Search

Background Colorectal cancer screening programmes have led to a shift towards early-stage colorectal cancer, which, in selected cases, can be treated using local excision. However, local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision (two-stage approach) may be associated with less favourable outcomes than primary total mesorectal excision (one-stage approach). The aim of this population study was to determine the distribution of treatment strategies for early rectal cancer in the Netherlands and to compare the short-term outcomes of primary total mesorectal excision with those of local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision. Methods Short-term data for patients with cT1–2 N0xM0 rectal cancer who underwent local excision only, primary total mesorectal excision, or local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision between 2012 and 2020 in the Netherlands were collected from the Dutch Colorectal Audit. Patients were categorized according to treatment groups and logistic regressions were performed after multiple imputation and propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the end-ostomy rate. Results From 2015 to 2020, the proportion for the two-stage approach increased from 22.3% to 43.9%. After matching, 1062 patients were included. The end-ostomy rate was 16.8% for the primary total mesorectal excision group versus 29.6% for the local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision group (P < 0.001). The primary total mesorectal excision group had a higher re-intervention rate than the local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision group (16.7% versus 11.8%; P = 0.048). No differences were observed with regard to complications, conversion, diverting ostomies, radical resections, readmissions, and death. Conclusion This study shows that, over time, cT1–2 rectal cancer has increasingly been treated using the two-stage approach. However, local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision seems to be associated with an elevated end-ostomy rate. It is important that clinicians and patients are aware of this risk during shared decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs) are benign liver tumors associated with bleeding or malignant transformation. Data on the indication for surgery are scarce. We analyzed indications and outcome of patients operated for HCAs < 50mm compared to HCAs = 50 mm. Changes in final postoperative diagnosis were assessed. We performed a retrospective study that included patients who underwent resection for (suspected) HCAs in the Netherlands from 2014 to 2019. Indication for resection was analyzed and stratified for small (<50 mm) and large (=50 mm) tumors. Logistic regression analysis was performed on factors influencing change in tumor diagnosis. Out of 222 patients who underwent surgery, 44 (20%) patients had a tumor <50 mm. Median age was 46 (interquartile range [IQR], 33-56) years in patients with small tumors and 37 (IQR, 31-46) years in patients with large tumors (p = 0.016). Patients with small tumors were more frequently men (21% vs. 5%, p = 0.002). Main indications for resection in patients with small tumors were suspicion of (pre) malignancy (55%), (previous) bleeding (14%), and male sex (11%). Patients with large tumors received operations because of tumor size >50mm (52%), suspicion of (pre)malignancy (28%), and (previous) bleeding (5.1%). No difference was observed in HCA-subtype distribution between small and large tumors. Ninety-six (43%) patients had a postoperative change in diagnosis. Independent risk factors for change in diagnosis were tumor size <50mm (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.4; p < 0.01), male sex (aOR, 3.7; p = 0.03), and lack of hepatobiliary contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) (aOR, 1.8; p = 0.04). Resection for small (suspected) HCAs was mainly indicated by suspicion of (pre)malignancy, whereas for large (suspected) HCAs, tumor size was the most prevalent indication. Male sex, tumor size <50 mm, and lack of hepatobiliary CE-MRI were independent risk factors for postoperative change in tumor diagnosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is growing evidence that bridge to surgery with stent or decompressing stoma for left-sided obstructive colon cancer (LSOCC) is better than emergency resection (ER), especially in elderly patients (age ≥70 years). This was already incorporated in Dutch guideline recommendations in 2014. The aim of this study was to evaluate time trends and interhospital variability in treatment approaches for LSOCC, and to compare short-term outcomes between approaches., Patients and Methods: Data of patients undergoing resection for LSOCC between 2012 and 2020 were extracted from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit., Results: A total of 4,535 patients were included (3,155 ER, 573 semielective resection [SER], 807 resection after stent or stoma [RSS]). A decrease in ER over time was observed (79.7% in 2012-2014, 68.8% in 2015-2017, and 54.7% in 2018-2020) in favor of RSS (9.2%, 17.9%, and 31.2%, respectively). Compared with SER and RSS, ER was associated with higher 30-day mortality (6.2% ER, 2.8% SER, and 1.0% RSS; P<.001) and complication rates (45.4%, 31.2%, 31.5%, respectively; P<.001). There were still 19 hospitals with >75% ER in 2018-2020. For hospitals with >75% ER, mortality was significantly higher compared with hospitals mainly performing SER and RSS (5.6% vs 4.2%; P=.038). The proportion of ER in patients (age ≥70 years) decreased from 80.7% in 2012-2014 to 54.3% in 2018-2020 (P<.001). Mortality in patients aged ≥70 years was significantly lower after RSS than after ER (1.6% vs 9.5%; P<.001)., Conclusions: A significant decrease in ER for LSOCC at a national level was observed, although with a variable degree of adherence to revised guidelines among hospitals. The high risk of mortality after ER, especially in elderly patients, strongly supports the guideline recommendations to perform bridge to surgery in these patients.

Background: Colorectal cancer screening programmes have led to a shift towards early-stage colorectal cancer, which, in selected cases, can be treated using local excision. However, local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision (two-stage approach) may be associated with less favourable outcomes than primary total mesorectal excision (one-stage approach). The aim of this population study was to determine the distribution of treatment strategies for early rectal cancer in the Netherlands and to compare the short-term outcomes of primary total mesorectal excision with those of local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision., Methods: Short-term data for patients with cT1-2 N0xM0 rectal cancer who underwent local excision only, primary total mesorectal excision, or local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision between 2012 and 2020 in the Netherlands were collected from the Dutch Colorectal Audit. Patients were categorized according to treatment groups and logistic regressions were performed after multiple imputation and propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the end-ostomy rate., Results: From 2015 to 2020, the proportion for the two-stage approach increased from 22.3% to 43.9%. After matching, 1062 patients were included. The end-ostomy rate was 16.8% for the primary total mesorectal excision group versus 29.6% for the local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision group (P < 0.001). The primary total mesorectal excision group had a higher re-intervention rate than the local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision group (16.7% versus 11.8%; P = 0.048). No differences were observed with regard to complications, conversion, diverting ostomies, radical resections, readmissions, and death., Conclusion: This study shows that, over time, cT1-2 rectal cancer has increasingly been treated using the two-stage approach. However, local excision followed by completion total mesorectal excision seems to be associated with an elevated end-ostomy rate. It is important that clinicians and patients are aware of this risk during shared decision-making., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Foundation Ltd.)

Importance: The development of colorectal cancer outcome registries internationally has been organic, with differing datasets, data definitions and infrastructure across registries which has limited data pooling and international comparison. Currently there is no comprehensive data dictionary identified as a standard. This study is part of an international collaboration that aims to identify areas of data capture and usage which may be optimised to improve understanding of colorectal cancer outcomes., Objective: This study aimed to compare and identify commonalities and areas of difference across major colorectal cancer registries. We sought to establish datasets comprising of mutually collected common fields, and a combined comprehensive dataset of all collected fields across major registries to aid in establishing a future colorectal cancer registry database standard., Design and Methods: This mixed qualitative and quantitative study compared data dictionaries from three major colorectal cancer outcome registries: Bowel Cancer Outcomes Registry (BCOR) (Australia and New Zealand), National Bowel Cancer Audit (NBOCA) (United Kingdom) and Dutch ColoRectal Audit (DCRA) (Netherlands). Registries were compared and analysed thematically, and a common dataset and combined comprehensive dataset were developed. These generated datasets were compared to data dictionaries from Sweden (SCRCR), Denmark (DCCG), Argentina (BNCCR-A) and the USA (NAACCR and ACS NSQIP). Fields were assessed against prominent quality indicator metrics from the literature and current case-use., Results: We developed a combined comprehensive dataset of 225 fields under seven domains: demographic, pre-operative, operative, post-operative, pathology, neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy, and follow up/recurrence. A common dataset was developed comprising 38 overlapping fields, showing a low degree of mutually collected data, especially in preoperative, post operative and adjuvant therapy domains. The BNCCR-A, SCRCR and DCCG databases all contained a high percentage of common dataset fields. Fields were poorly comparable when viewed form current quality indicator metrics., Conclusion: This study mapped data dictionaries of prominent colorectal cancer registries and highlighted areas of commonality and difference The developed common field dataset provides a foundation for registries to benchmark themselves and work towards harmonisation of data dictionaries. This has the potential to enable meaningful large-scale international outcomes research., (© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Introduction: In an era of exploring patient-tailored treatment options for colon cancer, preoperative staging is increasingly important. This study aimed to evaluate completeness and reliability of CT-based preoperative locoregional colon cancer staging in Dutch hospitals., Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent elective oncological resection of colon cancer without neoadjuvant treatment in 77 Dutch hospitals were evaluated between 2011 and 2021. Completeness of T-stage was calculated for individual hospitals and stratified based on a 60% cut-off. Concordance between routine CT-based preoperative locoregional staging (cTN) and definitive pathological staging (pTN) was examined., Results: A total of 59,558 patients were included with an average completeness of 43.4% and 53.4% for T and N-stage, respectively. Completeness of T-stage improved from 4.9% in 2011-2014 to 74.4% in 2019-2021. Median completeness for individual hospitals was 53.9% (IQR 27.3-80.5%) and were not significantly different between low and high-volume hospitals. Sensitivity and specificity for T3-4 tumours were relatively low: 75.1% and 76.0%, respectively. cT1-2 tumours were frequently understaged based on a low negative predictive value of 56.8%. Distinction of cT4 and cN2 disease had a high specificity (>95%), but a very low sensitivity (<50%). Positive predictive values of <60% indicated that cT4 and cN1-2 were often overstaged. Completeness and time period did not influence reliability of staging., Conclusion: Completeness of locoregional staging of colon cancer improved during recent years and varied between hospitals independently from case volume. Discriminating cT1-2 from cT3-4 tumours resulted in substantial understaging and overstaging, additionally cT4 and cN1-2 were overstaged in >40% of cases., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs) are benign liver tumors associated with bleeding or malignant transformation. Data on the indication for surgery are scarce. We analyzed indications and outcome of patients operated for HCAs < 50 mm compared to HCAs ≥ 50 mm. Changes in final postoperative diagnosis were assessed. We performed a retrospective study that included patients who underwent resection for (suspected) HCAs in the Netherlands from 2014 to 2019. Indication for resection was analyzed and stratified for small (<50 mm) and large (≥50 mm) tumors. Logistic regression analysis was performed on factors influencing change in tumor diagnosis. Out of 222 patients who underwent surgery, 44 (20%) patients had a tumor <50 mm. Median age was 46 (interquartile range [IQR], 33-56) years in patients with small tumors and 37 (IQR, 31-46) years in patients with large tumors ( p  = 0.016). Patients with small tumors were more frequently men (21% vs. 5%, p  = 0.002). Main indications for resection in patients with small tumors were suspicion of (pre)malignancy (55%), (previous) bleeding (14%), and male sex (11%). Patients with large tumors received operations because of tumor size >50 mm (52%), suspicion of (pre)malignancy (28%), and (previous) bleeding (5.1%). No difference was observed in HCA-subtype distribution between small and large tumors. Ninety-six (43%) patients had a postoperative change in diagnosis. Independent risk factors for change in diagnosis were tumor size <50 mm (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.4; p  < 0.01), male sex (aOR, 3.7; p  = 0.03), and lack of hepatobiliary contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) (aOR, 1.8; p  = 0.04). Resection for small (suspected) HCAs was mainly indicated by suspicion of (pre)malignancy, whereas for large (suspected) HCAs, tumor size was the most prevalent indication. Male sex, tumor size <50 mm, and lack of hepatobiliary CE-MRI were independent risk factors for postoperative change in tumor diagnosis., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc on behalf of the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases.)

Background: The feasibility of the liver-first approach for synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has been established. We sought to assess the short-term and long-term outcomes for these patients., Methods: Outcomes of patients who underwent a liver-first approach for CRLM between 2005 and 2015 were retrospectively evaluated from a prospective database., Results: Of the 92 patients planned to undergo the liver-first strategy, the paradigm could be completed in 76.1%. Patients with concurrent extrahepatic disease failed significantly more often in completing the protocol (67% versus 21%; p = 0.03). Postoperative morbidity and mortality were 31.5% and 3.3% following liver resection and 30.9% and 0% after colorectal surgery. Of the 70 patients in whom the paradigm was completed, 36 patients (51.4%) developed recurrent disease after a median interval of 20.9 months. The median overall survival on an intention-to-treat basis was 33.1 months (3- and 5-year overall survival: 48.5% and 33.1%). Patients who were not able to complete their therapeutic paradigm had a significantly worse overall outcome (p = 0.03)., Conclusion: The liver-first approach is feasible with acceptable perioperative morbidity and mortality rates. Despite the considerable overall-survival-benefit, recurrence rates remain high. Future research should focus on providing selection tools to enable the optimal treatment sequence for each patient with synchronous CRLM., (Copyright © 2018 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)