Background: Complications after colorectal cancer surgery can worsen long-term survival. The aim of this nationwide study was to determine the impact of different types of complications on overall... Show moreBackground: Complications after colorectal cancer surgery can worsen long-term survival. The aim of this nationwide study was to determine the impact of different types of complications on overall survival (OS) and conditional survival if still alive one year postoperatively (CS-1) after colorectal cancer surgery.Materials and methods: All patients registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit after resection of primary colorectal cancer between 2011 and 2017 and with known survival status were included. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the association of complications with OS and CS-1, thereby calculating the Hazard Ratio (HR) with 95% Confidence Interval.Results: 43,908 colon and 16,955 rectal cancer patients were included. Median follow-up time was 66.1 and 66.5 months, respectively. Five-year OS after colon cancer resection was 73.2% without complications, and 65.4% with surgical, 52.9% with non-surgical and 51.8% with combined type of complications (p < 0.001). Corresponding 5-year OS for rectal cancer patients was 76.9%, 72.7%, 64.9%, and 63.2% (p < 0.001). In colon cancer, multivariable analyses revealed HR 1.198 (1.136-1.264) for surgical, HR 1.489 (1.423-1.558) for non-surgical and HR 1.590 (1.505-1.681) for combined type of complications. For rectal cancer, these HRs were 1.193 (1.097-1.2297), 1.456 (1.346-1.329), and 1.489 (1.357-1.633). Surgical complications were associated with worse CS-1 in rectal cancer (HR 1.140 (1.050-1.260), but not in colon cancer (HR 1.007 (0.943-1.075)).Conclusion: Non-surgical complications have higher impact on survival than surgical complications. The impact of surgical complications on survival was still measurable after surviving the first year in rectal cancer but not in colon cancer patients. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd, BASO -The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved. Show less
Warps, A.K.; Saraste, D.; Westerterp, M.; Detering, R.; Sjovall, A.; Martling, A.; ... ; Swedish Colorectal Canc Registry 2022
Background: The timing and degree of implementation of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal cancer vary among countries. Insights in national differences regarding implementation of new... Show moreBackground: The timing and degree of implementation of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal cancer vary among countries. Insights in national differences regarding implementation of new surgical techniques and the effect on postoperative outcomes are important for quality assurance, can show potential areas for country-specific improvement, and might be illustrative and supportive for similar implementation programs in other countries. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate differences in patient selection, applied techniques, and results of minimal invasive surgery for colorectal cancer between the Netherlands and Sweden. Methods: Patients who underwent elective minimally invasive surgery for T1-3 colon or rectal cancer (2012-2018) registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit or Swedish ColoRectal Cancer Registry were included. Time trends in the application of MIS were determined. Outcomes were compared for time periods with a similar level of MIS implementation (Netherlands 2012-2013 versus Sweden 2017-2018). Multilevel analyses were performed to identify factors associated with adverse short-term outcomes.Results: A total of 46,095 Dutch and 8,819 Swedish patients undergoing MIS for colorectal cancer were included. In Sweden, MIS implementation was approximately 5 years later than in the Netherlands, with more robotic surgery and lower volumes per hospital. Although conversion rates were higher in Sweden, oncological and surgical outcomes were comparable. MIS in the Netherlands for the years 2012- 2013 resulted in a higher reoperation rate for colon cancer and a higher readmission rate but lower non- surgical complication rates for rectal cancer if compared with MIS in Sweden during 2017-2018.Conclusion: This study showed that the implementation of MIS for colorectal cancer occurred later in Sweden than the Netherlands, with comparable outcomes despite lower volumes. Our study demonstrates that new surgical techniques can be implemented at a national level in a controlled and safe way, with thorough quality assurance. Show less
Background Synchronous colorectal cancer (CRC) has been associated with higher postoperative morbidity and mortality rates compared to solitary CRC. The influence of improved CRC care and... Show moreBackground Synchronous colorectal cancer (CRC) has been associated with higher postoperative morbidity and mortality rates compared to solitary CRC. The influence of improved CRC care and introduction of screening on these outcomes remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate time trends in incidence, population characteristics, and short-term outcomes of synchronous CRC patients at the population level over a 10-year time period. Methods Data of all patients that underwent resection for primary CRC were extracted from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (2010-2019). Analyses were stratified for solitary and synchronous colon and rectal cancer. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were used to determine factors associated with pathological and surgical outcomes. Results Among 100,474 patients, 3.1% underwent surgery for synchronous CRC. A screening-related decrease for surgically treated left-sided solitary and synchronous colon cancer and a temporary increase for exclusively right-sided colon cancer were observed. Synchronous CRC patients had higher rates of complicated postoperative course, failure to rescue, and mortality. Bilateral synchronous colon cancer was more often treated with subtotal colectomy (25.4%) and demonstrated higher rates of surgical complications, reinterventions, prolonged hospital stay, and mortality than other synchronous tumor locations. Discussion National bowel screening resulted in contradictory effects on surgical resections for synchronous CRCs depending on sidedness. Bilateral synchronous colon cancer required more often extended resection resulting in significantly worse outcomes than other synchronous tumor locations. Identification of low volume, high complex CRC subpopulations is relevant for individualized care and has implications for case-mix correction and benchmarking in clinical auditing. Show less
Bosch, T. van den; Warps, A.L.K.; Babberich, M.P.M.D.T.; Stamm, C.; Geerts, B.F.; Vermeulen, L.; ... ; Dutch ColoRectal Audit 2021
Question Can big-data analysis of clinical audits help to find new risk factors and predict adverse events associated with colorectal cancer surgery? Findings This cohort study found that machine... Show moreQuestion Can big-data analysis of clinical audits help to find new risk factors and predict adverse events associated with colorectal cancer surgery? Findings This cohort study found that machine learning applied to a clinical audit containing 62 501 records and 103 preoperative variables of surgically treated patients with colorectal cancer outperformed conventional scores in predicting 30-day postoperative mortality but with similar performance as a preexisting case-mix model. New risk factors for several other adverse events may be identified. Meaning This study suggests that machine learning methods may be of additional value in analyzing quality indicators in colorectal cancer surgery, thereby providing directions to optimize case-mix corrections for benchmarking in clinical auditing.Importance Quality improvement programs for colorectal cancer surgery have been introduced with benchmarking based on quality indicators, such as mortality. Detailed (pre)operative characteristics may offer relevant information for proper case-mix correction. Objective To investigate the added value of machine learning to predict quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery and identify previously unrecognized predictors of 30-day mortality based on a large, nationwide colorectal cancer registry that collected extensive data on comorbidities. Design, Setting, and Participants All patients who underwent resection for primary colorectal cancer registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2016, were included. Multiple machine learning models (multivariable logistic regression, elastic net regression, support vector machine, random forest, and gradient boosting) were made to predict quality indicators. Model performance was compared with conventionally used scores. Risk factors were identified by logistic regression analyses and Shapley additive explanations (ie, SHAP values). Statistical analysis was performed between March 1 and September 30, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome of this cohort study was 30-day mortality. Prediction models were trained on a training set by performing 5-fold cross-validation, and outcomes were measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve on the test set. Machine learning was further used to identify risk factors, measured by odds ratios and SHAP values. Results This cohort study included 62 501 records, most patients were male (35 116 [56.2%]), were aged 61 to 80 years (41 560 [66.5%]), and had an American Society of Anesthesiology score of II (35 679 [57.1%]). A 30-day mortality rate of 2.7% (n = 1693) was found. The area under the curve of the best machine learning model for 30-day mortality (0.82; 95% CI, 0.79-0.85) was significantly higher than the American Society of Anesthesiology score (0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.77; P < .001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (0.66; 95% CI, 0.63-0.70; P < .001), and preoperative score to predict postoperative mortality (0.73; 95% CI, 0.70-0.77; P < .001). Hypertension, myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and asthma were comorbidities with a high risk for increased mortality. Machine learning identified specific risk factors for a complicated course, intensive care unit admission, prolonged hospital stay, and readmission. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with a decreased risk for all adverse outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance This study found that machine learning methods outperformed conventional scores to predict 30-day mortality after colorectal cancer surgery, identified specific patient groups at risk for adverse outcomes, and provided directions to optimize benchmarking in clinical audits.This cohort study investigates the ability of machine learning to predict quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery and identify previously unrecognized predictors of 30-day mortality based on a large nationwide colorectal cancer registry that collected extensive data on comorbidities. Show less
Purpose Interhospital referral is a consequence of centralization of complex oncological care but might negatively impact waiting time, a quality indicator in the Netherlands. This study aims to... Show morePurpose Interhospital referral is a consequence of centralization of complex oncological care but might negatively impact waiting time, a quality indicator in the Netherlands. This study aims to evaluate characteristics and waiting times of patients with primary colorectal cancer who are referred between hospitals. Methods Data were extracted from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (2015-2019). Waiting time between first tumor-positive biopsy until first treatment was compared between subgroups stratified for referral status, disease stage, and type of hospital. Results In total, 46,561 patients were included. Patients treated for colon or rectal cancer in secondary care hospitals were referred in 12.2% and 14.7%, respectively. In tertiary care hospitals, corresponding referral rates were 43.8% and 66.4%. Referred patients in tertiary care hospitals were younger, but had a more advanced disease stage, and underwent more often multivisceral resection and simultaneous metastasectomy than non-referred patients in secondary care hospitals (p<0.001). Referred patients were more often treated within national quality standards for waiting time compared to non-referred patients (p<0.001). For referred patients, longer waiting times prior to MDT were observed compared to non-referred patients within each hospital type, although most time was spent post-MDT. Conclusion A large proportion of colorectal cancer patients that are treated in tertiary care hospitals are referred from another hospital but mostly treated within standards for waiting time. These patients are younger but often have a more advanced disease. This suggests that these patients are willing to travel more but also reflects successful centralization of complex oncological patients in the Netherlands. Show less
Background: Complications after colorectal cancer surgery can worsen long-term survival. The aim of this nationwide study was to determine the impact of different types of complications on overall... Show moreBackground: Complications after colorectal cancer surgery can worsen long-term survival. The aim of this nationwide study was to determine the impact of different types of complications on overall survival (OS) and conditional survival if still alive one year postoperative (CS-1) after colorectal cancer surgery .Materials and methods: All patients registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit after resection of primary colorectal cancer between 2011 and 2017 and with known survival status were included. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the association of complications with OS and CS-1, thereby calculating the Hazard Ratio (HR) with 95% Confidence Interval.Results: 43,908 colon and 16,955 rectal cancer patients were included. Median follow-up was 66.1 and 66.5 months, respectively. Five-year OS after colon cancer resection was 73.2% without complications, and 65.4% with surgical, 52.9% with non-surgical and 51.8% with combined type of complications (p<0.001). Corresponding 5-year OS for rectal cancer patients was 76.9%, 72.7%, 64.9%, and 63.2% (p<0.001). In colon cancer, multivariable analyses revealed HR 1.198 (1.136-1.264) for surgical, HR 1.489 (1.423-1.558) for non-surgical and HR 1.590 (1.505-1.681) for combined type of complications. For rectal cancer, these HRs were 1.193 (1.097-1.2297), 1.456 (1.346-1.329), and 1.489 (1.357-1.633). Surgical complications were associated with worse CS-1 in rectal cancer (HR 1.140 (1.050-1.260), but not in colon cancer (HR 1.007 (0.943-1.075)).Conclusion: Non-surgical complications have higher impact on survival than surgical complications. The impact of surgical complications on survival was still measurable after surviving the first year in rectal cancer but not in colon cancer patients. Show less
Aim This study aimed to determine predictive factors for the circumferential resection margin (CRM) within two northern European countries with supposed similarity in providing rectal cancer care.... Show moreAim This study aimed to determine predictive factors for the circumferential resection margin (CRM) within two northern European countries with supposed similarity in providing rectal cancer care. Method Data for all patients undergoing rectal resection for clinical tumour node metastasis (TNM) stage I-III rectal cancer were extracted from the Swedish ColoRectal Cancer Registry and the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (2011-2015). Separate analyses were performed for cT1-3 and cT4 stage. Predictive factors for the CRM were determined using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. Results A total of 6444 Swedish and 12 089 Dutch patients were analysed. Over time the number of hospitals treating rectal cancer decreased from 52 to 42 in Sweden, and 82 to 79 in the Netherlands. In the Swedish population, proportions of cT4 stage (17% vs 8%), multivisceral resection (14% vs 7%) and abdominoperineal excision (APR) (37% vs 31%) were higher. The overall proportion of patients with a positive CRM (CRM+) was 7.8% in Sweden and 5.4% in the Netherlands. In both populations with cT1-3 stage disease, common independent risk factors for CRM+ were cT3, APR and multivisceral resection. No common risk factors for CRM+ in cT4 stage disease were found. An independent impact of hospital volume on CRM+ could be demonstrated for the cT1-3 Dutch population. Conclusion Within two northern European countries with implemented clinical auditing, rectal cancer care might potentially be improved by further optimizing the treatment of distal and locally advanced rectal cancer. Show less
