Marie Hanaoka1, Masamichi Yasuno2, Megumi Ishiguro3, Shinichi Yamauchi1, Akifumi Kikuchi1, Michiyo Tokura1, Toshiaki Ishikawa3, Eiji Nakatani4, Hiroyuki Uetake3. 1. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University Medical Hospital, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan. 2. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University Medical Hospital, 1-5-45, Yushima, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan. yasuno.srg1@tmd.ac.jp. 3. Department of Chemotherapy and Oncosurgery, Tokyo Medical and Dental University Medical Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 4. Division of Medical Statistics, Translational Research Informatics Center, Foundation for Biomedical Research and Innovation, Kobe, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sarcopenia is reported to be associated with complications after surgery. However, there is no established optimal parameter to determine sarcopenia affecting surgical outcome. This study investigated whether morphologic change of the psoas muscle (MPM) reflects sarcopenia and could be a predictor of complications after colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: Colorectal cancer patients who underwent primary tumor resection with anastomosis between 2015 and 2016 were analyzed. MPM score was evaluated as the ratio of the short-to-long axis of the psoas muscle in CT images at the L3 vertebrae and classified into five MPM grades. Then, the impact of MPM grade on development of postoperative complications was investigated. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients were studied. MPM score was significantly correlated to the sectional areas of the psoas muscle at the L3 vertebrae which was evaluated by manual tracing. 21.1% of the subjects were classified into severe MPM (defined as MPM grade 3-4). Overall and infectious complications were noted in 37 (27.8%) and 16 (12.0%) patients. Severe MPM (odds ratio [OR] 2.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-6.73), longer operative time (OR 1.01, 95%CI 1.001-1.01), and open surgery (OR 2.73, 95%CI 1.17-6.35) were identified as independent risk factors of overall complications. Severe MPM (OR 4.26,95%CI 1.38-13.10) and open surgery (OR 3.42, 95%CI 1.11-10.48) were identified as independent factors associated with infectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: MPM grade may be used as a simple and convenient marker of sarcopenia and to identify patients at increased risk of complications after colorectal cancer surgery.
PURPOSE:Sarcopenia is reported to be associated with complications after surgery. However, there is no established optimal parameter to determine sarcopenia affecting surgical outcome. This study investigated whether morphologic change of the psoas muscle (MPM) reflects sarcopenia and could be a predictor of complications after colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS:Colorectal cancerpatients who underwent primary tumor resection with anastomosis between 2015 and 2016 were analyzed. MPM score was evaluated as the ratio of the short-to-long axis of the psoas muscle in CT images at the L3 vertebrae and classified into five MPM grades. Then, the impact of MPM grade on development of postoperative complications was investigated. RESULTS: A total of 133 patients were studied. MPM score was significantly correlated to the sectional areas of the psoas muscle at the L3 vertebrae which was evaluated by manual tracing. 21.1% of the subjects were classified into severe MPM (defined as MPM grade 3-4). Overall and infectious complications were noted in 37 (27.8%) and 16 (12.0%) patients. Severe MPM (odds ratio [OR] 2.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-6.73), longer operative time (OR 1.01, 95%CI 1.001-1.01), and open surgery (OR 2.73, 95%CI 1.17-6.35) were identified as independent risk factors of overall complications. Severe MPM (OR 4.26,95%CI 1.38-13.10) and open surgery (OR 3.42, 95%CI 1.11-10.48) were identified as independent factors associated with infectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: MPM grade may be used as a simple and convenient marker of sarcopenia and to identify patients at increased risk of complications after colorectal cancer surgery.
Authors: Kostan W Reisinger; Jeroen L A van Vugt; Juul J W Tegels; Claire Snijders; Karel W E Hulsewé; Anton G M Hoofwijk; Jan H Stoot; Maarten F Von Meyenfeldt; Geerard L Beets; Joep P M Derikx; Martijn Poeze Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Donald C McMillan; Joseph E M Crozier; Khalid Canna; Wilson J Angerson; Colin S McArdle Journal: Int J Colorectal Dis Date: 2007-01-24 Impact factor: 2.571
Authors: Peter D Peng; Mark G van Vledder; Susan Tsai; Mechteld C de Jong; Martin Makary; Julie Ng; Barish H Edil; Christopher L Wolfgang; Richard D Schulick; Michael A Choti; Ihab Kamel; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2011-03-29 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Peter Peng; Omar Hyder; Amin Firoozmand; Peter Kneuertz; Richard D Schulick; Donghang Huang; Martin Makary; Kenzo Hirose; Barish Edil; Michael A Choti; Joseph Herman; John L Cameron; Christopher L Wolfgang; Timothy M Pawlik Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Jean Pierre Baeyens; Jürgen M Bauer; Yves Boirie; Tommy Cederholm; Francesco Landi; Finbarr C Martin; Jean-Pierre Michel; Yves Rolland; Stéphane M Schneider; Eva Topinková; Maurits Vandewoude; Mauro Zamboni Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2010-04-13 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Jacques Ferlay; Isabelle Soerjomataram; Rajesh Dikshit; Sultan Eser; Colin Mathers; Marise Rebelo; Donald Maxwell Parkin; David Forman; Freddie Bray Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-10-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Caroline Raab; Leah A Gilligan; Andrew T Trout; Darcy A Krueger; David N Franz; Bin Zhang; Alexander J Towbin Journal: Radiol Imaging Cancer Date: 2020-09-18
Authors: A A Ricciardolo; N De Ruvo; F Serra; F Prampolini; L Solaini; S Battisti; G Missori; S Fenocchi; E G Rossi; L Sorrentino; M Salati; A Spallanzani; N Cautero; A Pecchi; G Ercolani; R Gelmini Journal: Updates Surg Date: 2021-10-26