Use of patient-reported experience and outcome measures within the colorectal cancer care continuum: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are frequently adopted to evaluate colorectal cancer (CRC) care, but the use of patient-reported experience measures (PREM) appears to be underdeveloped and not widely validated. This scoping review aims to understand the contexts for deployment of PREMs in CRC care, reliability of measures, gaps in current use of PREMs, and how PREMs are associated with PROMs when deployed together. METHODS: Four scientific databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus) were systematically searched from January 2011 to December 2023. Observational or interventional studies involving quantitative or mixed methodology with samples consisting CRC patients undergoing screening, treatment, or cancer surveillance and utilizing at least one PREM as an exposure or outcome were included. RESULTS: The initial search resulted in 10,400 records. Only 13 relevant studies (consisting of 17,105 participants) met the eligibility criteria. Utilization of PREMs was heterogenous across our sample and the CRC care continuum, and about half of the studies (53.8%) evaluated the relationship between PREMs and PROMs. PREM usage across the CRC care continuum largely focused on treatment/survivorship. Better care experience was positively associated with improved patient-reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Future work in CRC PREM development should focus on (1) establishing validated measures that aim to either capture disease/treatment-specific granularity or capitalize on applicability across care settings, (2) localizing novel or existing PREMs to consider different cultural contexts in healthcare, and (3) benchmarking associations between PREMs, PROMs, and other outcomes of interest. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Individuals progressing through the CRC care continuum often undergo a multitude of procedures from detection and diagnosis to treatment and surveillance. The establishment of validated PREMs specific to CRC would help to benchmark and further improve the quality of care received-which should translate to better patient-reported outcomes-and serve as process indicators for institutions and providers to maintain rigorous health service delivery standard for CRC survivors.

Surgical High Dependency Admissions after Elective Laparoscopic Colorectal Resections: Is It Truly Necessary?

BACKGROUND: Surgical high dependency (SHD) allows for intermediate care provision between general ward (GW) and intensive care unit (ICU) for surgical patients but no universally accepted admission criteria exists. Unnecessary SHD admissions should be minimized to limit resource wastage and maintain spare critical care capacity. This study evaluates the utility of SHD admissions following elective laparoscopic colectomy by comparing post-operative outcomes and interventions performed between SHD and GW patients. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective review of all colorectal cancer patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colectomy in our institution between January 2019 and December 2021 was conducted. Patients converted to open surgery or admitted to IC post-operatively were excluded. Peri-operative parameters and outcomes between patients admitted to GW and SHD post-operatively were evaluated. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 393 patients. There were 153 patients (38.93%) who required SHD admission. SHD patients had higher American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) scores, body mass index, age and intra-operative blood loss. Majority of post-operative morbidity were minor (Clavien-Dindo II or lower) in both groups and the interventions required were safely instituted in both SHD and GW. None of the patients in the cohort required inotropic or ventilatory support in the SHD. CONCLUSIONS: GW patients were "healthier" but post-operative morbidity and interventions required were similar to the SHD group. Nonetheless, treatment delays, absence of continuous monitoring, and decreased nurse-to-patient ratio may be significant for patients with limited physiological reserves. Further studies should evaluate safety and cost-effectiveness of managing high risk surgical patients in GW using continuous remote vital signs monitoring.

How effective are digital technology-based interventions at promoting colorectal cancer screening uptake in average-risk populations? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Despite the global prevalence of colorectal cancer (CRC) and efforts in screening advocacy, screening uptake remains relatively low. Considering the greater accessibility and popularity of telemedicine in behaviour change interventions, this meta-analysis seeks to examine the usefulness of digital interventions in promoting CRC screening uptake as compared to existing non-digital strategies. A systematic search on five databases identified articles published before September 2022. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of digital interventions to usual care were included and assessed using the Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool. Effectiveness of interventions was measured by CRC screening completion rates, and pooled effect sizes were computed for both digital intervention subtypes identified - decision-making aids and tailored educational interventions. 14 studies (17,075 participants) assessed to have low or some risk of bias were included in this meta-analysis. A random-effects model revealed that digital interventions were more likely to promote CRC screening uptake (OR = 1.31, 95% CI: 1.11-1.56), and using a decision-making aid was almost 1.5 times more likely to result in screening completion (i.e., completed a colorectal investigation using stool-based or direct visualization test) (OR = 1.42, 95% CI: 1.24-1.63). Meanwhile, the tailored educational intervention subtype failed to achieve statistical significance in promoting screening uptake, bearing in mind the significant heterogeneity across studies (I2 = 88.6%). Digital decision-making aids significantly improved CRC screening uptake compared to tailored digital educational interventions and usual care. However, as all included studies were conducted in Western settings, its role in augmenting existing CRC screening promotion strategies especially among Asians should be further evaluated.

Discharge within 24 hours following colonic surgery-a distant dream or near reality? A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery programs have improved patient outcomes following colorectal surgery. This has provided a platform for the consideration of ambulatory colectomies where patients are discharged within 24 hours after surgery. Although some studies have demonstrated its feasibility, the safety profile and patient eligibility criteria for discharge within 24 hours after surgery remain relatively ill-defined. This study provided a review of the patient selection criteria and postoperative outcomes shown in patients discharged within 24 hours after surgery. METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines were adhered to. A comprehensive search was performed on 3 electronic databases, and the relevant articles were identified. The primary outcome measures were postoperative morbidity and readmission rates. The different domains relevant to the selection of patients and perioperative care of patients discharged within 24 hours after surgery were also qualitatively assessed. RESULTS: Eight studies were included, which involved a total of 1,229 patients. The majority of selected patients underwent elective laparoscopic colonic surgeries. The patient characteristics, such as age, comorbidities, obesity, and psychosocial environment, were important considerations. A close follow-up with home-based medical services was ideal in patients discharged within 24 hours after surgery. The readmission rates ranged from 0.0% to 9.0%. Despite morbidity rates of up to 26.7%, the majority of them were minor and classified as Clavien-Dindo Grade I to II. CONCLUSION: The use of programs related to discharge within 24 hours after surgery in colorectal surgery is safe, feasible, and practical in a select group of patients within a well-designed clinical framework and pathway. Future studies should compare patient outcomes following discharge within 24 hours after surgery with conventional enhanced recovery after surgery protocols. In addition, patient and caregiver perceptions, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness analysis should also be performed.

Presence of tumor cells in intra-operative blood salvage autotransfusion samples from hepatocellular carcinoma liver transplantation: analysis using highly sensitive microfluidics technology.

BACKGROUND: The application of intra-operative blood salvage autotransfusion(IBSA) in liver transplantation(LT) for hepatocellular carcinoma(HCC) remains controversial due to the theoretical risk of tumour cell(TC) reintroduction. Current studies evaluating for presence of TC are limited by suboptimal detection techniques. This study aims to analyze the presence of TC in HCC LT autologous blood using microfluidics technology. METHODS: A prospective study of HCC patients who underwent LT from February 2018-April 2019 was conducted. Blood samples were collected peri-operatively. TCs were isolated using microfluidics technology and stained with antibody cocktails for confirmation. RESULTS: A total of 15 HCC LT patients were recruited. All recipients had tumour characteristics within the University of California, San Francisco(UCSF) criteria pre-operatively. TC was detected in all of the autologous blood samples collected from the surgical field. After IOCS wash, five patients had no detectable TC, while 10 patients had detectable TC; of these two remained positive for TC after Leukocyte Depletion Filter(LDF) filtration. CONCLUSION: The risk of tumour cell reintroduction using IBSA in HCC LT patients can be reduced with a single LDF. Future studies should evaluate the proliferation capacity and tumorigenicity of HCC TC in IBSA samples, and the effects of TC reintroduction in patients with pre-existing HCC TCs.

Longitudinal versus transverse incision for common femoral artery exposure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A longitudinal or a transverse incision is routinely used for common femoral artery (CFA) exposure. Some believe a transverse incision is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative complications. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the risk of postoperative surgical site infection, lymphatic complications, wound dehiscence and haematoma formation when using a longitudinal or transverse incision for CFA exposure. METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines were adhered to. We searched various databases such as MEDLINE via PubMed and Embase for relevant studies from inception till 31 May 2020. Relevant search terms such as 'longitudinal', 'transverse', 'vertical', 'horizontal', 'femoral', 'incision' were used. We included both randomized controlled trials and case-controlled studies, and extracted data related to study characteristics and postoperative complications. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to obtain the pooled proportions and risk ratios (RR) for our study outcomes. RESULTS: We included seven studies with a total of 5922 groin incisions. A longitudinal incision was associated with a significantly higher incidence of wound infection (RR 2.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-7.70, P = 0.03) and wound dehiscence (RR 2.87, 95% CI 1.06-7.77, P = 0.04). The risk of lymphatic complications (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.39-3.05, P = 0.87) and wound haematoma (RR 2.85, 95% CI 0.88-9.21, P = 0.08) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: A longitudinal incision may be associated with a higher incidence of wound infection and wound dehiscence, as compared to using a transverse incision for CFA exposure.

Propensity score-matched analysis of early outcomes after laparoscopic-assisted versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is a feasible option for periampullary tumours. However, it remains a complex procedure with no proven advantages over open PD (OPD). The aim of the study was to compare the outcomes between laparoscopic-assisted PD (LAPD) and OPD using a propensity score-matched analysis. METHODS: Retrospective review of 40 patients who underwent PD for periampullary tumours between January 2014 and December 2016 was conducted. The patients were matched 1:1 for age, gender, body mass index, Charlson comorbidty index, tumour size and haematological indices. Peri-operative outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: LAPD appeared to have a longer median operative time as compared to OPD (LAPD, 425 min (285-597) versus OPD, 369 min (260-500)) (P = 0.066). Intra-operative blood loss was comparable between both groups. Respiratory complications were five times higher in the OPD group (LAPD, 5% versus OPD, 25%) (P = 0.077), while LAPD patients required less time to start ambulating post-operatively (LAPD, 2 days versus OPD, 2 days) (P = 0.021). Pancreas-specific complications and morbidity/mortality rates were similar. CONCLUSION: LAPD is a safe alternative to OPD in a select group of patients for an institution starting out with minimally invasive PD, and can be used to bridge the learning curve required for total laparoscopic PD.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: an analysis of early versus delayed cholecystectomy and predictive factors for conversion.

BACKGROUND: There is an increasing preference for early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) as compared to delayed LC (DLC) in the management of acute cholecystitis (AC). Conversion to open cholecystectomy (LOC) remains an important outcome. We aim to compare ELC and DLC outcomes and identify LOC predictors. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 466 patients who underwent LC for AC from June 2010 to June 2015 was performed. Patients were divided into ELC and DLC groups, defined as LC performed within 7 days and between 4 to 24 weeks of symptom onset, respectively. Peri-operative outcomes and predictors for LOC were analyzed. RESULTS: Conversion rates were comparable [ELC, 8.6% vs. DLC, 8.0%] (P=0.867). While median operative time was longer in ELC (101.5 min [83.0-130.1]) than DLC (88.0 min [62.3-118.8]) (P<0.001), intraoperative (ELC, 1.9% vs. DLC, 3.0%; P=0.541) and postoperative morbidity (ELC, 13.5% vs. DLC, 12.5%; P=0.688) was comparable. Median total length of stay (LOS) was shorter in ELC (4 days [3-6]) than DLC (5 days [4-9]) (P<0.001). Univariate analysis showed increased age (LC, 57 [45-66] vs. LOC, 60 [56-72]; P=0.016), presence of comorbidities (LC, 69.0% vs. LOC, 87.8%; P=0.009), previous abdominal surgery (LC, 6.1% vs. LOC, 17.1%; P=0.014), fever (P=0.001), Murphy's sign (P=0.005) and lower albumin (LC, 42.0 [39.0-45.0] vs. LOC, 40.0 [36.0-43.0]; P=0.003) to be predictors for LOC. CONCLUSIONS: ELC provides shorter LOS and eliminates the risk of gallstone-related morbidity while awaiting surgery. It should be advocated for patients with AC. The presence of comorbidities, increased age, previous abdominal surgery and low albumin are predictors for conversion.

Delayed Presentation of Acute Cholecystitis: Comparative Outcomes of Same-Admission Versus Delayed Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Studies have shown that same-admission laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SALC) is superior to delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy (DLC) for acute cholecystitis (AC). However, no studies have compared both modalities in patients with delayed presentation. The aim of the study was to compare outcomes between SALC and DLC in AC patients with more than 7-day symptom duration. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 83 AC patients who underwent LC after presenting with >7 days of symptoms from June 2010 to June 2015 was performed. Patients were divided into L-SALC and L-DLC, defined as LC performed within the same admission and between 4 and 24 weeks after discharge, respectively. Peri-operative outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: In L-SALC patients, the intra-operative severity was higher (p < 0.001) and median operative time was longer (L-SALC, 107 min (46-220) vs L-DLC, 95 mins (25-186)) (p = 0.048). Conversion rates were also higher in L-SALC than that in L-DLC (L-SALC, 21.4% vs L-DLC, 4.9%) (p = 0.048). While post-operative morbidity was similar, L-SALC was associated with a longer post-operative length of stay as compared to L-DLC (L-SALC, 2 (1-17) vs L-DLC, 1 (1-6)) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: DLC provides lower conversion rates and shorter length of stay in AC patients presenting beyond 7 days of symptoms. This group of patients should be offered DLC.

Same admission laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis: is the "golden 72 hours" rule still relevant?

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown that same admission laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SALC) is superior to delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis (AC). While some proposed a"golden 72-hour" for SALC, the optimal timing remains controversial. The aim of the study was to compare the outcomes of SALC in AC patients with different time intervals from symptom onset. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 311 patients who underwent SALC for AC from June 2010-June 2015 was performed. Patients were divided into three groups based on the time interval between symptom onset and surgery: <4 days (E-SALC), 4-7 days (M-SALC), >7 (L-SALC). RESULTS: The mean duration of symptoms was 2(1-3), 5(4-7) and 9 (8-13) days for E-SALC, M-SALC and L-SALC, respectively (p < 0.001). Conversion rates were higher in the L-SALC group [E-SALC, 8.2% vs M-SALC, 9.6% vs L-SALC, 21.4%] (p = 0.048). The total length of stay was longer in patients with longer symptom duration [E-SALC, 4 (2-33) vs M-SALC, 2 (2-23) vs L-SALC, 7 (2-49)] (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with AC presenting beyond 7 days of symptoms have higher conversion rates and longer length of stay associated with SALC. However, patients with less than a week of symptoms should be offered SALC.

Outcomes of resection of giant hepatocellular carcinoma in a tertiary institution: does size matter?

BACKGROUND: The surgical management of giant hepatocellular carcinoma (G-HCC), or HCC of ≥10 cm in diameter, remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of surgical resection of, respectively, G-HCC and small HCC (S-HCC), or HCC measuring <10 cm. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients (n = 86) diagnosed with HCC and submitted to resection in a tertiary hospital during the period from January 2007 to June 2012 was conducted. Overall survival (OS), recurrence rates and perioperative mortality at 30 days were compared between patients with, respectively, G-HCC and S-HCC. Prognostic factors for OS were analysed. RESULTS: The sample included 23 patients with G-HCC (26.7%) and 63 with S-HCC (73.3%) based on histological tumour size. Patient demographics and comorbidities were comparable. Median OS was 39.0 months in patients with G-HCC and 65.0 months in patients with S-HCC (P = 0.213). Although size did not affect OS in this cohort, the presence of satellite lesions [hazard ratio (HR) 3.70, P = 0.012] and perioperative blood transfusion (HR 2.85, P = 0.015) were negative predictors for OS. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical resection of G-HCC provides OS comparable with that after resection of S-HCC.

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery is safe and benefits octogenarian patients with malignant disease: a matched case-control study comparing laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: Increased physiological stress from laparoscopic surgery and the lower physiological reserves in the elderly are causes for concern. This study aims to compare the outcomes between laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in octogenarians. METHODS: Octogenarians who underwent elective colorectal resections from 2000 to 2011 were reviewed. Patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were matched for comorbidities, T-staging and type of resection performed to patients with open surgery. RESULTS: Each group had 36 patients. Both groups were comparable for median age (85 vs 83, p = 0.43), gender (21 vs 18 males, p = 0.64) and the American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score (p = 0.486). Both groups had comparable median maximal tumour dimensions (4.75 vs 4.25 cm, p = 0.38) and median number of lymph nodes harvested (15 vs 14, p = 0.94). The laparoscopic group had, however, a longer median operative time (167.5 vs 124.5 min, p < 0.001). Both groups had comparable median length of hospitalisation (8 vs 7, p = 0.83), number of complications with a grade of complication (GOC) of ≥3 (5 vs 7, p = 0.75) and 30-day mortality rates (8.3 vs 5.6%, p = 1.00). One-year survival rate for the open group was lower (75.0 vs 94.4%, p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a longer operating time, laparoscopic surgery had comparable short-term outcomes and might have a long-term survival benefit.

Rational dissection of a high institutional cesarean section rate: an analysis using the Robson Ten Group Classification System.

AIM: Cesarean section (CS) rates have risen far in excess of the optimal 15% recommended by the World Health Organization. The Robson Ten Group Classification System (TGCS) allows meaningful analysis of a CS rate. The aim of this study is to identify the leading patient categories contributing to our institution's CS rate. METHODS: Prospective study of all women who delivered at the Singapore General Hospital from January 2008 to December 2011. The following data was recorded: parity, singleton/multiple pregnancy, previous CS, mode of labor onset and gestational age at delivery. CS rates were computed for each group, as well as their relative contribution to the overall CS rate. RESULTS: There were 6074 deliveries, in which 2011 (33.1%) women had CS delivery. Group 5 was the largest contributor to the overall CS rate (25.9%). Of the patients in this group, 18.8% had a successful vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). Group 2 was the second largest contributor to the overall CS rate at 18.0%. Group 10 had a high contribution of 16.1%. CONCLUSION: The TGCS allows easy identification of the leading contributing patient groups. The surprisingly high contribution of group 10 suggests that our institution, a tertiary multidisciplinary teaching hospital, manages a sizeable group of high-risk patients in its obstetric case mix accounting for the high CS rate. Almost one in five term pregnancies with one previous CS had a successful vaginal delivery, suggesting that the institutional attempted VBAC rate is higher than 20%.