Advertisement

International Journal of Colorectal Disease

, Volume 33, Issue 6, pp 779–785 | Cite as

Improved perioperative care is associated with improved long-term survival in colorectal cancer

  • Eligijus Poskus
  • Marius KryzauskasEmail author
  • Tomas Poskus
  • Saulius Mikalauskas
  • Narimantas Evaldas Samalavicius
  • Oleg Aliosin
  • Sarunas Dailidenas
  • Algimantas Tamelis
  • Zilvinas Saladzinskas
  • Paulius Lizdenis
  • Audrone Jakaitiene
  • Giedre Smailyte
  • Kestutis Strupas
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To compare perioperative colorectal cancer care and survival in patient cohorts operated in 2005 and in 2010 in Lithuania.

Methods

Comparative observational cohort study was performed. The study was conducted in the three Lithuanian cancer hospitals. Patients, who underwent curative surgery for colorectal cancer in 2005 and 2010, were included. Demographic characteristics, distribution of the tumors, preoperative diagnostics and staging, surgical treatment, the quality of pathological examination, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed. One- and 5-year overall survival data were compared between the groups.

Results

Colorectal cancer diagnostics and treatment improved from 2005 to 2010 significantly. The disease was identified as stage III–IV for 45 vs. 48% of the patients; however, computed tomography staging scan was performed only for 5.9 vs. 17.8% in 2005 and 2010, respectively. Laparoscopic operations were performed 1.5 vs. 10.5% and abdominoperineal resections—42.7 vs. 31.7% in 2005 and 2010, respectively. The number of harvested lymph nodes was mentioned in 55.8 vs. 97.7% of the cases, whereas more than 12 lymph nodes were examined in 18 vs. 66.6% of cases after histological examination. The overall 5-year survival was 52.1 vs. 63.1% (p < 0.0001), while the 5-year survival of the patients with stage IV of disease was 4.2 vs. 17.8% in 2005 and 2010, respectively.

Conclusion

Preoperative investigation, surgical treatment, pathological examination, and postoperative course are associated with improved overall survival in colorectal cancer patients, undergoing curative surgery in the resource-limited settings.

Keywords

Colon cancer Rectal cancer Carcinoma Survival Surgical treatment Perioperative Care Complications Survival 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Lunevicius R, Poskus T, Samalavicius NE (2015) National burden of colorectal cancer in Lithuania and country’s ranking across 45 European nations. Oncol Lett 10(1):433–438CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Angelis R, Sant M, Coleman MP et al (2014) Cancer survival in Europe 1999–2007 by country and age: results of EUROCARE-5—a population-based study. Lancet Oncol 15(1):23–34CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Poškus E, Mikalauskas S, Jotautas V, Žeromskas P, Poškus T, Strupas K, Samalavičius NE, Lasinskas M, Sklepavičius A, Tamelis A, Saladžinskas Ž, Pavalkis D, Jakaitienė A, Smailytė G (2013) The pattern of colorectal cancer surgery in Lithuania in 2005: do results meet expectations? Medicina 49(3):124–131PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Poskus T, Strupas K, Mikalauskas S, Bitinaitė D, Kavaliauskas A, Samalavicius NE, Saladzinskas Z (2015) Initial results of the National Colorectal Cancer Screening Program in Lithuania. Eur J Cancer Prev 24(2):76–80CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Påhlman L, Laurberg S, Søreide O (2001) Structuring rectal cancer treatment in Scandinavia. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 10(4):855–862PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bülow S, Harling H, Iversen LH, Ladelund S, Danish Colorectal Cancer Group (2010) Improved survival after rectal cancer in Denmark. Color Dis 12(7 Online):e37–e42Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Leersum NJ, Snijders HS, Henneman D et al (2013) The Dutch surgical colorectal audit. Eur J Surg Oncol 39(10):1063–1070CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Breugom AJ, Boelens PG, van den Broek CB et al (2014) Quality assurance in the treatment of colorectal cancer: the EURECCA initiative. Ann Oncol 25(8):1485–1492CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guren MG, Kørner H, Pfeffer F, Myklebust TÅ, Eriksen MT, Edna TH, Larsen SG, Knudsen KO, Nesbakken A, Wasmuth HH, Vonen B, Hofsli E, Færden AE, Brændengen M, Dahl O, Steigen SE, Johansen MJ, Lindsetmo RO, Drolsum A, Tollåli G, Dørum LM, Møller B, Wibe A (2015) Nationwide improvement of rectal cancer treatment outcomes in Norway, 1993–2010. Acta Oncol 54(10):1714–1722CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ingeholm P, Gögenur I, Iversen LH (2016) Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database. Clin Epidemiol 8:465–468CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Govaert JA, van Dijk WA, Fiocco M, Scheffer AC, Gietelink L, Wouters MWJM, Tollenaar RAEM (2016) Nationwide outcomes measurement in colorectal cancer surgery: improving quality and reducing costs. J Am Coll Surg 222(1):19–29CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maurer CA, Dietrich D, Schilling MK, Metzger U, Laffer U, Buchmann P, Lerf B, Villiger P, Melcher G, Klaiber C, Bilat C, Brauchli P, Terracciano L, Kessler K (2017) Prospective multicenter registration study of colorectal cancer: significant variations in radicality and oncosurgical quality—Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research Protocol SAKK 40/00. Int J Color Dis 32(1):57–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kanters A, Mullard AJ, Arambula J, Fasbinder L, Krapohl G, Wong SL, Campbell da Jr, Hendren S (2016) Colorectal cancer: quality of surgical care in Michigan. Am J Surg 213(3):548–552CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Becerra AZ, Probst CP, Tejani MA, Aquina CT, González MG, Hensley BJ, Noyes K, Monson JRT, Fleming FJ (2015) Opportunity lost: adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer remains underused. Surgery 158(3):692–699CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schootman M, Lian M, Pruitt SL, Hendren S, Mutch M, Deshpande AD, Jeffe DB, Davidson NO (2014) Hospital and geographic variability in two colorectal cancer surgery outcomes: complications and mortality after complications. Ann Surg Oncol 21(8):2659–2666CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Munro A, Brown M, Niblock P, Steele R, Carey F (2015) Do multidisciplinary team (MDT) processes influence survival in patients with colorectal cancer? A population-based experience. BMC Cancer 15:686CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lorenzon L, La Torre M, Ziparo V et al (2014) Evidence based medicine and surgical approaches for colon cancer: evidences, benefits and limitations of the laparoscopic vs open resection. World J Gastroenterol 20(13):3680–3692CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Spanjersberg WR, van Sambeeck JD, Bremers A, Rosman C, van Laarhoven CJ (2015) Systematic review and meta-analysis for laparoscopic versus open colon surgery with or without an ERAS programme. Surg Endosc 29(12):3443–3453CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Theophilus M, Platell C, Spilsbury K (2014) Long-term survival following laparoscopic and open colectomy for colon cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Color Dis 16(3):O75–O81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Arezzo A, Passera R, Salvai A, Arolfo S, Allaix ME, Schwarzer G, Morino M (2015) Laparoscopy for rectal cancer is oncologically adequate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Surg Endosc 29(2):334–348CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martínez-Pérez A, Carra MC, Brunetti F, de'Angelis N (2017) Pathologic outcomes of laparoscopic vs open mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Surg 152(4):e165665.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2016.5665
  22. 22.
    Vennix S, Pelzers L, Bouvy N, Beets GL, Pierie JP, Wiggers T, Breukink S (2014) Laparoscopic versus open total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (4):CD005200.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD005200.pub3
  23. 23.
    Benz S, Barlag H, Gerken M, Fürst A, Klinkhammer-Schalke M (2017) Laparoscopic surgery in patients with colon cancer: a population-based analysis. Surg Endosc 31(6):2586–2595.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-5266-2
  24. 24.
    Dobbins TA, Young JM, Solomon MJ (2014) Uptake and outcomes of laparoscopically assisted resection for colon and rectal cancer in Australia: a population-based study. Dis Colon Rectum 57(4):415–422CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Allaix ME, Arezzo A, Morino M (2016) Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal cancer: T1 and beyond? An evidence-based review. Surg Endosc 30(11):4841–4852CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJH, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JHJM, the Pathology Review Committee for the Cooperative Clinical Investigators of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (2002) Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 20(7):1729–1734CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Quirke P, Dixon MF (1988) The prediction of local recurrence in rectal adenocarcinoma by histopathological examination. Int J Color Dis 3(2):127–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    West NP, Morris EJ, Rotimi O, Cairns A, Finan PJ, Quirke P (2008) Pathology grading of colon cancer surgical resection and its association with survival: a retrospective observational study. Lancet Oncol 9(9):857–865CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lu ZR, Rajendran N, Lynch AC, Heriot AG, Warrier SK (2016) Anastomotic leaks after restorative resections for rectal cancer compromise cancer outcomes and survival. Dis Colon Rectum 59(3):236–244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    McSorley ST, Horgan PG, McMillan DC (2016) The impact of the type and severity of postoperative complications on long-term outcomes following surgery for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 97:168–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Stormark K, Søreide K, Søreide JA, Kvaløy JT, Pfeffer F, Eriksen MT, Nedrebø BS, Kørner H (2016) Nationwide implementation of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes and long-term survival in a population-based cohort. Surg Endosc 30(11):4853–4864CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eligijus Poskus
    • 1
  • Marius Kryzauskas
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tomas Poskus
    • 1
  • Saulius Mikalauskas
    • 1
  • Narimantas Evaldas Samalavicius
    • 2
    • 3
  • Oleg Aliosin
    • 2
  • Sarunas Dailidenas
    • 3
  • Algimantas Tamelis
    • 4
  • Zilvinas Saladzinskas
    • 4
  • Paulius Lizdenis
    • 4
  • Audrone Jakaitiene
    • 5
  • Giedre Smailyte
    • 6
  • Kestutis Strupas
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Clinical Medicine, Clinic of Gastroenterology, Nephrourology and SurgeryVilnius UniversityVilniusLithuania
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryKlaipeda University HospitalKlaipedaLithuania
  3. 3.Department of Abdominal and General Surgery and Oncology, National Cancer InstituteClinic of Internal, Family Medicine and Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Vilnius UniversityVilniusLithuania
  4. 4.Department of SurgeryLithuanian University of Health SciencesKaunasLithuania
  5. 5.Centre of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, Department of Human and Medical GeneticsVilnius UniversityVilniusLithuania
  6. 6.Laboratory of Cancer EpidemiologyNational Cancer InstituteVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations