Search

Ileocolic resection (ICR) is the most common surgical procedure in Crohn disease (CD). There are many surgical techniques for performing ICRs and subsequent anastomoses. Recurrence of CD after ICR is common, often clinically silent, and thus requires monitoring including periodic use of endoscopy to detect early active disease. There is emerging evidence that surgical approaches may influence CD recurrence. This review explores the various surgical considerations, the data behind each decision, and how these techniques influence subsequent endoscopic surveillance.

Background Colorectal neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are the most common NETs of the gastrointestinal tract. Due to the rarity, colorectal NETs are understudied and are not clearly understood. Our study sought to identify the factors associated with worse outcomes for colorectal NETs following resection. Methods We identified patients diagnosed with colorectal NETs [2004-2014] who underwent resection from the National Cancer Data Base. Non-NETs were excluded. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated using the Kaplan Meier method. Cox proportional hazards and logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with radical versus local resection, OS and LOS. Results A total of 7,967 colon and 11,929 rectal NETs were analyzed. The majority of colon (93.4%) and rectal (89.1%) NETs underwent radical and local resection respectively. The 5-year OS was 69% and 92% for colon and rectal NETs respectively. Older age (OR 1.45, CI 1.37-1.53) and clinical stage 4 (OR 9.91, CI 4.56-21.52) were associated with higher odds for colonic radical resection. Lowest median income quartile (OR 1.41, CI 1.21-1.64) and African Americans (OR 1.26, CI 1.07-1.49) experienced higher mortality for colon and rectal NETs respectively. Conclusions Racial minority and low-income patients experience worse outcomes for colorectal NETs following resection.

No abstract available

Background Circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement is widely considered the strongest predictor of local recurrence after TME. This study aimed to determine preoperative factors associated with a higher risk of pathological CRM involvement in robotic rectal cancer surgery. Methods This was a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of consecutive adult patients who underwent elective, curative robotic low anterior or abdominoperineal resection with curative intent for primary rectal adenocarcinoma in a tertiary referral cancer center from March 2012 to September 2019. Pretreatment magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) reports were reviewed for all the patients. Risk factors for pathological CRM involvement were investigated using Firth’s logistic regression and a predictive model based on preoperative radiological features was formulated. Results A total of 305 patients were included, and 14 (4.6%) had CRM involvement. Multivariable logistic regression found both T3 >5 mm (OR 6.12, CI 1.35–36.44) and threatened or involved mesorectal fascia (OR 4.54, CI 1.33–17.55) on baseline MRI to be preoperative predictors of pathologic CRM positivity, while anterior location (OR 3.44, CI 0.72–33.13) was significant only on univariate analysis. The predictive model showed good discrimination (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve >0.80) and predicted a 32% risk of positive CRM if all risk factors were present. Conclusion Patients with pre-operatively assessed threatened radiological margin, T3 tumors with greater than 5 mm extension and anterior location are at risk for a positive CRM. The predictive model can preoperatively estimate the CRM positivity risk for each patient, allowing surgeons to tailor management to improve oncological outcomes.

OBJECTIVE To compare short term outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic rectal cancer surgery. BACKGROUND Significant benefits of robotic rectal cancer surgery over laparoscopy have yet to be demonstrated. Operative time and direct institutional cost seem in favor of the laparoscopic approach. METHODS We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients operated on for rectal cancer with a mini-invasive approach at Mayo Clinic from 2005 to 2018. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the difference in postoperative morbidity between the laparoscopic and robotic approach. Multivariable models for odds to complications and prolonged (≥6 days) length of stay were built. RESULTS A total of 600 patients were included in the analysis. The number of patients undergoing robotic surgery was 317 (52.8%). The 2 groups were similar in respect to age, sex, and body mass index. Laparoscopic surgery was correlated to shorter operative time (214 vs 324 minutes; P < 0.001). Patients undergoing robotic surgery had a lower overall complications rate (37.2% vs 51.2%; P < 0.001). Robotic surgery was found to be the most protective factor [odds ratio (OR) 0.485; P = 0.006] for odds to complications. The event of a complication (OR 9.33; P < 0.001) and conversion to open surgery (OR 3.095; P = 0.002) were identified as risk factors for prolonged length of stay whereas robotic surgery (OR 0.62; P = 0.027) was the only independent protective factor. CONCLUSIONS Robotic rectal cancer surgery is strongly associated with better short-term outcomes over laparoscopic surgery.

Utilization of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has multiple determinants, one being the specialization of the surgeon. The purpose of this study was to assess the differences in the utilization of MIS, associated length of stay (LOS), and complications for colorectal cancer between colorectal (CRS) and general surgeons (GS). Previous studies have documented the influence of surgical volume and surgeon specialty on clinical outcomes and patient survival following colorectal cancer surgery. It is unclear whether there are differences in the utilization of MIS for colorectal cancer based on surgeon's specialization and how this influences clinical outcomes.Using the 2013-2015 Florida Inpatient Discharge Dataset and the National PlanProvider Enumeration System, colorectal cancer patients experiencing a colorectal surgery were identified as well as the operating physician's specialty. Mixed-effects regression models were used to identify associations between the use of MIS, complications during the hospital stay, and patient LOS with patient, physician, and hospital characteristics.There is no difference in the use of MIS, complication, nor LOS between GS and CRS for colorectal cancer surgery. However, physician volume was associated with increased use of MIS (OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.09, 1.46) and MIS was associated with decreases in certain complications as well as reductions in LOS overall (β = - 0.16, p 0.001) and for each specialty (GS: β = - 0.18, p 0.001; CRS β = - 0.12, p 0.001) CONCLUSIONS: Despite the higher amount of proctectomies performed by CRS, no difference in MIS utilization, complication rate, or LOS was found for colorectal cancer patients based on surgeon specialty. While there are some differences in clinical outcomes attributable to specialized training, results from this study indicate that differences in surgical approach (MIS vs. Open), as well as the patient populations encountered by these two specialties, are key factors in the outcomes observed.

Peritoneal metastases arise in patients with a variety of primary cancers, and are associated with a poor prognosis. Systemic chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment; however, the morbidity is considerable and the survival benefit is modest. Cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy is a potentially curative treatment available to a minority of patients; however, most develop recurrent disease. A novel palliative treatment for peritoneal metastases, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy, has recently been introduced. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy utilizes an aerosol of chemotherapy in carbon dioxide gas. It is instilled into the abdomen under pressure via laparoscopic ports. No cytoreduction is performed. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy can be repeated at 6-week intervals. Oxaliplatin or cis-platinum and doxorubicin have been used to date.This study aims to systematically review and evaluate the method, and the preclinical and early clinical results of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy.Medline and the Cochrane Library were the data sources for the study.Peer-reviewed series of greater than 10 patients, with sufficient patient data, through April 2019, were selected.Patients with peritoneal metastases underwent pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy.Patient dropout, histologic tumor response, adverse events, and 30-day mortality were the primary outcomes measured.A total of 921 patients with peritoneal metastases were brought to the operating room for pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy. The number of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy treatments administered was as follows: 1 treatment, 862 (94%); 2 treatments, 645 (70%); and 3 treatments, 390 patients (42%). Initial laparoscopic access was not possible in 59 patients (6.4%). Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or higher were noted in 13.7% of the patients who, collectively, underwent a total of 2116 treatments. The 30-day mortality was 2.4% (22/921).This study was limited by the heterogeneity of reported data and primary tumor types and by the lack of long-term survival data.Early clinical results are encouraging, but tumor-specific, prospective, randomized trials are needed to compare pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy to systemic chemotherapy. This method has yet to be introduced to the United States. It is another therapeutic option for patients with peritoneal metastases and will broaden the patient base for future clinical trials.

125 Background: Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) is being evaluated as a novel minimally invasive palliative treatment of peritoneal metastases (PM). Prior studies have established the feasibility and safety of repeated PIPAC treatments in gastrointestinal and gynecologic cancers. The goal of the present phase 1 trial was to establish the safety and feasibility of PIPAC oxaliplatin in a highly chemotherapy refractory colorectal and appendiceal cancer patient population. Methods: Patients with biopsy-proven peritoneal metastases from colorectal or appendiceal cancer underwent up to three PIPAC treatments using oxaliplatin (92 mg/m2) with a six-week interval at two academic centers. Patients with bowel obstruction, extra-peritoneal metastases, or poor performance status (ECOG>2) were excluded. PIPAC was nebulized over 5 min with a 30 min aerosol dwell time. Apart from the first PIPAC cycle, the patients also received a sensitizing dose of 5FU/LV (400mg/m2) within 24 hours of the procedure. Primary end point was safety as assessed by dose limiting toxicities within 6 weeks of the first PIPAC. Secondary endpoints included safety with the addition of 5FU/LV, efficacy, surgical morbidity, technical failure rate, progression-free and overall survival, pharmacokinetics (PK), and quality of life assessment. Results: A total of 8 patients were included: 5 colorectal; and 3 appendiceal. Median number of prior chemotherapy cycles was 2 (Interquartile range – IQR; 1.5-3.5). All patients were refractory to systemic oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. Median time from diagnosis to PIPAC was 16 months (IQR; 5.6, 17.5) and Peritoneal Carcinomatosis Index was 29 (IQR; 20.5, 31.5). Five (62.5%) patients completed 3 PIPAC cycles while in 3 (37.5%) patients PIPAC was discontinued due to disease progression within the peritoneal cavity. No surgical complication or dose limiting toxicity was observed. Only one patient developed grade 3 treatment-related toxicity after first PIPAC (anemia), and another patient after second PIPAC (abdominal pain and anemia). At the completion of PIPAC treatment 5 patients had stable disease and 3 had disease progression. Pharmacokinetic, histologic response and preliminary survival data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: PIPAC with oxaliplatin is safe and feasible in a highly chemotherapy refractory cohort of appendiceal and colorectal carcinomatosis patients with or without sensitizing 5-FU/ LV. Clinical trial information: NCT04329494.

Background Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is the first-line approach for ileocolic resection in patients with Crohn’s disease (CD) and it is safe and feasible even in complex cases. However, an open approach is still required, but indications to open ileocolic resection for CD are not well described. Methods All consecutive adult patients with CD who underwent elective ileocolic resection in the Departments of Colon and Rectal Surgery at Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota and Jacksonville, Florida between September 2014 and March 2021 were included and divided into “open” and “MIS” groups. Open approach was defined as upfront laparotomy, MIS included laparoscopic and robotic approaches, and conversion was defined as incision made earlier than planned. Indications to open approach were retrospectively reviewed by two authors, and any incongruity was resolved. Analogous indications were also assessed in the MIS group, as appropriate. Indications, baseline, perioperative characteristics, and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared between open and MIS. Results Among 319 ileocolic resections for CD, 45 (14.1%) were open and 274 (85.9%) MIS. Indications for open approach were severe disease, adhesions at previous surgery, history of abdominal sepsis, multifocal and extensive disease, abdominal wall involvement, concomitant open procedures, small bowel dilatation, and anaesthesiologic contraindications (Table 1). In addition, two or more of the above indications were present in 40 patients (89%) in the open group, while only in 6 patients (2%) in the MIS group (p Conclusion Overall rate of open approach ileocolic resection for CD was 14 % during a 7-years period in a referral centre. Open approach was the only operation performed in cases of abdominal wall involvement, concomitant open procedures, and anaesthesiologic contraindication. In addition, the presence of at least two indications,predicting high technical complexity, may be considered as a no-go for the MIS approach in ileocolic resections for CD.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) provides many benefits. However, important knowledge gaps with respect to specific components of enhanced recovery after surgery remain because of limited validation data. The aim of the study was to validate a mature ERAS protocol at a different hospital and in a similar population of patients. This is a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery from 2009 through 2016. Patients enrolled in ERAS are compared with those undergoing the standard of care. Patient demographic characteristics, length of stay, pain scores, and perioperative morbidity are described. Patients (1396) were propensity matched into two equal groups (ERAS vs non-ERAS). No significant difference was observed for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, body mass index, sex, operative approach, and surgery duration. Median length of stay in ERAS and non-ERAS groups was 3 and 5 days (P

Obesity has been identified as a risk factor for both conversion and severe postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing laparoscopic rectal resection. Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is proposed to overcome some of the technical limitations associated with laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. The aim of our study was to determine if obesity remains a risk factor for severe morbidity in patients undergoing robotic-assisted rectal resection.This study was a retrospective review of a prospective database. A total of 183 patients undergoing restorative RAS for rectal cancer between 2007 and 2016 were divided into 2 groups: control (BMI 30 kg/mControl and obese groups had similar clinicopathologic characteristics. Severe complications were observed in 9 (7%) and 4 (7%) patients, respectively (p 0.99). Obesity did not impact conversion, anastomotic leak rate, length of stay, or readmission but was significantly associated with increased postoperative morbidity (29 vs. 45%; p = 0.04) and especially more postoperative ileus (11 vs. 26%; p = 0.01). Obesity and male gender were the two independent risk factors for postoperative overall morbidity (OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.02-3.94; p = 0.04 and OR 2.23; 95% CI 1.10-4.76; p = 0.03, respectively).‎Obesity did not impact severe morbidity or conversion rate following RAS for rectal cancer but remained a risk factor for overall morbidity and especially postoperative ileus.

Background: Palliative care has been increasingly recognized as an important part of cancer care but remains underutilized in patients with solid cancers. There is a current gap in knowledge regarding why palliative care is underutilized nationwide. Objective: To identify the factors associated with palliative care use among deceased patients with solid cancer tumors. Methods: Using the 2016 National Cancer Data Base, we identified deceased patients (2004-2013) with breast, colon, lung, melanoma, and prostate cancer. Data were described as percentages. Associations between palliative care use and patient, facility, and geographic characteristics were evaluated through multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 1 840 111 patients were analyzed; 9.6% received palliative care. Palliative care use was higher in the following patient groups: survival >24 months (17% vs 2%), male (54% vs 46%), higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score (16% vs 8%), treatment at designated cancer programs (74% vs 71%), lung cancer (76% vs 28%), higher grade cancer (53% vs 24%), and stage IV cancer (59% vs 13%). Patients who lived in communities with a greater percentage of high school degrees had higher odds of receiving palliative care; Central and Pacific regions of the United States had lower odds of palliative care use than the East Coast. Patients with colon, melanoma, or prostate cancer had lower odds of palliative care than patients with breast cancer, whereas those with lung cancer had higher odds. Conclusions: Palliative care use in solid cancer tumors is variable, with a preference for patients with lung cancer, younger age, known insurance status, and higher educational level.

Several studies have shown a correlation between longer operative times and higher rates of postoperative morbidity for open and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. The aim of the study was to determine the impact of prolonged operative time on early postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing robotic-assisted rectal cancer resection. The study was a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database conducted in two centers of the same institution. A total of 260 consecutive patients undergoing with robotic-assisted resection for rectal cancer between 2007 and 2016 were included. Patients were divided into two groups regarding median operative time: > 300 min (prolonged operative time; n = 133) and ≤ 300 min (control; n = 127). Patient characteristics, operative and postoperative data were compared between groups. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine whether prolonged operative time was a predictive factor of 30-day postoperative morbidity. Prolonged operative time was noted more frequently in males (p = 0.02), patients with higher BMI (p

Objective To characterize reasons for discordance between administrative data and registry data in the determination of postoperative infectious complications. Background Data regarding the occurrence of postoperative surgical complications are identified through either administrative or registry data. Rates of complications vary significantly between these two types of data; the reasons for this are not well-understood. Methods The occurrence of 30-day inpatient infectious complications (pneumonia, sepsis, surgical site infection, and urinary tract infection) was compared between the NSQIP and administrative mechanisms at 4 academic hospitals between 2012 and 2014. In each situation where the NSQIP and administrative data were discordant regarding the occurrence of a specific complication, a 2-clinician chart abstraction was performed to characterize the reasons for discordance as (i) administrative coding error, (ii) NSQIP coding error, (iii) "question of criteria", where the discordance was the result of differences in criteria, or (iv) "dually incorrect", where both data sources coded the complication incorrectly. Results The cohort included 19,163 patients undergoing surgery in 4 different academic hospitals. Rates of infectious complications varied up to 5-fold between the two data sources. A total of 717 discordant complications were identified. Of these, the greatest portion (43%) was due to "question of criteria," followed by administrative coding error (37%), NSQIP error (15%), and dually incorrect (5%). Conclusions With a goal of improving existing mechanisms for measuring surgical quality, definitions for the occurrence of a postoperative complication need to be developed and applied consistently. Progress toward this goal will enable patients and payers to better take advantage of recent advances in healthcare data transparency.

Inflammatory bowel disease is associated with an increased risk of dysplasia and cancer. Improvements in medical management and endoscopic surveillance have reduced these risks. Patients can develop cancer even in the absence of dysplasia or with indefinite or low-grade dysplasia. Most guidelines recommend starting surveillance colonoscopy 6 to 10 years after initial diagnosis with interval surveillance afterward every 1 to 5 years depending on risk and/or individual characteristics. Most patients should undergo total proctocolectomy with end ileostomy or reconstruction with ileal pouch anal anastomosis because segmental and subtotal resections carry a higher risk of metachronous cancers.

The aim of this study was to review risk factors for conversion in a cohort of patients with rectal cancer undergoing minimally invasive abdominal surgery.A retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive patients operated on from February 2005 to April 2018. Adult patients undergoing low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection for primary rectal adenocarcinoma by a minimally invasive approach were included. Exclusion criteria were lack of research authorization, stage IV or recurrent rectal cancer, and emergency surgery. Risk factors for conversion were investigated using logistic regression. A subgroup analysis of obese patients (BMI 30 kg/mA total of 600 patients were included in the analysis. The overall conversion rate was 9·2 per cent. Multivariable analysis showed a 72 per cent lower risk of conversion when patients had robotic surgery (odds ratio (OR) 0·28, 95 per cent c.i. 0·15 to 0·52). Obese patients experienced a threefold higher risk of conversion compared with non-obese patients (47 versus 24·4 per cent respectively; P 0·001). Robotic surgery was associated with a reduced risk of conversion in obese patients (OR 0·22, 0·07 to 0·71).Robotic surgery was associated with a lower risk of conversion in patients undergoing minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery, in both obese and non-obese patients.El objetivo del estudio era revisar los factores de riesgo para la conversión en una cohorte de pacientes con cáncer de recto sometidos a cirugía abdominal mínimamente invasiva. MÉTODOS: Se realizó un análisis retrospectivo de pacientes consecutivos operados desde febrero de 2005 hasta abril de 2018. Se incluyeron pacientes adultos sometidos a resección anterior baja o resección abdominoperineal por adenocarcinoma primario de recto mediante abordaje mínimamente invasivo. Los criterios de exclusión fueron falta del consentimiento informado, cáncer de recto en estadio IV o recidivado y cirugía urgente. Los factores de riesgo para la conversión se determinaron mediante regresión logística. Se realizó un análisis de subgrupo en pacientes obesos (índice de masa corporal, IMC ≥ 30 kg/mSe incluyeron en el análisis un total de 600 pacientes. La tasa global de conversión fue del 9,2%. El modelo multivariado mostró un riesgo 72% menor de conversión cuando los pacientes fueron tratados mediante cirugía robótica (razón de oportunidades, odds ratio, OR 0,28, i.c. del 95% 0,15-0,52). Los pacientes obesos presentaron un riesgo de conversión tres veces mayor en comparación con los pacientes no obesos (47,3% versus 24,5%, P 0,001). La cirugía robótica se asoció con una menor probabilidad de conversión en los pacientes obesos (OR 0,22; i.c. del 95% 0,07-0,71). CONCLUSIÓN: La cirugía robótica se asoció con un menor riesgo de conversión en pacientes sometidos a cirugía mínimamente invasiva de cáncer de recto, tanto en pacientes obesos como no obesos.

Background: Our study investigated the demographic characteristics of Mayo Clinic Colon and Rectal Cancer Registry patients and sought to associate tumor location with overall survival.Methods: Using the cohort of patients seen at Mayo Clinic (Minnesota, Arizona, Florida) from 1972 to 2017, we obtained 26,908 colorectal adenocarcinoma patient records. Overall survival of patients with colorectal cancer was analyzed by sidedness (right vs. left) and location (right vs. left vs. rectum). Kaplan–Meier method was used to analyze all demographic and cancer variables available within the dataset to trace survival over a 35-year period. Subgroups within variables were compared to each other using log-rank test and considered significantly different at P < 0.05. Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess impact of tumor location while controlling for age, year of diagnosis, sex, tumor stage, and tumor grade. Cox regression models were used to evaluate the independent effect of cancer location on overall survival after adjusting for age, gender, year of diagnosis, and cancer stage. To further explore the potential interaction effect of cancer location with cancer stage and year of diagnosis, similar multivariable Cox model was fit stratified by cancer stage (1–3 vs. 4) and by year of diagnosis (2000).Results: Overall survival differed significantly within all variables studied after Kaplan–Meier method analysis (P < 0.0001). Survival was higher in the left-side group when evaluated by tumor sidedness, and rectal cancer patients had the highest median survival (101.3 months). Right-sided cancer patients had the worst prognosis in both tumor location and sidedness analyses, with a median survival of 76.6 months. However, the stratified analysis showed that, the difference in survival between left- and right-sided cancer only existed in late cancer stage (stage 4) patients but not in early cancer stage; therefore, screening for CRC to pick cancer at an early stage can influence overall survival significantly.Conclusion: These observations confirm some of the previous and recent studies on sidedness of colorectal cancer patients. Our analysis is novel in that it included patients of all stages rather than just stage IV metastatic patients. This initial study provides a platform to investigate more biologic and clinical factors associated with tumor location. Merging this dataset with other available datasets and previously conducted studies within the institution will provide a robust platform for multiple future studies and collaborations. Finally, appropriate screening can result in a decrease in incidence and mortality of CRC.

Background Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is associated with improved colorectal cancer (CRC) outcomes, but it is used less frequently in emergency settings. We aimed to assess patient-level factors associated with emergency presentation for CRC and the use of MIS in emergency versus elective settings. Methods This retrospective study examined the clinical data of patients who underwent emergency and elective resections for CRC from 2013 to 2015 using the Florida Inpatient Discharge Dataset. Multivariable analyses were performed to assess differences in gender, age, race, urbanization, region, insurance, and clinical characteristics associated with mode of presentation and surgical approach. In-hospital mortality and length of stay by mode of presentation were recorded. Results Of 16,277 patients identified, 10,224 (61%) had elective surgery and 6503 (39%) had emergency surgery. Emergency presentations were more likely to be black (14.2% versus 9.5%), Hispanic (18.9% versus 15.4%), Medicaid-insured (9.7% versus 4.2%), and have metastatic cancer (34.4% versus 20.2%) or multiple comorbidities (12.6% versus 4.0%). MIS was the surgical approach in 31.8% of emergency cases versus 48.1% of elective cases. Factors associated with lower odds of MIS for emergencies include Medicaid (odds ratio (OR) 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-0.99), metastases (OR 0.56, CI 0.5-0.63), and multiple comorbidities (OR 0.53, CI 0.4-0.7). Emergency cases experienced higher in-hospital mortality (3.7% versus 1.0%) and a longer median length of stay (10 d versus 5 d). Conclusions Emergency CRC presentations are associated with racial minorities, Medicaid insurance, metastatic disease, and multiple comorbidities. Odds of MIS in emergency settings are lowest for patients with Medicaid insurance and highest clinical disease burden.

Background. Individuals after solid organ transplant may develop secondary malignancies. In our clinical practice, we noted an increasing number of individuals who developed colorectal cancers after solid organ transplantation. The primary aim of this study was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of the patients who developed colorectal cancer after solid organ transplant. Materials and Methods. Data was gathered and merged from several registries at Mayo Clinic to identify all patients who received a diagnosis of colon or rectal cancer and solid organ transplant. Continuous variables were summarized as mean (standard deviation) and median (range), while categorical variables were reported as frequency (percentage). Time to colorectal cancer after transplant and overall survival after cancer diagnosis were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method. Results. Initially, 115 colorectal cancer patients who also had a transplant were identified. The diagnosis of colorectal cancer was noted after solid organ transplant in 63 patients. The mean age at transplant was 57 years. Majority had received a kidney transplant (44.4%) followed by liver (36.5%). The median time to develop colorectal cancer was 59.3 months (range: 4.4-251.4 months). 15 (24.6%) were stage 4 at diagnosis and 13 (21.3%) had stage 3 colorectal cancer. Median overall survival was 30.8 months; 5-, 10- and 15-year survival were noted to be 42.5%, 17.9%, and 7.5%, respectively. None of the stage 4 patients were alive at 5 years; 5-year survival rate for stage 1, 2, and 3 patients was 77%, 50%, and 42%, respectively. Conclusions. Our study reports on one of the largest cohorts of patients of colorectal cancer that developed the cancer after solid organ transplant. Survival is extremely poor for advanced cases. However, long-term survivors are noted who developed the cancer at a relatively early stage. Colorectal screening recommendations may need to be revised for patients after solid organ transplant.

Individuals with Crohn’s disease (CD) of the large intestine develop colorectal cancer at an increased rate compared to the general population. The exact magnitude of increased risk is unknown. The prevalence of dysplasia at 25 years has been reported to range between 0.5% to 25% and the risk for colorectal cancer may be six-fold that of the general population. Colorectal cancer in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) appears to develop via a pathway that deviates from the well characterized adenoma-carcinoma sequence of sporadic colorectal cancer and may progress rapidly, skipping steps seen with sporadic colorectal cancer.