Referrals for surgical removal of polyps since the introduction of a colorectal cancer screening programme.

AIM: Implementation of the Dutch national bowel screening programme in 2014 led to an increased rate of detection of polyps. In general, polyps should be removed endoscopically. However, if the size and location of the polyp make endoscopic removal technically difficult, or if there is a suspicion for early (T1) cancer, surgery is the preferred method for removal. An increasing number of these patients are being treated with minimally invasive surgical procedures instead of segmental resection. The aim of this study was to assess the number of referrals for surgery and the type of surgery for polyps since the introduction of the Dutch national bowel screening programme. METHOD: A retrospective cohort study was performed. Patients who underwent surgery for colorectal polyps between January 2012 and December 2017 were included. Patients with histologically proven carcinoma prior to surgery were excluded. Primary outcomes were the number and type of surgical procedures for polyps. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were included. An annual increase in procedures for colorectal polyps was observed, from 18 patients in 2012 to 36 patients in 2017. All the procedures before implementation of the screening programme were segmental resections, and 58.8% of the patients underwent organ-preserving surgery after implementation of the screening. The overall complication rate of organ-preserving surgery was 16.3%, compared with 44.3% for segmental resections (P = 0.001). Overall, invasive colorectal cancer was encountered in 23.8% of cases. CONCLUSION: The number of referrals for surgical resection of colorectal polyps has doubled since the introduction of the Dutch national bowel screening programme with a substantial shift towards organ-preserving techniques.

Psychological distress and quality of life following positive fecal occult blood testing in colorectal cancer screening.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess psychological functioning, quality of life, and regret about screening after a positive fecal immunochemical test (FIT) and subsequent colonoscopy, and to evaluate changes over time. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study. Individuals aged 55 to 75 with a positive FIT that were referred for colonoscopy between July 2017 and November 2018, were invited to complete questionnaires related to psychological distress and health-related quality of life at three predefined time points: before colonoscopy, after histopathology result notification, and after 6 months. Four questionnaires were used: the Psychological Consequences Questionnaire (PCQ), the six-item Cancer Worry Scale (CWS), the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), and the 36-item Short-Form (SF-36). RESULTS: A total of 1066 participants out of 2151 eligible individuals were included. Patients with cancer showed a significant increase in psychological dysfunction (P = .01) and cancer worry (P = .008) after colonoscopy result notification, and a decline to pre-colonoscopy measurements after 6 months. In the no-cancer groups, psychological dysfunction and cancer worry significantly decreased over time (P < .05) but there was no ongoing decline. After 6 months, 17% of participants with no cancer experienced high level of cancer worry (CWS ≥ 10). Yet, only 5% reported high level of regret about screening participation (DRS > 25). A good global quality of life was reported in participants with no cancer. CONCLUSION: Some psychological distress remains up to 6 months after colonoscopy in participants who tested false-positive in the Dutch bowel cancer screening program.

Postoperative Outcomes of Screen-Detected vs Non-Screen-Detected Colorectal Cancer in the Netherlands.

Importance: The nationwide fecal immunochemical test-based screening program has influenced surgical care for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) in the Netherlands, although these implications have not been studied in much detail so far. Objective: To compare surgical outcomes of patients diagnosed as having CRC through the fecal immunochemical test-based screening program (screen detected) and patients with non-screen-detected CRC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a population-based comparative cohort study using the Dutch ColoRectal Audit and analyzed all Dutch hospitals performing CRC resections. Patients who underwent elective resection for CRC between January 2011 to December 2016 were included. Interventions: Colorectal cancer surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Postoperative nonsurgical complications, postoperative surgical complications, postoperative 30-day or in-hospital mortality, and complicated course (postoperative complication resulting in a hospital stay >14 days and/or a reintervention and/or mortality). A risk-stratified comparison was made for different postoperative outcomes based on screening status (screen detected vs not screen detected), cancer stage (I-IV), and for cancer stage I to III also on age (aged ≤70 years and >70 years) and American Society of Anesthesiologists score (I-II and III-IV). To determine any residual case-mix-corrected differences in outcomes between patients with screen-detected and non-screen-detected cancer, univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. Results: In total, 36 242 patients with colon cancer and 17 416 patients with rectal cancer were included for analysis. Compared with patients with non-screen-detected CRC, screen-detected patients were younger (mean [SD] age, 68 [5] vs 70 [11] years), more often men (3777 [60%] vs 13 506 [57%]), and had lower American Society of Anesthesiologists score (American Society of Anesthesiologists score III+: 838 [13%] vs 5529 [23%]). Patients with stage I to III colon cancer who were screen detected had a significantly lower mortality and complicated course rate compared with non-screen-detected patients. For patients with rectal cancer, only a significant difference was found in mortality rate in patients with a cancer stage IV disease, which was higher in the screen-detected group. Compared with non-screen-detected colon cancer, an independent association was found for screen-detected colon cancer on nonsurgical complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.91), surgical complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.89), and complicated course (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.90). Screen-detected rectal cancer had significantly higher odds on mortality. Conclusions and Relevance: Postoperative outcomes were significantly better for patients with colon cancer referred through the fecal immunochemical test-based screening program compared with non-screen-detected patients. These differences were not found in patients with rectal cancer. The outcomes of patients with screen-detected colon cancer were still better after an extensive case-mix correction, implying additional underlying factors favoring patients referred for surgery through the screening program.

Treatment and survival of rectal cancer patients over the age of 80 years: a EURECCA international comparison.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for older rectal cancer patients remains unclear. The current study aimed to compare treatment and survival of rectal cancer patients aged 80+. METHODS: Patients of ≥80 years diagnosed with rectal cancer between 2001 and 2010 were included. Population-based cohorts from Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), the Netherlands (NL), Norway (NO) and Sweden (SE) were compared side by side for neighbouring countries on treatment strategy and 5-year relative survival (RS), adjusted for sex and age. Analyses were performed separately for stage I-III patients and stage IV patients. RESULTS: Overall, 19 634 rectal cancer patients were included. For stage I-III patients, 5-year RS varied from 61.7% in BE to 72.3% in SE. Proportion of preoperative radiotherapy ranged between 7.9% in NO and 28.9% in SE. For stage IV patients, 5-year RS differed from 2.8% in NL to 5.6% in BE. Rate of patients undergoing surgery varied from 22.2% in DK to 40.8% in NO. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variation was observed in the 5-year relative survival between European countries for rectal cancer patients aged 80+, next to a wide variation in treatment, especially in the use of preoperative radiotherapy in stage I-III patients and in the rate of patients undergoing surgery in stage IV patients.

Treatment and Survival of Patients with Colon Cancer Aged 80 Years and Older: A EURECCA International Comparison.

BACKGROUND: Colon cancer in older patients represents a major public health issue. As older patients are hardly included in clinical trials, the optimal treatment of these patients remains unclear. The present international EURECCA comparison explores possible associations between treatment and survival outcomes in elderly colon cancer patients. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS, AND METHODS: National data from Belgium, Denmark, The Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden were obtained, as well as a multicenter surgery cohort from Germany. Patients aged 80 years and older, diagnosed with colon cancer between 2001 and 2010, were included. The study interval was divided into two periods: 2001-2006 and 2007-2010. The proportion of surgical treatment and chemotherapy within a country and its relation to relative survival were calculated for each time frame. RESULTS: Overall, 50,761 patients were included. At least 94% of patients with stage II and III colon cancer underwent surgical removal of the tumor. For stage II-IV, the proportion of chemotherapy after surgery was highest in Belgium and lowest in The Netherlands and Norway. For stage III, it varied from 24.8% in Belgium and 3.9% in Norway. For stage III, a better adjusted relative survival between 2007 and 2010 was observed in Sweden (adjusted relative excess risk [RER] 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54-0.76) and Norway (adjusted RER 0.81, 95% CI: 0.69-0.96) compared with Belgium. CONCLUSION: There is substantial variation in the rate of treatment and survival between countries for patients with colon cancer aged 80 years or older. Despite higher prescription of adjuvant chemotherapy, poorer survival outcomes were observed in Belgium. No clear linear pattern between the proportion of chemotherapy and better adjusted relative survival was observed. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: With the increasing growth of the older population, clinicians will be treating an increasing number of older patients diagnosed with colon cancer. No clear linear pattern between adjuvant chemotherapy and better adjusted relative survival was observed. Future studies should also include data on surgical quality.

Clinical presentation, diagnosis, and treatment of venous aneurysms.

Venous aneurysms have been reported in most major veins and are often asymptomatic but can cause serious complications. Three patients with symptomatic venous aneurysms of the internal jugular vein, portal vein, and popliteal vein are presented, and their treatment and outcomes are discussed. Furthermore, presentation and management of the most frequent venous aneurysms, based on available literature, are evaluated. The literature supports conservative treatment of asymptomatic and nonthrombotic jugular, subclavian, thoracic, and visceral venous aneurysms. Surgery should be considered only for symptomatic venous aneurysms or in case of progressive expansion on follow-up. Prophylactic surgery is recommended for all patients with lower extremity deep venous aneurysms, by means of tangential aneurysmectomy with lateral venorrhaphy, because of the increased risk of pulmonary embolization. Postoperative anticoagulation is recommended for a period of at least 3 months after operative treatment.