R.G. Orsini

Quality of life of older rectal cancer patients is not impaired by a permanent stoma

BACKGROUND The current study was undertaken to investigate the impact of a stoma on the HRQL with a special focus on age. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using the Eindhoven Cancer Registry, rectal cancer patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2007 in 4 hospitals were identified. All patients underwent TME surgery. Survivors were approached to complete the SF-36 and EORTC QLQ-C38 questionnaires. HRQL scores of the four groups, stratified by stoma status (stoma/no stoma) and age at operation (<70 and ≥ 70), were compared. The SF-36 and the QLQ-CR38 sexuality subscale scores of the survivors were compared with an age- and sex-matched Dutch norm population. RESULTS Median follow-up of 143 patients was 3.4 years. Elderly had significantly worse physical function (p = 0.0003) compared to younger patients. Elderly (p = 0.005) and patients without a stoma (p = 0.009) had worse sexual functioning compared to younger patients and patients with a stoma. Older males showed more sexual dysfunction (p = 0.01) when compared to younger males. In comparison with the normative population, elderly with a stoma had worse physical function (p < 0.01), but slightly better mental health (p < 0.05). Elderly without a stoma had better emotional role function (p < 0.01), and younger patients had worse sexual functioning and enjoyment (both p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS Older patients with a stoma have comparable HRQL to older patients without a stoma or the normative population, indicating the feasibility of a permanent stoma for elderly patients with a low situated rectal carcinoma. The negative impact of treatment on sexual functioning as found in the current study calls for further attention to alleviate this problem in sexually active patients.

Measuring the health-related quality of life and sexual functioning of patients with rectal cancer : Does type of treatment matter?

The literature on the health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) after rectal cancer is growing, however, a comparison between patients with nonadvanced disease (NAD), locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC), locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) and a normative population has not been made. Data on the sexual functioning of patient groups is also scarce. We compared (i) the HRQOL of patients with NAD, LARC, or LRRC, with a special focus on sexual functioning and (ii) the HRQOL of the three treatment groups with a normative population. The EORTC QLQ‐C30 and QLQ‐CR38 were completed by 80 patients with NAD, 292 LARC patients and 67 LRRC patients. The normative population (n = 350) completed the EORTC QLQ‐C30 and the Sexual Functioning and Sexual Enjoyment scales of the CR38. LRRC patients reported a lower Physical Function, Social Function, Future Perspective, Sexual Functioning and more Pain compared with LARC and NAD patients. Also, LRRC patients had a worse Body image than NAD patients and a lower Male Sexual Functioning than LARC patients. More than 75% of men and 50% of women were sexually active preoperative, compared with less than 50% and less than 35% postoperative. Male LRRC patients had more problems with erectile or ejaculatory functioning and felt less masculine than NAD or LARC patients. Women did not differ on Lubrication, Dyspareunia and Body Image. About 10% of patients used aids in order to improve erectile functioning (men) or lubrication (women). The treatment groups reported a lower HRQOL and sexual functioning compared with the normative population.

Anastomotic leakage and presacral abscess formation after locally advanced rectal cancer surgery: Incidence, risk factors and treatment

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Anastomotic leakage (AL) and presacral abscess (PA) after rectal cancer surgery are a major concern for the colorectal surgeon. In this study, incidence, prognosis and treatment was assessed. METHODS Patients operated on in our institute, between 1994 and 2011, for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC, T3+/T4M0) were included. Morbidity was scored using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Prognostic factors were analysed using binary logistic regression. RESULTS 517 patients were included after a low anterior resection (n = 219) or abdominoperineal resection (n = 232). AL occurred in 25 patients (11.4%); 50 patients (9.7%) developed a PA. We identified intraoperative blood loss ≥4500 cc (p = 0.038) and the era of surgery; patients operated on before the year 2006 (p = 0.042); as risk factors for AL. The time between last day of neo-adjuvant treatment and surgery, <8 weeks is significantly associated with the development of PA (p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS In our population of LARC patients we found an incidence of 9.7% PA and 11.4% AL, with a 12% mortality rate for AL, which is comparable to surgery in general colorectal cancer. Increased intraoperative blood loss and surgery prior to 2006 are associated with AL. Increased intraoperative blood loss and a timing interval <8 weeks increases the risk of PA formation.

Comparable survival for young rectal cancer patients, despite unfavourable morphology and more advanced-stage disease

BACKGROUND Young patients with rectal cancer tend to present with more advanced-stage disease and unfavourable tumour morphology. The effects of these tumour characteristics on survival in this particular patient group are unclear. METHODS Population-based data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) were used. Data from patients diagnosed with rectal cancer between 1989 and 2010 were selected. Younger patients (⩽ 40 years) were compared with middle-aged patients (41-70 years) with respect to disease stage, tumour characteristics, treatment and outcomes. Patients aged older than 70 years were excluded. Relative excess risk (RER) models were used to perform uni- and multivariate survival analyses. FINDINGS A total of 37.056 patients were included (⩽ 40 years n = 1.102). Compared with middle-aged patients, young patients were more likely to have stage III (33.8% versus 27.8%) and stage IV (24.3% versus 19.6%) disease (p < 0.001). Young patients also presented more frequently with mucinous tumours (10.8% versus 9.0%), signet cell carcinomas (2.6% versus 0.6%) and poorly differentiated tumours (16.6% versus 12.3%) (p = 0.001). The treatment of stage I-III patients did not differ between the two groups, except regarding adjuvant chemotherapy, which was more often given to young patients (24.3% versus 14.4%, p < 0.001). Young age was a prognostic factor for better survival in stage I-III patients (RER 0.82 CI 0.71-0.94). Adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved survival in stage I-III patients (RER 0.76, 95%CI 0.70-0.83). In an exploratory analysis, adjuvant chemotherapy in young stage III and pN1 patients was associated with improved survival. CONCLUDING STATEMENT Young patients present with more advanced disease and have more unfavourable tumour characteristics compared with middle-aged patients. Despite these characteristics, survival rates are equal, and young age is a prognostic factor for better survival. Although the use of adjuvant chemotherapy is controversial, a positive correlation with survival was found in this study.

Stoma placement in obstructive rectal cancer prior to neo-adjuvant treatment and definitive surgery: A practical guideline

INTRODUCTION Mechanical bowel obstruction in rectal cancer is a common problem, requiring stoma placement to decompress the colon and permit neo-adjuvant treatment. The majority of patients operated on in our hospital are referred; after stoma placement at the referring centre without overseeing final type of surgery. Stoma malpositioning and its effects on rectal cancer care are described. METHODS All patients who underwent surgery for locally advanced or locally recurrent rectal cancer between 2000 and 2013 in our tertiary referral centre were reviewed and included if they received a stoma before curative surgery. Patients with recurrent rectal cancer were only included if the stomas from the primary surgery had been restored. The main outcome measures are stoma malpositioning, postoperative and stoma-related complications. RESULTS A total of 726 patients were included; of these, 156 patients (21%) had a stoma before curative surgery. In the majority of patients, acute or pending large bowel obstruction was the main indication for emergent stoma creation; some of the patients had tumour-related fistulae. In 53 patients (34%), the stoma required revision during definitive surgery. No significant differences were found regarding postoperative complications. CONCLUSION One-third of the previously placed emergency stomas were considered to be located inappropriately and required revision. We were able to avoid increased complication rates in patients with a malpositioned stoma, however unnecessary surgery for an inappropriately placed stoma should be avoided to decrease patient inconvenience and risks. An algorithm is proposed for the placement of a suitable stoma.

What Are the Issues in the Treatment of Elderly Patients

As the incidence of older patients with rectal cancer is rising, elderly rectal cancer patients will be more common in daily practice. Elderly patients are a heterogeneous group with different comorbidities and a physiological fitness varying between very fit and frail, unable to sustain any treatment. In addition, more elderly patients present in an emergency situation making them more susceptible for an adverse outcome.

Rectal Cancer Treatment in the Elderly

Elderly rectal cancer patients are a heterogeneous group of patients ranging from the very fit to the frail patients who are at high risk of treatment complications. Most elderly have comorbidities which adversely affects outcome. In addition treatment related complications have more impact on outcome in elderly patients. Therefore a different approach compared to younger patients is needed. Only after a meticulous assessment of the physiological status and adequate counselling of the patient an individual treatment plan can be determined. Shared decision making is essential in the treatment of rectal cancer in the elderly.

Surgery for Rectal Cancer—What is on the Horizon?

The management of rectal cancer has improved considerably in recent decades. Surgery remains the cornerstone of the treatment. However, the role of preoperative imaging has made it possible to optimize the treatment plan in rectal patients. Neoadjuvant treatment may be indicated in efforts to sterilize possible tumor deposits outside the surgical field, or may be used to downsize and downstage the tumor itself. The optimal sequence of treatment modalities can be determined by a multidisciplinary team, who not only use pretreatment imaging, but also review pathologic results after surgery. The pathologist plays a pivotal role in providing feedback about the success of surgery, i.e., the distance between the tumor and the circumferential resection margin, the quality of surgery, and the effect of neoadjuvant treatment. Registry and auditing of all treatment variables can further improve outcomes. In this century, rectal cancer treatment has become a team effort.