International trends in surgical treatment of rectal cancer

Knut M. Augestad, Rolv Ole Lindsetmo, Harry Reynolds, Jonah Stulberg, Anthony Senagore, Brad Champagne, Alexander G. Heriot, Fabien Leblanc, Conor P. Delaney

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Surgical technique might influence rectal cancer survival, yet international practices for surgical treatment of rectal cancer are poorly described. Methods We performed a cross-sectional survey in a cohort of experienced colorectal surgeons representing 123 centers. Results Seventy-one percent responded, 70% are from departments performing more than 50 proctectomies annually. More than 50% defined the rectum as "15 cm from the verge." Seventy-two percent perform laparoscopic proctectomy, 80% use oral bowel preparation, 69% perform high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery, 76% divert stomas as routine for colo-anal anastomosis, and 63% use enhanced recovery protocols. Different practices exist between US and non-US surgeons: 15 cm from the verge to define the rectum (34% vs 59%; P = .03), personally perform laparoscopic resection (82% vs 66%; P = .05), rectal stump washout (36% vs 73%; P = .0001), always drain after surgery (23% vs 42%; P = .03), transanal endoscopic microsurgery for T2N0 in medically unfit patients (39% vs 61%; P = .0001). Conclusions Wide international variations in rectal cancer management make outcome comparisons challenging, and consensus development should be encouraged.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)353-358
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
Volume201
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Rectal Neoplasms
Rectum
Inferior Mesenteric Artery
Ligation
Consensus
Therapeutics
Cross-Sectional Studies
Survival
Surgeons

Keywords

  • International practice
  • International Rectal Cancer Study Group
  • Rectal cancer
  • Rectum anatomy
  • Surgical treatment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Augestad, K. M., Lindsetmo, R. O., Reynolds, H., Stulberg, J., Senagore, A., Champagne, B., ... Delaney, C. P. (2011). International trends in surgical treatment of rectal cancer. American Journal of Surgery, 201(3), 353-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.08.030

International trends in surgical treatment of rectal cancer. / Augestad, Knut M.; Lindsetmo, Rolv Ole; Reynolds, Harry; Stulberg, Jonah; Senagore, Anthony; Champagne, Brad; Heriot, Alexander G.; Leblanc, Fabien; Delaney, Conor P.

In: American Journal of Surgery, Vol. 201, No. 3, 03.2011, p. 353-358.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Augestad, KM, Lindsetmo, RO, Reynolds, H, Stulberg, J, Senagore, A, Champagne, B, Heriot, AG, Leblanc, F & Delaney, CP 2011, 'International trends in surgical treatment of rectal cancer', American Journal of Surgery, vol. 201, no. 3, pp. 353-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.08.030
Augestad KM, Lindsetmo RO, Reynolds H, Stulberg J, Senagore A, Champagne B et al. International trends in surgical treatment of rectal cancer. American Journal of Surgery. 2011 Mar;201(3):353-358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.08.030
Augestad, Knut M. ; Lindsetmo, Rolv Ole ; Reynolds, Harry ; Stulberg, Jonah ; Senagore, Anthony ; Champagne, Brad ; Heriot, Alexander G. ; Leblanc, Fabien ; Delaney, Conor P. / International trends in surgical treatment of rectal cancer. In: American Journal of Surgery. 2011 ; Vol. 201, No. 3. pp. 353-358.
@article{5d59ff5be82f4bfea2f9e27603ad6ae6,
title = "International trends in surgical treatment of rectal cancer",
abstract = "Background Surgical technique might influence rectal cancer survival, yet international practices for surgical treatment of rectal cancer are poorly described. Methods We performed a cross-sectional survey in a cohort of experienced colorectal surgeons representing 123 centers. Results Seventy-one percent responded, 70{\%} are from departments performing more than 50 proctectomies annually. More than 50{\%} defined the rectum as {"}15 cm from the verge.{"} Seventy-two percent perform laparoscopic proctectomy, 80{\%} use oral bowel preparation, 69{\%} perform high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery, 76{\%} divert stomas as routine for colo-anal anastomosis, and 63{\%} use enhanced recovery protocols. Different practices exist between US and non-US surgeons: 15 cm from the verge to define the rectum (34{\%} vs 59{\%}; P = .03), personally perform laparoscopic resection (82{\%} vs 66{\%}; P = .05), rectal stump washout (36{\%} vs 73{\%}; P = .0001), always drain after surgery (23{\%} vs 42{\%}; P = .03), transanal endoscopic microsurgery for T2N0 in medically unfit patients (39{\%} vs 61{\%}; P = .0001). Conclusions Wide international variations in rectal cancer management make outcome comparisons challenging, and consensus development should be encouraged.",
keywords = "International practice, International Rectal Cancer Study Group, Rectal cancer, Rectum anatomy, Surgical treatment",
author = "Augestad, {Knut M.} and Lindsetmo, {Rolv Ole} and Harry Reynolds and Jonah Stulberg and Anthony Senagore and Brad Champagne and Heriot, {Alexander G.} and Fabien Leblanc and Delaney, {Conor P.}",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.08.030",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "201",
pages = "353--358",
journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
issn = "0002-9610",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - International trends in surgical treatment of rectal cancer

AU - Augestad, Knut M.

AU - Lindsetmo, Rolv Ole

AU - Reynolds, Harry

AU - Stulberg, Jonah

AU - Senagore, Anthony

AU - Champagne, Brad

AU - Heriot, Alexander G.

AU - Leblanc, Fabien

AU - Delaney, Conor P.

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - Background Surgical technique might influence rectal cancer survival, yet international practices for surgical treatment of rectal cancer are poorly described. Methods We performed a cross-sectional survey in a cohort of experienced colorectal surgeons representing 123 centers. Results Seventy-one percent responded, 70% are from departments performing more than 50 proctectomies annually. More than 50% defined the rectum as "15 cm from the verge." Seventy-two percent perform laparoscopic proctectomy, 80% use oral bowel preparation, 69% perform high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery, 76% divert stomas as routine for colo-anal anastomosis, and 63% use enhanced recovery protocols. Different practices exist between US and non-US surgeons: 15 cm from the verge to define the rectum (34% vs 59%; P = .03), personally perform laparoscopic resection (82% vs 66%; P = .05), rectal stump washout (36% vs 73%; P = .0001), always drain after surgery (23% vs 42%; P = .03), transanal endoscopic microsurgery for T2N0 in medically unfit patients (39% vs 61%; P = .0001). Conclusions Wide international variations in rectal cancer management make outcome comparisons challenging, and consensus development should be encouraged.

AB - Background Surgical technique might influence rectal cancer survival, yet international practices for surgical treatment of rectal cancer are poorly described. Methods We performed a cross-sectional survey in a cohort of experienced colorectal surgeons representing 123 centers. Results Seventy-one percent responded, 70% are from departments performing more than 50 proctectomies annually. More than 50% defined the rectum as "15 cm from the verge." Seventy-two percent perform laparoscopic proctectomy, 80% use oral bowel preparation, 69% perform high ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery, 76% divert stomas as routine for colo-anal anastomosis, and 63% use enhanced recovery protocols. Different practices exist between US and non-US surgeons: 15 cm from the verge to define the rectum (34% vs 59%; P = .03), personally perform laparoscopic resection (82% vs 66%; P = .05), rectal stump washout (36% vs 73%; P = .0001), always drain after surgery (23% vs 42%; P = .03), transanal endoscopic microsurgery for T2N0 in medically unfit patients (39% vs 61%; P = .0001). Conclusions Wide international variations in rectal cancer management make outcome comparisons challenging, and consensus development should be encouraged.

KW - International practice

KW - International Rectal Cancer Study Group

KW - Rectal cancer

KW - Rectum anatomy

KW - Surgical treatment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952141378&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952141378&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.08.030

DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.08.030

M3 - Article

C2 - 21367378

AN - SCOPUS:79952141378

VL - 201

SP - 353

EP - 358

JO - American Journal of Surgery

JF - American Journal of Surgery

SN - 0002-9610

IS - 3

ER -