Dataset Information

Discrepancy between surgeon and radiological assessment of ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery in patients operated for rectal cancer-impacting registry-based research and surgical practice.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The reliability of the registered ligation level of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry has been questioned. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate this parameter in the registry by comparing the registered ligation levels with a postoperative computed tomography angiography (CT-angiography) in patients operated for rectal cancer.

Methods

Patients operated for rectal cancer at two Swedish university hospitals were prospectively included between December 2016 and December 2019. At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, an additional CT-angiography was performed and independently examined by two radiologists. The radiological assessment of the ligation level was compared to registry data, using different measures of agreement.

Results

A total of 94 patients were included, 55 (59%) were men and 39 (41%) women. All patients underwent abdominal resection: conventional or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery, n=56 (60%), or open resection, n=38 (40%). The ligation level as assessed on CT-angiography was high in 29 (31%) patients and low in 65 (69%). The registered level of ligation of the IMA and the radiological assessment of the CT-angiographies were consistent in 77/94 cases, demonstrating an 82% agreement and a sensitivity and specificity of 86% and 72%, respectively. The estimated Kappa value was 0.58, reaching 0.64 after prevalence bias adjustment.

Conclusion

This study showed that CT-angiography can be used to evaluate the reliability of the registered ligation level in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The demonstrated agreement between the registry and postoperative CT-angiography was moderate to good. This discrepancy impacts registry-based research using IMA ligation data and may ultimately influence surgical practice.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials identifier NCT03875612.

SUBMITTER: Wikner F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8045315 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the current scientific evidence regarding the impact of the level of inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) ligation on post-operative and oncological outcomes in rectal cancer surgery.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of the literature up to 06 September 2022. Included were RCTs that compared patients who underwent high (HL) vs. anterior (LL) IMA ligation for resection of rectal cancer. The literature search was performed on Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and the Web of Science without any language restrictions. The primary endpoint was overall anastomotic leakage (AL). Secondary endpoints were oncological outcomes, intraoperative complications, urogenital functional outcomes, and length of hospital stay.ResultsEleven RCTs (1331 patients) were included. The overall rate of AL was lower in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.96). The overall number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (MD 0.93, 95% CI - 2.21 to 0.34). The number of lymph nodes harvested was assessed in 256 patients, and all had a laparoscopic procedure. The number of lymph nodes was higher when LL was associated with lymphadenectomy of the vascular root than when IMA was ligated at its origin, but there the difference was not statistically significant (MD - 0.37, 95% CI - 1.00 to 0.26). Overall survival at 5 years was slightly better in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05). Disease-free survival at 5 years was higher in the LL group, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.04).ConclusionsThere is no evidence to support HL or LL according to results in terms of AL or oncologic outcome. Moreover, there is not enough evidence to determine the impact of the level of IMA ligation on functional outcomes. The level of IMA ligation should be chosen case by case based on expected functional and oncological outcomes.

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine the disease-free survival (DFS), disease-specific survival (DSS), and recurrence in patients who underwent laparoscopic low anterior rectal resection with total mesorectal excision (TME) with either high or low ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA).BackgroundThe level of IMA ligation during anterior rectal resection with TME is still a matter of debate, especially in terms of oncological adequacy.MethodsBetween June 2014 and December 2016, patients scheduled to undergo elective laparoscopic low anterior resection (LAR) and TME in 6 Italian nonacademic hospitals were randomized into 2 groups in the HIGHLOW Trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02153801) according to the level of IMA ligation: high ligation (HL) versus low ligation (LL). DFS, DSS, and recurrence were inquired. Recurrence was determined at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months and every 6 months thereafter. Patients and tumor characteristics as well as surgical outcomes were analyzed to identify risk factors for recurrence.ResultsOne hundred ninety-six patients from the HIGHLOW trial were analyzed. Median follow-up for DFS was 40.6 (interquartile range [IQR], 6-64.7) and 40 (IQR, 7.6-67.8), while median follow-up for DSS was 41.2 (IQR, 10.7-64.7) and 42.7 (IQR, 6-67.6) in the HL and LL groups, respectively. The 3-year DFS rate of HL and LL patients was 82.2% and 82.1% (P = 0.874), respectively. The 3-year DSS for HL and LL patients was 92.1% and 93.4% (P = 0.897), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the local recurrence rate (2% HL vs 2.1% LL), in the regional recurrence rate (3% HL vs 2.1% LL), and in the distant recurrence rate (12.9% HL vs 13.7% LL). Multivariate analysis found conversion to open surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 3.68; P = 0.001) and higher stage of disease (HR, 7.73; P < 0.001) to be significant determinant for DFS.ConclusionsThe level of inferior mesenteric artery ligation during LAR and TME for rectal cancer does not affect DFS, DSS, and recurrence.

Project description:Background and Objectives: This study aimed to compare the effects of high ligation (HL) versus low ligation (LL) in colorectal cancer surgery. Materials and Methods: We performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (trial registries and ClinicalTrials.gov), other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings, with no restrictions on the language or publication status, up until 10 March 2021. We included all parallel-group randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and considered cluster RCTs for inclusion. The risk of bias domains were "low risk," "high risk," or "unclear risk." We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model and interpreted the results according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We used the GRADE guidelines to rate the certainty of evidence (CoE) of the randomized controlled trials. Results: We found 12 studies (24 articles) from our search. We were very uncertain about the effects of HL on overall mortality, disease recurrence, cancer-specific mortality, postoperative mortality, and anastomotic leakage (very low CoE). There may be little to no difference between HL and LL in postoperative complications (low CoE). For short-term follow-up (within 6 months), HL may reduce defecatory function (constipation; low CoE). While HL and LL may have similar effects on sexual function in men, HL may reduce female sexual function compared with LL (low CoE). For long-term follow-up (beyond 6 months), HL may reduce defecatory function (constipation; low CoE). There were discrepancies in the effects regarding urinary dysfunction according to which questionnaire was used in the studies. HL may reduce male and female sexual function (low CoE). Conclusions: We are very uncertain about the effects of HL on survival outcomes, and there is no difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between HL and LL. More rigorous RCTs are necessary to evaluate the effect of HL and LL on functional outcomes.