Abdominoperineal Resection Rate Research Articles

Evaluation of the Response Rate to Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Patients with Rectal Adenocarcinoma: A Retrospective Long-term Study in Two Terciary Reference Centers

Abstract Objectives To evaluate the complete response (CR) rate and surgeries performed in patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant therapy (NT) at Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo and at Hospital São Paulo, in Ribeirão Preto, from January 2007 to December 2017. Methods We evaluated 166 medical records of patients with locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma (T3, T4 or N + ) who underwent NT. The regimen consisted of performing conventional (2D) or conformational (three-dimensional-3D/ radiotherapy with modulated intensity – IMRT) at a dose of 45-50.4Gy associated with capecitabine 1650mg/m2 or 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and leucovorin (LV). The following variables were analyzed: gender, age, pretreatment stage, radiotherapy, CR index, local and distant recurrence rates. Surgical treatment and complications were also evaluated. Results The CR index was 28.3%. Patients treated with 3D/IMRT radiotherapy had a higher rate of CR (36.3% x 4.8%; p < 0.001), higher rates of clinical follow-up (21% x 0%; p < 0.001), lower surgery rates (79% x 100%; p < 0.001), higher rates of transanal resection (37.1% x 9.5%; p = 0.001), lower rates of abdominal rectosigmoidectomy (25.8% x 50%; p = 0.007) and lower rates of abdominoperineal resection of the rectum (16.1% x 40.5%; p = 0.002), when compared to patients treated with 2D radiotherapy. Conclusion Modern radiotherapy techniques such as 3D conformal and IMRT, by offering greater adequacy and precision of treatment, could result in better local control and less toxicity in organs at risk, enabling organ preservation strategies and less invasive approaches in selected cases.

Omission of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for clinical T2/N1 and T3N0/1 middle and low rectal cancers with safe circumferential resection margins.

PurposeFor moderately advanced rectal cancers with safe circumferential margins, the oncologic benefit of neoadjuvant radiotherapy must be reconsidered because of the possibility of overtreatment, resulting in complications from radiotoxicity. To evaluate the oncologic safety of the omission of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for moderately advanced rectal cancers, we evaluated and compared the prognoses of patients who underwent radical resection with and without neoadjuvant radiotherapy for T2/N1 and T3N0/1 middle and low rectal cancers with safe circumferential resection margins.MethodsWe retrospectively enrolled 66 patients who underwent radical resection for clinical (c) T2N1 and T3N0/1 middle and low rectal cancers between 2008 and 2014. Patients with distant metastasis; cT4, cN2, or positive lateral pelvic lymph nodes; positive circumferential resection margin; signet-ring cell carcinoma; cT1/2N0; or those who had received adjuvant radiotherapy were excluded. The clinical and pathological characteristics and 5-year oncologic outcomes of the no-radiotherapy (n = 34) and radiotherapy (n = 32) groups were compared.ResultsThe rates of abdominoperineal resection and ileostomies and the proportion of patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy were significantly higher in the radiotherapy group. There were no significant differences in tumor location, clinical stage, surgery type, pathologic N stage, anastomotic leakage, or long-term oncologic outcomes including 5-year disease-free survival, overall survival, and local recurrence and distant metastasis rates between both groups.ConclusionThe oncologic benefit of neoadjuvant radiotherapy for cT2/N1 and T3N0/1 middle and low rectal cancers with safe circumferential resection margins is considered unclear, and it can be omitted to prevent radiotoxicity and facilitate prompt essential treatment.

Short-Term Impact of Temporary Shutdown of a University-Affiliated Hospital on Patients With Colorectal Cancer During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic.

Owing to in-hospital transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), Uijeongbu St. Mary’s Hospital, a university-affiliated hospital in South Korea, was temporarily closed for disinfection in March 2020. This study aimed to investigate the impact of both the hospital shutdown and the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic on short-term outcomes of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. We retrospectively reviewed the clinicopathologic data of 607 patients who were surgically treated for CRC from May 2018 to September 2021. Nodal upstaging, higher lymphatic invasion and abdominoperineal resection rates for 3 months after the hospital resumed surgery following the shutdown in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic were detected, without worse short-term morbidity or mortality. The incidence of adverse pathologic features of CRC such as lymphatic, venous, and perineural invasion was higher throughout the COVID-19 pandemic era. Further follow-up of CRC patients treated in the pandemic era for long-term oncologic outcomes is needed.

618 Management of Rectal Cancer in England And Wales. Is the Rate of Abdominoperineal Excision of Rectum Associated with The Pre-Operative Radiotherapy Rates?

Abstract Aim Rectal cancer treatment has improved over the years, but variations in practice remain. Abdominoperineal resection (APER) is associated with significant morbidity and pre-operative radiotherapy (RT) is only recommended for advanced rectal cancer. As such, APER and RT should be reserved for patients with an appropriate clinical need. The aim of the study is to evaluate the association between the rates of APER and RT, and whether any other factors are associated. Method Data on rectal cancer cases was extracted from National Bowel Cancer Audit 2019. Primary outcomes were: APER rate, RT rate. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was calculated. The means for APER and pre-operative radiotherapy were plotted on a four-quadrant matrix. The differences were analysed using Mann-Whitney U and Student T-test. Results 3,764 patients were included. A mean of 25% (95%CI: 10.3-14.9%) underwent APER and an average of 34% (95%CI: 30.5-36.8%) received RT. There was a weak positive correlation between rates of APER and RT (r = 0.356, p < 0.001). 43 (37%) trusts had proportions of both APER and RT below the overall mean, whilst 30 (26%) had both proportions above. No significant differences were found when comparing other variables between the high to low-rate trusts (p > 0.05). Conclusions There is a weak positive correlation between the proportion of rectal cancer patients undergoing APER and the proportion receiving RT in trusts across England and Wales. It is unknown whether this finding has a clinical significance and further analysis on trust/surgeon performance and patient demographics is needed, allowing for prevention strategies to be implemented.

Critical assessment of the surgical treatment of low rectal adenocarcinoma in a reference hospital in Recife

ObjectivesTo evaluate the rates of abdominoperineal resection in patients with low rectal adenocarcinoma at the Hospital Barão de Lucena – SES/PE. MethodologyThis is a study based on the analysis of medical records of patients with low rectal adenocarcinoma submitted to surgical treatment at the Hospital Barão de Lucena Coloproctology Service between 2013 and 2016. ResultsIt was observed that 77.5% of patients underwent abdominoperineal resection and 22.5% underwent anal sparing surgery. Most of the patients were male (62.5%), were under 70 years old (72.5%), presented a BMI less than 30kg/m2 (87.5%), presented American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score I and III (82.5%), Rullier classification from I to III (95%) and TNM different from T1–T3 (95%). In 92.5% of medical records, there was no record of fecal continence before surgery. The most frequent period between the end of the radiotherapy and the surgery was over 11 weeks (57.5%); the most common distance from the tumor to the anal margin was between 3.1 and 4.0cm (35% of patients). ConclusionThere was a high rate of non-sparing anal sphincter surgeries. The only predictive factor for abdominoperineal resection was the presence of tumors classified as Rullier type III and IV.

Medicare Beneficiaries with Rectal Cancer in Regions with Lower Colorectal Surgeon Density Have Higher Rates of Abdominoperineal Resection: A Dartmouth Atlas Study

Medicare Beneficiaries with Rectal Cancer in Regions with Lower Colorectal Surgeon Density Have Higher Rates of Abdominoperineal Resection: A Dartmouth Atlas Study

Rectal resection following neoadjuvant therapy in a Midwest community hospital setting: The case for standardization over centralization as the means to optimize rectal cancer outcomes in the United States

BackgroundIncomplete and flawed national databases reveal strikingly inferior outcomes for rectal cancer patients resected at “low” versus “high “ volume hospitals, therefore, a study of outcomes of a “high” volume surgeon in a “low” volume Midwest community hospital setting examined this perception in comparison to contemporary studies. MethodsReview of 109 consecutive patients who underwent open resection of rectal cancer following neoadjuvant therapy, 1999–2010. ResultsDespite the majority of tumors in the low rectum (54%), the rate of abdominoperineal resection was only 39% with R0 resection achieved in 94% and primary anastomosis in 61/109 patients (56%). Disease-free survival (DFS) 73%: stage 0 (complete response)- 100%, stage I- 88%, stage II- 68%, stage III- 50%, stage IV- 0% with recurrence rate of 11% (local recurrence (LR) - 3%, distant - 8%). ConclusionOutcomes of rectal cancer resection by a “high” volume surgeon in a “low” volume Midwest community hospital setting were comparable to contemporary studies from tertiary care institutions. Geographic location and hospital capacity matter less than access to multispecialty expertise providing neoadjuvant therapy and following standard principles of oncologic resection, in efforts to optimize rectal cancer outcomes.

Sphincter-Preserving Surgery for Low Rectal Cancers: Incidence and Risk Factors for Permanent Stoma.

Advances in surgical techniques and paradigm changes in rectal cancer treatment have led to a drastic decline in the abdominoperineal resection rate, and sphincter-preserving operation is possible in distal rectal cancer. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term incidence of permanent stoma after sphincter-preserving surgery for low rectal cancer and its corresponding risk factors. From 2000 to 2014, patients who underwent sphincter-preserving low anterior resection for low rectal cancer (within 5cm from the anal verge) were included. The occurrence of permanent stoma over time and its risk factors were investigated by using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. This study included 194 patients who underwent ultra-low anterior resection for distal rectal cancer, and the median follow-up period was 77months for the surviving patients. Forty-six (23.7%) patients required a permanent stoma eventfully. Anastomotic-related complications and disease progression were the main reasons for permanent stoma. Clinical anastomotic leakage (HR 5.72; 95% CI 2.31-14.12; p<0.001) and neoadjuvant chemoradiation (HR 2.34; 95% CI 1.12-4.90; p=0.024) were predictors for permanent primary stoma. Local recurrence (HR 16.09; 95% CI 5.88-44.03; p<0.001) and T4 disease (HR 11.28; 95% CI 2.99-42.49; p<0.001) were predictors for permanent secondary stoma. The 5- and 10-year cumulative incidence for permanent stoma was 24.1 and 28.0%, respectively. Advanced disease, prior chemoradiation, anastomotic leakage and local recurrence predispose patients to permanent stoma should be taken into consideration when contemplating sphincter-preserving surgery.

Sphincter preservation rates after radical resection for rectal cancer in the United States veteran population: opportunity for improvement in early disease.

Sphincter preservation (SP) is an important goal of rectal cancer surgery. We hypothesized that SP rates among veteran patients have increased and are comparable to national rates, and that a subset of patients with early disease still undergo non-SP procedures. Patients with nonmetastatic primary rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent curative-intent rectal resection were identified from the Veterans Affairs Central Cancer Registry (VACCR) database (1995-2010). SP trends over time were described and compared to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results (SEER) population. Subset analysis was performed in patients with nonirradiated, pathologic stage 0-I rectal cancers, a population that may qualify for novel SP strategies. Of 5,145 study patients, 3,509 (68 %) underwent SP surgery. The VACCR SP rate increased from 59.9 % in 1995-1999 to 79.3 % in 2005-2010, when it exceeded that of SEER (76.9 %, p = 0.023). On multivariate analysis, recent time period was independently associated with higher likelihood of SP (odds ratio [OR] 2.64, p < 0.001). Preoperative radiotherapy (OR 0.51, p < 0.001) and higher pathologic stage (OR 0.37, stage III, p < 0.001) were negative predictors. In patients with nonirradiated pathologic stage 0-I cancers, SP rates also increased, but 25 % of these patients underwent non-SP procedures. Within this subset, patients with clinical stage 0 and I disease still had significant rates of abdominoperineal resection (7.7 and 17.0 %, respectively). SP rates among veterans have increased and surpass national rates. However, an unacceptable proportion of patients with stage 0-I rectal cancers still undergo non-SP procedures. Multimodal treatment with local excision may further improve SP rates in this subset of patients.

Assessment of abdominoperineal resection rate as a surrogate marker of hospital quality in rectal cancer surgery

Rates of abdominoperineal resection (APR) have been suggested as a solitary surrogate marker for comparing overall hospital quality in rectal cancer surgery. This study investigated the value of this marker by examining the associations between hospital APR rates and other quality indicators. Hospital-level correlations between risk-adjusted APR rates for low rectal cancer and six risk-adjusted outcomes and six care processes were performed (such as 30-day mortality, complications, timely treatment). The ability of APR rates to discriminate between hospitals' performance was examined by means of hospital variance results in multilevel regression models and funnel plots. A linked population-based data set identified 1703 patients diagnosed in 2007 and 2008 who underwent surgery for rectal cancer. Some 15.9 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 14.2 to 17.6) per cent of these patients had an APR. Among 707 people with low rectal cancer, 38.2 (34.6 to 41.8) per cent underwent APR. Although risk-adjusted hospital rates of APR for low rectal cancer varied by up to 100 per cent, only one hospital (1 per cent) fell outside funnel plot limits and hospital variance in multilevel models was not very large. Lower hospital rates of APR for low rectal cancer did not correlate significantly with better hospital-level outcomes or process measures, except for recording of pathological stage (r = -0.55, P = 0.019). Patients were significantly more likely to undergo APR for low rectal cancer if they attended a non-tertiary metropolitan hospital (adjusted odds ratio 2.14, 95 per cent c.i. 1.11 to 4.15). APR rates do not appear to be a useful surrogate marker of overall hospital performance in rectal cancer surgery.

Previous transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal cancer represents a risk factor for an increased abdominoperineal resection rate

Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) represents a surgical option in the treatment of selected early rectal cancers. However, when definitive histopathology shows negative prognostic factors, rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) is recommended to reduce the risk of recurrence. No studies have yet analyzed the impact of previous TEM on the perioperative outcomes of immediate laparoscopic TME (LTME) for rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of LTME after TEM for rectal cancer. This study was a retrospective analysis of a prospective database. All patients undergoing LTME within 8 weeks after full-thickness TEM for rectal cancer between January 2001 and December 2011 were included. Each patient was matched on the basis of demographic and clinical characteristics with two patients undergoing primary LTME for rectal cancer during the same period. Age, gender, body mass index, tumor distance from the anal verge, tumor size, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, previous TEM, rectal wall defect size created during TEM, and intraoperative complications were included in a multivariate analysis to identify risk factors for abdominoperineal resection (APR). A total of 17 patients undergoing TEM followed by LTME were compared to 34 patients undergoing primary LTME. Mean operative time of LTME after TEM was significantly higher (206 vs. 188 min, P = 0.025). APR was more frequently performed after TEM [odds ratio (OR) 5.25, P = 0.028] and in male patients (OR 9.04, P = 0.034). On multivariate analysis, a previous TEM was the only independent predictor of APR (OR 4.13, P = 0.046). The incidence and severity of postoperative complications were similar in both groups. Mesorectum integrity was complete in all cases. LTME after TEM is a challenging procedure, with a significantly higher risk of APR compared to primary LTME. Future improvements in preoperative patient selection for TEM are needed to reduce this risk.

Proximal and distal rectal cancers differ in curative resectability and local recurrence

To evaluate patients with proximal rectal cancer (PRC) (> 6 cm up to 12 cm) and distal rectal cancer (DRC) (0 to 6 cm from the anal verge). Two hundred and eighteen patients (120 male, 98 female, median age 58 years, range 19-88 years) comprised 100 with PRC and 118 with DRC. The proportion of T1, T2 vs T3, T4 stage cancers was similar in both groups (PRC: T1+T2 = 29%; T3+T4 = 71% and DRC: T1+T2 = -31%; T3+T4 = 69%). All patients had cancer confined to the rectum - those with synchronous distant metastasis were excluded. Surgical resection was with curative intent with or without pre-operative chemoradiation (c-RT). Follow-up was for a median of 35 mo (range: 12 to 126 mo). End points were: 30 d mortality, complications of operation, microscopic tumour- free margins, resection with a tumour-free circumferential margin (CRM) of 1 to 2 mm and > 2 mm, local recurrence, survival and the permanent stoma rate. Overall 30-d mortality was 6% (12): PRC 7 % and DRC 4%. Postoperative complications occurred in 14% with PRC compared with 21.5% with DRC, urinary retention was the complication most frequently reported (PRC 2% vs DRC 9%, P = 0.04). Twelve percent with PRC compared with 37% with DRC were subjected to preoperative c-RT (P = 0.03). A tumour-free CRM of 1 to 2 mm and > 2 mm was reported in 93% and 82% with PRC and 88% and 75% with DRC respectively (PRC vs DRC, P > 0.05). However, local recurrence was 5% for PRC vs 11% for DRC (P < 0.001). Three and five years survival was 65.6% and 60.2% for PRC vs 67% and 64.3% for DRC respectively. No patient with PRC and 23 (20%) with DRC received an abdomino-perineal resection. PRC and DRC differ in the rate of abdomino-perineal resection, post-operative urinary retention and local recurrence. Survival in both groups was similar.

The Rate of Abdominoperineal Resections for Rectal Cancer in the State of Victoria, Australia: A Population-Based Study

The aim of this study was to document a population-based rate of abdominoperineal resections for adenocarcinoma of the rectum in the state of Victoria, Australia. It also determined whether surgeon caseload or specialist colorectal training affects this rate. All resections for adenocarcinoma of the rectum (International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, 3rd edition C20) that were performed in Victoria in the year 2005 were included. Procedures for rectosigmoid or colon cancer were excluded. The sample was taken from the Victorian Cancer Registry. The rate of abdominoperineal resections was calculated by dividing the total number of abdominoperineal resections by the total number of procedures for rectal cancer. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratio for surgeon caseload and specialist colorectal training. There were 582 resections available for analysis. Patients were mostly males (66%) and over 60 years of age (67.7%). The overall rate of abdominoperineal resection was 23.4%. The rate of abdominoperineal resections for low rectal cancers was lower (42.8%) among surgeons who had specialist colorectal training compared with those who did not (60.6%) (OR = 2.06; 95% CI, 1.24-3.42). The rate of abdominoperineal resection in Victoria for 2005 was 23.4%. Patients with low rectal cancer operated on by surgeons who had had specialist colorectal training were significantly less likely to undergo an abdominoperineal resection compared with patients undergoing an operation by surgeons who did not have specialist colorectal training.

Quality of Medical Care in Colorectal Cancer in Germany

Background: To investigate recent developments in therapeutic approaches, we examine the quality of and discuss current trends in the routine treatment of colorectal cancer in Germany. Material and Methods: We conducted a prospective, multicentre, country-wide observational study in Germany at a representative number of hospitals providing care at all levels. Results: The perioperative morbidity and mortality rates were found not to have changed for a given risk profile of patient and tumour characteristics. The resection rates and long-term oncological results achieved in clinical routine are comparable with those reported in the current literature for colorectal cancer. The quality of care of rectal carcinoma patients has improved significantly, as measured by perioperative oncosurgical criteria (abdominoperineal resection rate, total mesorectal excision rate and quality, and proportion of neoadjuvant procedures). Conclusion: At present, it remains to be seen whether these factors will lead to a further improvement in long-term results (e.g. rates of local recurrence), and this will require further critical analysis.

Prophylactic antibiotics given within 24 hours of surgery, compared with antibiotics given for 72 hours perioperatively, increased the rate of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from surgical site infections

The purpose of this research was to find which method better prevented MRSA isolation from postoperative infection sites: the administration of postoperative infection control agents within 72 h of surgery, including the day of surgery, or the administration of these agents within 24 h of surgery. More than 3000 patients who underwent elective surgery of the digestive system were studied. Cefazolin or cefotiam was used as the prophylactic antibiotic. The number of patients, sex, age, clinical stage, incidence of surgical site infection (SSI), isolated bacteria, distal pancreatectomy with or without gastrectomy, the rate of laparoscopic surgery, and the rate of abdominoperineal resection (APR) were examined in a prospective controlled study over three time periods. There were no significant differences in the demographics of patients in the three periods. The duration of antibiotic administration was 96.1 +/- 11.2 h in period A, 18.2 +/- 2.7 h in period B, and 66.9 +/- 11.1 hours in period C (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the incidence of SSI in the three periods. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was isolated from the infectious site in 0.47% of patients in period A, and from 2.1% and 0.34% of patients in periods B and C, respectively, and the incidence of MRSA was significantly higher in period B as compared with periods A and C (P < 0.01). The isolation rates of MRSA and methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) were both significantly higher in period B patients (P < 0.005). We concluded that the administration of prophylactic antibiotics within 24 h of surgery increased the rate of isolation of MRSA.

Influence of the neo-adjuvant radiochemotherapy as a factor in the surgical treatment of rectal cancer by expert surgeon. A comparative study

Total mesorectal excision and surgeon experience are prognostic factors in rectal cancer surgery, in terms of local recurrence and conservative sphincter surgery. Pre-operative radiation-chemotherapy can even improve those results. The aim of this study is to assess the utility of pre-operative radiation therapy (PRT) on the results of surgical treatment for rectal cancer comparing two consecutive series of patients operated on by surgeons with experience in rectal cancer surgery according to whether they had received PRT. Retrospective review of 118 patients with rectal cancer, divided into two groups: group I, 57 patients without pre-operative radiation-chemotherapy, and group II, 61 patients with rectal cancer who received pre-operative radiation-chemotherapy. Both groups were homogeneous. The short-term results (surgical technique, post-operative stay, post-operative complications) and long-term results (local recurrences, liver metastases and both overall and tumour-related survival) were analysed. The rate of anterior resection in the lower third was significantly higher (p = 0.037) in group II than in group I (56 vs 23%), the rate of abdominoperineal resection in the middle third was significantly lower (p = 0.046) in group II (3.5 vs 21%). The incidence of post-operative complications was similar in both groups, but the rate of anastomotic leaks was higher in group II. The local recurrences was lower in group II (p = 0.002), but the disease free survival and the overall survival was similar in both groups. At the multivariate analysis, the only prognostic factor for the local recurrence was the use of pre-operative radiation-chemotherapy. Besides surgeon experience and total mesorectal excision, a very important prognostic factor is the administration of pre-operative radiation-chemotherapy in cases of locally advanced rectal cancer, as it does not increase post-operative morbidity and mortality and significantly influences the rate of local recurrences and the conservative sphincter surgery.

Stellenwert der Rektumexstirpation im Therapiekonzept des tief sitzenden Rektumkarzinoms

The main objective of surgery of rectal carcinomas is to avoid a permanent colostomy by sphincter-sparing surgical procedures. A variety of different abdominoperineal resection rates is described in the literature. The study was performed in 2000 within the framework of a multicentric study including 282 hospitals. The purpose of the study was to document the quality of diagnosis and therapy for colorectal carcinomas.A total of 9477 patients were included in this study: 3402 suffering from a rectal carcinoma and 6075 suffering from a colon carcinoma. A total of 866 abdominoperineal resections was performed. This corresponds to an abdominoperineal resection rate of 27.4%. In 30.4% of all men and in 23.0% of all women an abdominoperineal resection was performed. Of all tumor patients who underwent abdominoperineal resection, 8.3% had a pT4 carcinoma and 57.5% a pT3 carcinoma. Adapted to the localization of the tumor in the rectum, i.e., the distance of the aboral tumor margin to the anal verge, the following abdominoperineal resection rates were found: <4 cm from the anal verge 84.6%, 4-7.9 cm 43.9%, 8-11.9 cm 5.8%, and 12-16 cm 0.5%.Intraoperative complications occurred in 11.8%, specific postoperative complications in 33.1%, and general postoperative complications in 27.4% of the patients. The postoperative lethality was 2.8%. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 21.7 days. Logistic regression identified the body mass index, gender, the distance of the carcinoma from the anal verge, and the T category as independent factors influencing the abdominoperineal resection rate. Despite an overall decrease in use, abdominoperineal resection will continue to play an important role for the surgical treatment of low rectal cancers in routine clinical practice in Germany. It will remain an individual decision for each patient whether the tumor and the patient allow sphincter preservation or whether abdominoperineal resection seems to be necessary. According to the results of the present study,a general definition of an abdominoperineal resection rate in an unselected group of patients should be viewed critically.

Management of colorectal cancer: variations in practice in one hospital

Aims: The Royal College of Surgeons of England and the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines for the management of colorectal cancer were published in 1996. We audited our practice against these guidelines.Methods: Data from 211 consecutive patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery, between September 1999 and September 2000, have been prospectively collected. Preoperative large bowel and liver imaging, assessment by colorectal specialist nurses and median number of lymph nodes resected have been compared between specialist colorectal and non-colorectal surgeons for rectal and colonic cancers. The adequacy of resection and rates of abdomino-perineal resection have been compared for rectal cancers. Following presentation of our findings, we re-audited practice between January and June 2002.Results: There was marked variation in practice within our hospital. Colorectal specialists were more likely to conform to best practice guidelines, performed fewer abdomino-perineal resections and tended to perform more extensive lymphadenectomy. Following presentation of these data, compliance with guidelines was markedly improved and the number of rectal procedures performed by non-colorectal surgeons decreased.Conclusions: The ability of audit to change practice has been demonstrated. We feel that completion of this audit cycle has improved the quality of service we provide for colorectal cancer patients in our hospital.

Early postoperative results of surgery for rectal carcinoma as a function of the distance of the tumor from the anal verge: results of a multicenter prospective evaluation.

The problems associated with rectal surgery are frequently discussed with no reference being made to the distance of the tumor from the anal verge. This study examined the effect of the location of the tumor on early postoperative results. This was a multicenter study involving 75 German hospitals and 3756 patients, of whom 1463 had rectal carcinoma. On the basis of the location of the tumor (distance from the anal verge), four groups were distinguished: <4, 4-7.9, 8-11.9, and 12-16 cm. Resection and abdominoperineal resection rates and the incidence of postoperative complications depended on the location of the tumor. Significantly higher resection rates and fewer specific complications, and a significant reduction in overall postoperative morbidity were found with tumor locations more than 8 cm from the anal verge. The highest anastomotic leak rate was observed with anastomoses less than 7 cm from the anal verge. The logistic regression showed that the distance of the tumor from the anal verge is an independent variable for the development of an anastomotic leak. Early results are greatly affected by the location of the rectal carcinoma. This applies to both abdominoperineal resection rates and specific postoperative complications, such as anastomotic leak rate and operation morbidity in general.

Prospective multi-center study colon/rectum carcinoma (primary tumors)--Results of the year 2000

Surgical quality control in the form of multicentre studies make it possible to analyse the treatment status of a given surgical illness under quality assurance aspects. On 1. 1. 2000, under the patronage of the Convent of Hospital Chief Surgeons a project (ongoing) - organised and conducted by the Institute for Quality Management in Operative Medicine at the Otto-von-Guericke University of Magdeburg - was initiated to document and collect the data of patients with colorectal cancer throughout the whole of Germany. This work is supported by the German Society of Surgery, and the Surgical Working Group, Quality Assurance within the German Society of Surgery. Currently, some 282 hospitals throughout the country are involved in establishing a prospective documentation of colorectal carcinoma. Participation in this study is on a voluntary basis. The anonymity of both patients and hospitals is guaranteed, and no hospitals wishing to participate are excluded. Both operatively and conservatively treated patients are being documented, and no randomization takes place. In the year 2000, the participating hospitals documented a total of 9 477 patients with a colorectal carcinoma, including 6 975 patients with a carcinoma of the colon, and 3 402 with a rectal carcinoma. The average age of the patients was 68.5 years, and there were 5 010 men and 4 467 women. The operation rate was 99.2 %, the resection rate 95.6 %. The abdominoperineal resection rate was 27.4 %. The indicators for diagnostic quality as set out by Hermanek were largely complied with, but some deviations were noted. On the basis of the data collected, structures were established for a uniform Germany-wide quality management for a clinical condition with a major health policy impact. This information make it possible for the hospitals to identify and eliminate deficits in the structural and process quality in the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer, and in this way to improve outcome quality. This means that the results of medical care research have an immediate impact on the individual treatment received by a given patient.