Search

Introduction: Oesophageal cancer (EC) and gastric cancer (GC) are among the top 10 cancers worldwide. Both diseases impact the nutritional status of patients and their Quality of Life (QoL). Preoperative malnutrition is reported in 42%-80%. However, studies investigating postoperative nutritional status are limited, and postoperative identification and treatment of micronutrient and macronutrient deficiencies are currently lacking in (inter-)national guidelines. The aim of this study is to identify and target micronutrient deficiencies after surgery for oesophagogastric neoplasms., Methods: This is a single-centre prospective intervention trial performed in Zuyderland Medical Centre. 248 patients who underwent oesophagectomy (n=124) or (sub)total gastrectomy (n=124) from 2011 until 2022 will be included. Both groups will receive Calcium Soft Chew D3 and a multivitamin supplement (MVS) specifically developed according to the type of operation patients underwent; the oesophagectomy group will receive Multi-E and the gastrectomy group will receive Multi-G. The MVSs will be taken once daily and Calcium Soft Chew D3 two times per day. Supplementation will start after baseline measurements. At baseline (T0), blood withdrawal for micronutrient analysis and faecal elastase-1 analysis for exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) will be performed. Additionally, patients will receive questionnaires regarding QoL and dietary behaviour. After 180 days of supplementation (T1), baseline measurements will be repeated, and the supplement tolerance questionnaire will be completed. Measurements will also be conducted after 360 days (T2) and after 720 days (T3) of supplementation. The main study parameter is micronutrient deficiency (yes/no) for all measurements. Secondary parameters include occurrence of EPI (n, %), diarrhoea (n, %), steatorrhoea (n, %) or bloating (n, %), time between surgery and start of supplementation (mean in months), and QoL at all time points., Ethics and Dissemination: The study was approved by the Zuyderland Medical Centre Ethics Committee, Heerlen, the Netherlands. The findings will be disseminated through scientific congresses and in peer-reviewed journals., Trial Registration Number: NCT05281380., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Introduction: The most important prognostic factor for oncological outcome of rectal cancer is radical surgical resection. In patients with locally advanced T4 rectal cancer (LARC) or locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) (partial) resection of the urinary tract is frequently required to achieve radical resection. The psoas bladder hitch (PBH) technique is the first choice for reconstruction of the ureter after partial resection and this bladder-preserving technique should not influence the oncological outcome., Methods: Demographic and clinical data were collected prospectively for all patients operated on for LARC or LRRC between 1996 and 2014 who also underwent a psoas hitch ureter reconstruction. Urological complications and oncological outcome were assessed., Results: The sample comprised 70 patients, 30 with LARC and 40 with LRRC. The mean age was 62 years (range: 39-86). Postoperative complications occurred in 38.6% of patients, the most frequent were urinary leakage (22.9%), ureteral stricture with hydronephrosis (8.6%) and urosepsis (4.3%). Surgical re-intervention was required in 4 cases (5.7%), resulting in permanent loss of bladder function and construction of a ureter-ileo-cutaneostomy in 3 cases (4.3%). Oncological outcome was not influenced by postoperative complications., Conclusion: The rate of complications associated with the PBH procedure was higher in our sample than in previous samples with benign conditions, but most complications were temporary and did not require surgical intervention. We conclude that the bladder-sparing PBH technique of ureter reconstruction is feasible in locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer with invasion of the urinary tract after pelvic radiotherapy., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Changes in rectal cancer treatment include increasing emphasis on organ preservation. Local excision after chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for rectal cancer with excellent clinical response reduces morbidity and mortality compared to total mesorectal excision, although residual lymph node metastases (LNM) may cause local recurrence. Our aim is to identify clinicopathological factors predicting the presence of residual LNM in rectal cancer patients with ypT0-2 tumours after neoadjuvant CRT. These risk factors may help to select patients who can be spared radical surgery without compromising oncological outcomes., Methods and Results: Rectal cancer patients with ypT0-2 tumours after CRT and radical resection from five centres treated between June 1999 and February 2012 were included. Histopathology was reviewed extensively. Clinicopathological characteristics and their association with residual LNM were investigated. Of 657 consecutive CRT-treated rectal cancer patients 210 with ypT0-2 disease were included. Residual nodal disease was found in 44 cases (21.0%). Independent predictors of LNM were clinical nodal involvement (cN + ) [odds ratio (OR): 2.79, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-7.48, P = 0.042], high-grade histopathology assessed in the post-CRT resection specimen (OR: 6.46, 95% CI: 1.23-34.02, P = 0.028) and residual tumour diameter (RTD) ≥10 mm (OR: 2.54, 95% CI: 1.06-6.09, P = 0.036). An algorithm combining these factors stratified patients adequately according to LNM risk, independently of ypT category., Conclusions: Clinical nodal involvement, high-grade histopathology and RTD ≥10 mm are strong and independent predictors of residual nodal disease in rectal cancer patients with ypT0-2 tumours after CRT. Risk stratification based on these factors may help to identify patients suitable for organ preserving therapy and should be validated in appropriately selected populations., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Mechanical bowel obstruction in rectal cancer is a common problem, requiring stoma placement to decompress the colon and permit neo-adjuvant treatment. The majority of patients operated on in our hospital are referred; after stoma placement at the referring centre without overseeing final type of surgery. Stoma malpositioning and its effects on rectal cancer care are described., Methods: All patients who underwent surgery for locally advanced or locally recurrent rectal cancer between 2000 and 2013 in our tertiary referral centre were reviewed and included if they received a stoma before curative surgery. Patients with recurrent rectal cancer were only included if the stomas from the primary surgery had been restored. The main outcome measures are stoma malpositioning, postoperative and stoma-related complications., Results: A total of 726 patients were included; of these, 156 patients (21%) had a stoma before curative surgery. In the majority of patients, acute or pending large bowel obstruction was the main indication for emergent stoma creation; some of the patients had tumour-related fistulae. In 53 patients (34%), the stoma required revision during definitive surgery. No significant differences were found regarding postoperative complications., Conclusion: One-third of the previously placed emergency stomas were considered to be located inappropriately and required revision. We were able to avoid increased complication rates in patients with a malpositioned stoma, however unnecessary surgery for an inappropriately placed stoma should be avoided to decrease patient inconvenience and risks. An algorithm is proposed for the placement of a suitable stoma., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: High-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDRBT) appears to be associated with less treatment-related toxicity compared with external beam radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer. The present study compared the effect of preoperative treatment strategies on overall survival, cancer-specific deaths, and local recurrences between a Dutch and Canadian expert center with different preoperative treatment strategies., Patients and Methods: We included 145 Dutch and 141 Canadian patients with cT3, non-metastasized rectal cancer. All patients from Canada were preoperatively treated with HDRBT. The preoperative treatment strategy for Dutch patients consisted of either no preoperative treatment, short-course radiotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing overall survival. We adjusted for age, cN stage, (y)pT stage, comorbidity, and type of surgery. Primary endpoint was overall survival. Secondary endpoints were cancer-specific deaths and local recurrences., Results: Five-year overall survival was 70.9% (95% CI 62.6%-77.7%) in Dutch patients compared with 86.9% (80.1%-91.6%) in Canadian patients, resulting in an adjusted HR of 0.70 (95% CI 0.39-1.26; p = 0.233). Of 145 Dutch patients, 6.9% (95% CI 2.8%-11.0%) had a local recurrence and 17.9% (95% CI 11.7%-24.2%) patients died of rectal cancer, compared with 4.3% (95% CI 0.9%-7.5%) local recurrences and 10.6% (95% CI 5.5%-15.7%) rectal cancer deaths out of 141 Canadian patients., Conclusion: We did not detect statistically significant differences in overall survival between a Dutch and Canadian expert center with different treatment strategies. This finding needs to be further investigated in a randomized controlled trial., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: In locally advanced rectal cancer, an extended resection peripheral to the mesorectal fascia is needed to achieve a radical resection. The influence of extended resections on health-related quality of life is unclear., Objective: Differences in health-related quality of life and sexuality between patients receiving standard surgery and patients receiving extended surgery were examined, with a focus on age., Design: Patients operated on for rectal cancer between 2000 and 2010 were selected from a database and invited to complete the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality-of-life questionnaires (C30 and ColoRectal 38)., Settings: All patients were treated at the Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands., Patients: All patients received total mesorectal excision surgery or extended surgery for rectal cancer., Main Outcome Measures: Health-related quality of life and sexual activity was compared between patients treated with total mesorectal excision surgery and extended surgery and further stratified by age at the time of surgery (<70 and ≥70)., Results: Two hundred twenty-nine (64.1%) patients with standard surgery and 128 (35.9%) patients treated with extended resections responded. Extended surgery in patients <70 years resulted in lower body image compared with patients <70 years receiving standard surgery. Patients ≥70 years had lower sexual function and more male sexual dysfunction than patients <70 years undergoing standard surgery. In all groups, sexual activity dropped significantly after treatment., Limitations: No information was available of the patients' health-related quality of life before treatment except for the retrospective question about sexual activity., Conclusions: This study showed no major differences between patients undergoing total mesorectal excision surgery and those receiving extended surgery, with the exception of body image, which was significantly lower in patients <70 years undergoing extended surgery. In all patient groups, treatment for rectal cancer influenced sexual activity dramatically. Awareness of the impact of surgery on health-related quality of life and sexuality is needed.

Purpose of the Study: Anastomotic leakage (AL) and presacral abscess (PA) after rectal cancer surgery are a major concern for the colorectal surgeon. In this study, incidence, prognosis and treatment was assessed., Methods: Patients operated on in our institute, between 1994 and 2011, for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC, T3+/T4M0) were included. Morbidity was scored using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Prognostic factors were analysed using binary logistic regression., Results: 517 patients were included after a low anterior resection (n = 219) or abdominoperineal resection (n = 232). AL occurred in 25 patients (11.4%); 50 patients (9.7%) developed a PA. We identified intraoperative blood loss ≥4500 cc (p = 0.038) and the era of surgery; patients operated on before the year 2006 (p = 0.042); as risk factors for AL. The time between last day of neo-adjuvant treatment and surgery, <8 weeks is significantly associated with the development of PA (p = 0.010)., Conclusions: In our population of LARC patients we found an incidence of 9.7% PA and 11.4% AL, with a 12% mortality rate for AL, which is comparable to surgery in general colorectal cancer. Increased intraoperative blood loss and surgery prior to 2006 are associated with AL. Increased intraoperative blood loss and a timing interval <8 weeks increases the risk of PA formation., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcome of abdominosacral resections (ASR) in patients with locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer., Methods: From 1994 until 2012 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) underwent a curative ASR and were enrolled in a database. The postoperative complication rates, predictive factors on oncological outcome and survival rates were registered., Results: Seventy-two patients with LRRC (mean age 63; 44 male, 28 female) and 14 patients with LARC (mean age 65; 6 male, 8 female) underwent ASR. R0 resection was achieved in 37 patients with LRRC and 11 patients with LARC. Twenty-seven patients underwent an R1 resection (3 in the LARC group). Eight patients had an R2 resection, compared to no patients in the LARC group. In respectively 26 and 1 patients of the LRRC and LARC groups a grade 3 or 4 complication occurred and the 30-days mortality rate was respectively 3% and 7%. The 5-years overall survival was 28% and 24% respectively., Conclusion: En bloc radical resection remains the primary goal in the treatment of dorsally located (recurrent) rectal cancer. After thorough patient selection, ASR is a safe procedure to perform, shows acceptable morbidity rates and leads to a good oncological outcome., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Surgical options after anterior resection for rectal cancer include a primary anastomosis, anastomosis with a defunctioning stoma, and an end colostomy. This study describes short-term and 1-year outcomes of these different surgical strategies., Methods: Patients undergoing surgical resection for primary mid and high rectal cancer were retrospectively studied in seven Dutch hospitals with 1-year follow-up. Short-term endpoints were postoperative complications, re-interventions, prolonged hospital stay, and mortality. One-year endpoints were unplanned readmissions and re-interventions, presence of stoma, and mortality., Results: Nineteen percent of 388 included patients received a primary anastomosis, 55% an anastomosis with defunctioning stoma, and 27% an end colostomy. Short-term anastomotic leakage was 10% in patients with a primary anastomosis vs. 7% with a defunctioning stoma (P = 0.46). An end colostomy was associated with less severe re-interventions. One-year outcomes showed low morbidity and mortality rates in patients with an anastomosis. Patients with a defunctioning stoma had high (18%) readmissions and re-intervention (12%) rates, mostly due to anastomotic leakage. An end colostomy was associated with unplanned re-interventions due to stoma/abscess problems. During follow-up, there was a 30% increase in patients with an end colostomy., Conclusions: This study showed a high 1-year morbidity rate after anterior resection for rectal cancer. A defunctioning stoma was associated with a high risk for late complications including anastomotic leakage. An end colostomy is a safe alternative to prevent anastomotic leakage, but stomal problems cannot be ignored. Selecting low-risk patients for an anastomosis may lead to favorable short- and 1-year outcomes.

The management of rectal cancer has improved considerably in recent decades. Surgery remains the cornerstone of the treatment. However, the role of preoperative imaging has made it possible to optimize the treatment plan in rectal patients. Neoadjuvant treatment may be indicated in efforts to sterilize possible tumor deposits outside the surgical field, or may be used to downsize and downstage the tumor itself. The optimal sequence of treatment modalities can be determined by a multidisciplinary team, who not only use pretreatment imaging, but also review pathologic results after surgery. The pathologist plays a pivotal role in providing feedback about the success of surgery, i.e., the distance between the tumor and the circumferential resection margin, the quality of surgery, and the effect of neoadjuvant treatment. Registry and auditing of all treatment variables can further improve outcomes. In this century, rectal cancer treatment has become a team effort.

The management of rectal cancer has changed dramatically over the last few decades. Due to improvements in the multimodality treatment and the introduction of neoadjuvant chemoradiation, previously irresectable tumours can nowadays be cured by extensive multivisceral resections. These highly complex operations are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Due to optimization of chemoradiotherapy, the introduction of IORT, increasing knowledge of tumour pathology and patterns of recurrence the need for extensive surgery diminishes. The question arises which patients with T4 rectal cancer really need extensive surgery and who can safely be considered for an organ preserving approach.

Aims: Pre-operative radiotherapy has proven to reduce local recurrences after curative surgery for rectal cancer. Radiotherapy is generally well tolerated, although postoperative morbidity and mortality was increased in some patients. Current study was undertaken to analyse whether the interval between preoperative radiotherapy and surgery influences post-operative mortality and recurrence for two cohorts., Methods: All Dutch patients included in the total mesorectal excision (TME)-trial receiving radiotherapy for resectable rectal cancer were included in this study (n=642). The verification set consisted of all patients receiving short-course radiotherapy for resectable rectal cancer in two radiotherapy clinics in The Netherlands (n=600). Univariate and multivariable survival analyses for overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence-free survival and non-cancer related survival were calculated., Results: Patients aged 75 years and older treated during the TME-trial showed a worse overall and non-cancer-related survival when surgically treated 4-7 days after the last fraction of radiotherapy. No differences in survival between the interval groups were found in the verification set., Conclusion: Present study found that elderly patients aged 75 years and older operated 4-7 days after the last fraction of radiotherapy had a higher chance of dying due to non-cancer-related causes during the TME-trial as compared to patients with an interval of 0-3 days. In the verification set similar differences could not be confirmed, which could be due to awareness of the clinicians who avoided delayed surgery after radiotherapy since the results have been presented during congresses. A longer than recommended interval between radiotherapy and surgery should be avoided. Besides, the verification set suggests that radiotherapy duration of 7 days is acceptable., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: To achieve T-downstaging and better resectability in locally advanced rectal cancer, neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy (RCT) has become the current standard of treatment. A variety of schemes have been used. This study investigates which scheme had the best effect on these parameters., Methods: Our institution is a referral center for locally advanced rectal cancer. Different neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy regimens were administered: long course radiotherapy (RTH), 5-FU and leucovorin (5FUBolus), a combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CORE), and capecitabine only (CAP). Selection of patients for 1 of the regimens was based on hospital policy rather than patient or tumor characteristics., Results: The data of 504 consecutive patients (n = 181 T3+, n = 323 T4) without metastatic disease (cM0) who underwent surgery for advanced rectal carcinoma between 1994 and 2010 were reviewed. The RTH, 5FUBolus, CORE, and CAP scheme were administered to 106, 137, 155, and 106 patients, respectively. Odds ratios for downstaging were less effective for RTH, 5FUBolus, and CAP (0.31, 0.44, and 0.31; P < .0001) when compared with the CORE scheme. Odds ratios for a R1 resection (3.74, 1.94, 1.14; P = .003) or CRM+ resection (3.78, 2.73, 1.34; P = .001) were also in favor of the CORE. Hazard ratios for CSS were significantly better for the CORE scheme., Conclusions: Downstaging with neoadjuvant treatment results in an increased number of radical resections. In our study, the combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin appears to be the most effective regimen for locally advanced rectal cancer tumors. However, longer follow-up will be necessary to confirm this conclusion.