included ( N = 5671). By means of active followup by the Cancer Registry staff within ten hospitals, data on development of metastatic disease were collected. Median follow-up was 5.0 years. Results: Of the 5671 colorectal cancer patients, 1042 (18%) were diagnosed with metachronous metastases. Most common affected sites were the liver (60%), lungs (39%), extra-regional lymph nodes (22%), and peritoneum (19%). 86% of all metastases was diagnosed within three years and the median time to diagnosis was 17 months (interquartile range 10-29 months). Male gender (HR = 1.2, 95%CI 1.03-1.32), an advanced primary T-stage (T4 vs. T3 HR = 1.6, 95%CI 1.32-1.90) and N-stage (N1 vs. N0 HR = 2.8, 95%CI 2.42-3.30 and N2 vs. N0 HR = 4.5, 95%CI 3.72-5.42), high-grade tumour differentiation (HR = 1.4, 95%CI 1.17-1.62), and a positive (HR = 2.1, 95%CI 1.68-2.71) and unknown (HR = 1.7, 95%CI 1.34-2.22) resection margin were predictors for metachronous metastases. Conclusions: Different patterns of metastatic spread were observed for colon and rectal cancer patients and differences in time to diagnosis were found. Knowledge on these patterns and predictors for metachronous metastases may enhance tailor-made follow-up schemes leading to earlier detection of metastasized disease and increased curative treatment options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]