Dataset Information

Audit of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer in Morocco: A report of the results of a prospective multicentre cohort study

ABSTRACT:

Background

Little data is available about colon laparoscopic surgery in low mid-income countries. The aim of this study was to audit the status and results of laparoscopic colon cancer surgery in Morocco.

Patients and methods

This was a prospective study performed at 4 academic departments in Morocco between January 1, 2018, and March 31, 2020. All adult patients who underwent elective right or left colonic resection for colon adenocarcinoma were included. The main outcomes were the rate of laparoscopic surgery (LS) and the comparison of its short-term outcomes with open surgery (OS).

Results

Among 121 patients included, 52 (43%) underwent laparoscopic resection (0–49.3%). Five surgeons (29%) performed at least one laparoscopic resection. There were more left colectomies in the laparoscopic group (71.2% vs. 39.1%. p = 0.0004), and more extended resections (23.1% vs. 40.6%. p = 0.043) and T4 stage (19% vs. 37.5%. p = 0.037) in the open group. There were no differences in 90-days overall and serious complications. OS patients had significantly more harvested lymph nodes (14 vs. 18. P = 0.007) and higher median surgical margins (6 cm vs. 9 cm. P = 0.003) than LS patients.

Conclusions

LS for colon cancer in Morocco is performed by few surgeons, who apply strict patient selection for laparoscopic cases. It was associated with lower quality resections compared to open surgery. There are still many challenges requiring more focus on training, certification, centralization and standardisation of care across the nation. Highlights • Laparoscopy is the standard technique for colon cancer in rich countries. Little data exists about lower income countries.• We evaluated laparoscopy for colon cancer by comparing it to open colon resections in a low-mid income country.• We found that Laparoscopy is performed by few surgeons, who apply strict patient selection for laparoscopic cases.• Patients in the laparoscopy group also had lower quality resections compared to open surgery.• The challenges identified will require more focus on training, certification, centralization, and standardisation of care.

SUBMITTER: El Yaakoubi A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9382411 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) versus conventional 'straight stick' laparoscopic surgery (CLS) in women undergoing hysterectomy as part of their treatment for either suspected or proven gynaecological malignancy.DesignMulticentre prospective observational cohort study.SettingPatients aged 16+ undergoing hysterectomy as part of their treatment for gynaecological malignancy at 12 National Health Service (NHS) cancer units and centres in England between August 2017 and February 2020.Participants275 patients recruited with 159 RALS, 73 CLS eligible for analysis.Outcome measuresPrimary outcome was the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life measure (EORTC). Secondary outcomes included EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D-5L) utility, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), NHS costs using pounds sterling (£) 2018-2019 prices and cost-effectiveness. The cost-effectiveness evaluation compared EQ-5D-5L quality adjusted life years and costs between RALS and CLS.ResultsNo difference identified between RALS and CLS for EORTC, EQ-5D-5L utility and 6MWT. RALS had unadjusted mean cost difference of £556 (95% CI -£314 to £1315) versus CLS and mean quality adjusted life year (QALY) difference of 0.0024 (95% CI -0.00051 to 0.0057), non-parametric incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £231 667per QALY. For the adjusted cost-effectiveness analysis, RALS dominated CLS with a mean cost difference of -£188 (95% CI -£1321 to £827) and QALY difference of 0.0024 (95% CI -0.0008 to 0.0057).ConclusionsFindings suggest that RALS versus CLS in women undergoing hysterectomy (after adjusting for differences in morbidity) is cost-effective with lower costs and QALYs. Results are highly sensitive to the usage of robotic hardware with higher usage increasing the probability of cost-effectiveness. Non-inferiority randomised controlled trial would be of benefit to decision-makers to provide further evidence on the cost-effectiveness of RALS versus CLS but may not be practical due to surgical preferences of surgeons and the extensive roll out of RALS.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To estimate the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic surgical excision of rectovaginal endometriosis. DESIGN:A multicentre, prospective cohort study. SETTING:51 hospitals accredited as specialist endometriosis centres. PARTICIPANTS:5162 women of reproductive age with rectovaginal endometriosis of which 4721 women had planned laparoscopic excision. INTERVENTIONS:Laparoscopic surgical excision of rectovaginal endometriosis requiring dissection of the pararectal space. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Standardised symptom questionnaires enquiring about chronic pelvic pain, bladder and bowel symptoms, analgesia use and quality of life (EuroQol) completed prior to surgery and at 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Serious perioperative and postoperative complications including major haemorrhage, infection and visceral injury were recorded. RESULTS:At 6 months postsurgery, there were significant reductions in premenstrual, menstrual and non-cyclical pelvic pain, deep dyspareunia, dyschezia, low back pain and bladder pain. In addition, there were significant reductions in voiding difficulty, bowel frequency, urgency, incomplete emptying, constipation and passing blood. These reductions were maintained at 2 years, with the exception of voiding difficulty. Global quality of life significantly improved from a median pretreatment score of 55/100 to 80/100 at 6 months. There was a significant improvement in quality of life in all measured domains and in quality-adjusted life years. These improvements were sustained at 2 years. All analgesia use was reduced and, in particular, opiate use fell from 28.1% prior to surgery to 16.1% at 6 months. The overall incidence of complications was 6.8% (321/4721). Gastrointestinal complications (enterotomy, anastomotic leak or fistula) occurred in 52 (1.1%) operations and of the urinary tract (ureteric/bladder injury or leak) in 49 (1.0%) procedures. CONCLUSION:Laparoscopic surgical excision of rectovaginal endometriosis appears to be effective in treating pelvic pain and bowel symptoms and improving health-related quality of life and has a low rate of major complications when performed in specialist centres.

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess the nutritional status of patients presenting with small bowel obstruction (SBO), along with associated nutritional interventions and clinical outcomes.DesignProspective cohort study.Setting131 UK hospitals with acute surgical services.Participants2069 adult patients with a diagnosis of SBO were included in this study. The mean age was 67.0 years and 54.7% were female.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes recorded included: major complications (composite of in-hospital mortality, reoperation, unplanned intensive care admission and 30-day readmission), complications arising from surgery (anastomotic leak, wound dehiscence), infection (pneumonia, surgical site infection, intra-abdominal infection, urinary tract infection, venous catheter infection), cardiac complications, venous thromboembolism and delirium.ResultsPostoperative adhesions were the most common cause of SBO (49.1%). Early surgery (<24 hours postadmission) took place in 30.0% of patients, 22.0% underwent delayed operation and 47.9% were managed non-operatively. Malnutrition as stratified by Nutritional Risk Index was common, with 35.7% at moderate risk and 5.7% at severe risk of malnutrition. Dietitian review occurred in just 36.4% and 55.9% of the moderate and severe risk groups. In the low risk group, 30.3% received nutritional intervention compared with 40.7% in moderate risk group and 62.7% in severe risk group. In comparison to the low risk group, patients who were at severe or moderate risk of malnutrition had 4.2 and 2.4 times higher unadjusted risk of in-hospital mortality, respectively. Propensity-matched analysis found no difference in outcomes based on use or timing of parenteral nutrition.ConclusionsMalnutrition on admission is associated with worse outcomes in patients with SBO, and marked variation in management of malnutrition was observed. Future trials should focus on identifying effective and cost-effective nutritional interventions in SBO.