Literature DB >> 18156926

A national perspective on the decline of abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer.

Henry S Tilney1, Alexander G Heriot, Sanjay Purkayastha, Anthony Antoniou, Paul Aylin, Ara W Darzi, Paris P Tekkis.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess rates of abdominoperineal excision of the rectum (APER) for rectal cancer between centers and over time, and to evaluate the influence of patient characteristics, including social deprivation, on APER rate.
METHODS: Data on patients undergoing APER or anterior resection (AR) in England were extracted from a national administrative database for the years 1996 to 2004. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients presenting with rectal cancer undergoing APER. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to identify independent factors associated with a nonrestorative resection.
RESULTS: Data on 52,643 patients were analyzed, 13,109(24.9%) of whom underwent APER. The APER rate significantly reduced over the study period from 29.4% to 21.2% (P < 0.001). Operative mortality following AR decreased significantly during the period of study (5.1% to 4.2%, P = 0.002), while that following APER did not (P = 0.075). Male patients were more likely to undergo APER (P < 0.001), whereas those with an emergency presentation more commonly underwent AR (P < 0.001). Independent predictors of increased APER rate were male gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.239, P < 0.001) and social deprivation (most vs. least deprived; OR = 1.589, P < 0.001), whereas increasing patient age (OR = 0.977, P = 0.027 per 10-year increase), year of study (2003/4 vs. 1996/7; OR = 0.646, P < 0.001) and initial presentation as an emergency (OR = 0.713, P < 0.001) were associated with lower APER rates. After accounting for case-mix, there was significant between-center variability in APER rates.
CONCLUSION: Socially deprived patients were more likely to undergo abdominoperineal resection. Significant improvements in rates of nonrestorative resection were seen over time but although short-term outcomes following AR have improved, those following APER have not. Permanent stoma rates following rectal cancer surgery may be considered a surrogate marker of surgical quality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18156926     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31816076c3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  39 in total

1.  Do Diagnostic and Procedure Codes Within Population-Based, Administrative Datasets Accurately Identify Patients with Rectal Cancer?

Authors:  Reilly P Musselman; Tara Gomes; Deanna M Rothwell; Rebecca C Auer; Husein Moloo; Robin P Boushey; Carl van Walraven
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-12-03       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Current practice in abdominoperineal resection: an email survey of the membership of the Association of Coloproctology.

Authors:  N Dabbas; K Adams; H Chave; G Branagan
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 3.  Adjuvant chemotherapy for rectal cancer: Is it needed?

Authors:  Kristijonas Milinis; Michael Thornton; Amir Montazeri; Paul S Rooney
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-12-10

4.  Circular Stapler-Assisted Extraperitoneal Colostomy in Laparoscopic Abdominoperineal Resection: a Single Surgeon Experience.

Authors:  Peng Zhang; Jie Bai; Xiaoming Shuai; Weilong Chang; Jinbo Gao; Xinghua Liu; Guobin Wang; Kaixiong Tao
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Prone extralevator abdominoperineal excision of the rectum with porcine collagen perineal reconstruction (Permacol™): high primary perineal wound healing rates.

Authors:  R L Harries; A Luhmann; D A Harris; J A Shami; B N Appleton
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2014-07-29       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Patient expectations of functional outcomes after rectal cancer surgery: a qualitative study.

Authors:  Jason Park; Heather B Neuman; Antonia V Bennett; Lily Polskin; P Terry Phang; W Douglas Wong; Larissa K Temple
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.585

7.  Wound dehiscence after abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer is associated with decreased survival.

Authors:  Alexander T Hawkins; David L Berger; Paul C Shellito; Patrica Sylla; Liliana Bordeianou
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.585

8.  Effect of Neoadjuvant Systemic Chemotherapy With or Without Chemoradiation on Bowel Function in Rectal Cancer Patients Treated With Total Mesorectal Excision.

Authors:  Felipe Quezada-Diaz; Rosa M Jimenez-Rodriguez; Emmanouil P Pappou; J Joshua Smith; Sujata Patil; Iris Wei; Jose G Guillem; Philip B Paty; Garrett M Nash; Martin R Weiser; Julio Garcia-Aguilar
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Use of the gluteus maximus muscle as the neosphincter for restoration of anal function after abdominoperineal resection.

Authors:  J D Puerta Díaz; R Castaño Llano; L J Lombana; J I Restrepo; G Gómez
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2012-12-15       Impact factor: 3.781

10.  Social variations in access to hospital care for patients with colorectal, breast, and lung cancer between 1999 and 2006: retrospective analysis of hospital episode statistics.

Authors:  Rosalind Raine; Wun Wong; Shaun Scholes; Charlotte Ashton; Austin Obichere; Gareth Ambler
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-01-14
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.