Marta Sandini, Stefania Piccioni, Simona Badalucco, Eleonora Andreucci, Margherita Gambelli, Andrea Fontani, Riccardo Piagnerelli, Luigi Verre, Daniele Marrelli, Franco Roviello
{"title":"Emergency Resection for Colonic Cancer Has an Independent and Unfavorable Effect on Long-Term Oncologic Outcome.","authors":"Marta Sandini, Stefania Piccioni, Simona Badalucco, Eleonora Andreucci, Margherita Gambelli, Andrea Fontani, Riccardo Piagnerelli, Luigi Verre, Daniele Marrelli, Franco Roviello","doi":"10.1007/s12029-024-01074-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Long-term outcomes in patients undergoing emergency versus elective resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) remain controversial. This study aims to assess short- and long-term outcomes of emergency versus elective CRC surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this single-center retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing emergency or elective colonic resections for CRC from January 2013 to December 2017 were included. Primary outcome was long-term survival. As secondary outcomes, we sought to analyze potential differences on postoperative morbidity and concerning the oncological standard of surgical resection. The Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard model were used to compare survival between the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 225 CRC patients were included. Of these 192 (85.3%) had an elective and 33 (14.7%) an emergency operation. Emergency indications were due to obstruction, perforation, or bleeding. Patients in the emergency group had higher ASA score (p = 0.023), higher Charlsson comorbidity index (CCI, p = 0.012), and were older than those in the elective group, with median age 70 (IQR 63-79) years and 78 (IQR 68-83) years, for elective and emergency, respectively (p = 0.020). No other preoperative differences were observed. Patients in the emergency group experienced significantly more major complications (12.1% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.037), more anastomotic leakage (12.1% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.001), need for reoperation (12.1% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.021), and postoperative mortality (2 patients vs. 0, p < 0.001). No differences in terms of final pathological stage, nor in accuracy of lymphadenectomy were observed. Overall survival was significantly worse in case of emergency operation, with estimated median 41 months vs. not reached in elective cases (p < 0.001). At the multivariate analysis, emergency operation was confirmed as independent unfavorable determinant of survival (with hazard rate HR = 1.97, p = 0.028), together with age (HR = 1.05, p < 0.001), postoperative major morbidity (HR = 3.18, p = 0.012), advanced stage (HR = 5.85, p < 0.001), and need for transfusion (HR = 2.10, p = 0.049).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Postoperative morbidity and mortality were increased in emergency versus elective CRC resections. Despite no significant differences in terms of accuracy of resection and pathological stages, overall survival was significantly worse in patients who underwent emergency procedure, and independent of other determinants of survival.</p>","PeriodicalId":15895,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11347463/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12029-024-01074-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Long-term outcomes in patients undergoing emergency versus elective resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) remain controversial. This study aims to assess short- and long-term outcomes of emergency versus elective CRC surgery.
Methods: In this single-center retrospective cohort study, patients undergoing emergency or elective colonic resections for CRC from January 2013 to December 2017 were included. Primary outcome was long-term survival. As secondary outcomes, we sought to analyze potential differences on postoperative morbidity and concerning the oncological standard of surgical resection. The Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard model were used to compare survival between the groups.
Results: Overall, 225 CRC patients were included. Of these 192 (85.3%) had an elective and 33 (14.7%) an emergency operation. Emergency indications were due to obstruction, perforation, or bleeding. Patients in the emergency group had higher ASA score (p = 0.023), higher Charlsson comorbidity index (CCI, p = 0.012), and were older than those in the elective group, with median age 70 (IQR 63-79) years and 78 (IQR 68-83) years, for elective and emergency, respectively (p = 0.020). No other preoperative differences were observed. Patients in the emergency group experienced significantly more major complications (12.1% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.037), more anastomotic leakage (12.1% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.001), need for reoperation (12.1% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.021), and postoperative mortality (2 patients vs. 0, p < 0.001). No differences in terms of final pathological stage, nor in accuracy of lymphadenectomy were observed. Overall survival was significantly worse in case of emergency operation, with estimated median 41 months vs. not reached in elective cases (p < 0.001). At the multivariate analysis, emergency operation was confirmed as independent unfavorable determinant of survival (with hazard rate HR = 1.97, p = 0.028), together with age (HR = 1.05, p < 0.001), postoperative major morbidity (HR = 3.18, p = 0.012), advanced stage (HR = 5.85, p < 0.001), and need for transfusion (HR = 2.10, p = 0.049).
Conclusion: Postoperative morbidity and mortality were increased in emergency versus elective CRC resections. Despite no significant differences in terms of accuracy of resection and pathological stages, overall survival was significantly worse in patients who underwent emergency procedure, and independent of other determinants of survival.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer is a multidisciplinary medium for the publication of novel research pertaining to cancers arising from the gastrointestinal tract.The journal is dedicated to the most rapid publication possible.The journal publishes papers in all relevant fields, emphasizing those studies that are helpful in understanding and treating cancers affecting the esophagus, stomach, liver, gallbladder and biliary tree, pancreas, small bowel, large bowel, rectum, and anus. In addition, the Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer publishes basic and translational scientific information from studies providing insight into the etiology and progression of cancers affecting these organs. New insights are provided from diverse areas of research such as studies exploring pre-neoplastic states, risk factors, epidemiology, genetics, preclinical therapeutics, surgery, radiation therapy, novel medical therapeutics, clinical trials, and outcome studies.In addition to reports of original clinical and experimental studies, the journal also publishes: case reports, state-of-the-art reviews on topics of immediate interest or importance; invited articles analyzing particular areas of pancreatic research and knowledge; perspectives in which critical evaluation and conflicting opinions about current topics may be expressed; meeting highlights that summarize important points presented at recent meetings; abstracts of symposia and conferences; book reviews; hypotheses; Letters to the Editors; and other items of special interest, including:Complex Cases in GI Oncology: This is a new initiative to provide a forum to review and discuss the history and management of complex and involved gastrointestinal oncology cases. The format will be similar to a teaching case conference where a case vignette is presented and is followed by a series of questions and discussion points. A brief reference list supporting the points made in discussion would be expected.