Safe Colorectal Surgery in the Elderly

Rectal Cancer Clinical Trial

Official title:

Safe Surgery in the Elderly: A Review of Outcomes Following Robotic Proctectomy From the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, a Retrospective Cross Sectional Cohort Study. Cross-Sectional Study

Clinical Trial Details — Status: Completed

Administrative data

• NCT number: NCT03765411
• Other study ID #: Robotic Proct in the Elderly
• Status: Completed
• Start date: January 1, 2013
• Est. completion date: April 15, 2017

Study information

• Verified date: December 2018
• Source: Tripler Army Medical Center
• Contact: n/a
• Is FDA regulated: No
• Study type: Observational [Patient Registry]

Clinical Trial Summary

The objective was to evaluate the use and outcomes of robotic proctectomy compared to open and laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer in the elderly. A retrospective cross-sectional cohort study utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS; 2006-2013) was performed.

Description:

The objective was to evaluate the use and outcomes of robotic proctectomy compared to open and laparoscopic approaches for rectal cancer in the elderly. A retrospective cross-sectional cohort study utilizing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS; 2006-2013) was performed. All cases were restricted to age 70 years old or greater. The incidence of robotic proctectomy from 2006 - 2013 both as a whole as well as divided into approach was analyzed. Each approach was compared for both primary and secondary outcomes.

Recruitment information / eligibility

• Status: Completed
• Enrollment: 6740
• Est. completion date: April 15, 2017
• Est. primary completion date: April 15, 2013
• Gender: All
• Age group: 70 Years and older

Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria:

• 70 years of age or older

• underwent proctectomy

Exclusion Criteria:

• emergent admissions

• abdominoperineal resections

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

• Rectal Cancer

Intervention

Procedure:
• Proctectomy
Resection of the rectum

Locations

Country	Name	City	State
United States	Tripler Army Medical Center	Honolulu	Hawaii

Sponsors (2)

Lead Sponsor	Collaborator
Tripler Army Medical Center	Madigan Army Medical Center

Country where clinical trial is conducted

United States, 

References & Publications (34)

Agha RA, Borrelli MR, Vella-Baldacchino M, Thavayogan R, Orgill DP; STROCSS Group. The STROCSS statement: Strengthening the Reporting of Cohort Studies in Surgery. Int J Surg. 2017 Oct;46:198-202. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.08.586. Epub 2017 Sep 7. — View Citation

Antoniou SA, Antoniou GA, Koch OO, Pointner R, Granderath FA. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery confers lower mortality in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 66,483 patients. Surg Endosc. 2015 Feb;29(2):322-33. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-367 — View Citation

Baek JH, Pastor C, Pigazzi A. Robotic and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: a case-matched study. Surg Endosc. 2011 Feb;25(2):521-5. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1204-x. Epub 2010 Jul 7. — View Citation

Baik SH, Kwon HY, Kim JS, Hur H, Sohn SK, Cho CH, Kim H. Robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a prospective comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009 Jun;16(6):1480-7. doi: 10.1245/s10434-009-0435-3. Epu — View Citation

Champagne BJ, Delaney CP. Laparoscopic approaches to rectal cancer. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2007 Aug;20(3):237-48. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-984868. — View Citation

Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-83. — View Citation

Cheung HY, Chung CC, Fung JT, Wong JC, Yau KK, Li MK. Laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer in octogenarians: results in a decade. Dis Colon Rectum. 2007 Nov;50(11):1905-10. Epub 2007 Sep 26. — View Citation

D'Annibale A, Pernazza G, Monsellato I, Pende V, Lucandri G, Mazzocchi P, Alfano G. Total mesorectal excision: a comparison of oncological and functional outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2013 Jun;27(6):1887 — View Citation

Damle A, Damle RN, Flahive JM, Schlussel AT, Davids JS, Sturrock PR, Maykel JA, Alavi K. Diffusion of technology: Trends in robotic-assisted colorectal surgery. Am J Surg. 2017 Nov;214(5):820-824. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2017.03.020. Epub 2017 Mar 21. — View Citation

Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Harris DR, Coffey RM. Comorbidity measures for use with administrative data. Med Care. 1998 Jan;36(1):8-27. — View Citation

Fielding LP, Phillips RK, Hittinger R. Factors influencing mortality after curative resection for large bowel cancer in elderly patients. Lancet. 1989 Mar 18;1(8638):595-7. — View Citation

Frasson M, Braga M, Vignali A, Zuliani W, Di Carlo V. Benefits of laparoscopic colorectal resection are more pronounced in elderly patients. Dis Colon Rectum. 2008 Mar;51(3):296-300. doi: 10.1007/s10350-007-9124-0. Epub 2008 Jan 15. — View Citation

Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: an approach for clinicians. Guiding principles for the care of older adults with multimorbidity: an approach for clinicians: American Geriatrics Society Expert Panel on the Care of Older — View Citation

Halabi WJ, Kang CY, Jafari MD, Nguyen VQ, Carmichael JC, Mills S, Stamos MJ, Pigazzi A. Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes. World J Surg. 2013 Dec;37(12):2782-90. doi: 10.1007/s00268-013- — View Citation

Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, Quirke P, West N, Rautio T, Thomassen N, Tilney H, Gudgeon M, Bianchi PP, Edlin R, Hulme C, Brown J. Effect of Robotic-Assisted vs Conventional Laparoscopic Surgery on Risk of Conversion to — View Citation

Jayne DG, Brown JM, Thorpe H, Walker J, Quirke P, Guillou PJ. Bladder and sexual function following resection for rectal cancer in a randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open technique. Br J Surg. 2005 Sep;92(9):1124-32. — View Citation

Keller DS, Senagore AJ, Lawrence JK, Champagne BJ, Delaney CP. Comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic versus robot-assisted colorectal resection. Surg Endosc. 2014 Jan;28(1):212-21. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3163-5. Epub 2013 Aug 31. — View Citation

Kim JY, Kim NK, Lee KY, Hur H, Min BS, Kim JH. A comparative study of voiding and sexual function after total mesorectal excision with autonomic nerve preservation for rectal cancer: laparoscopic versus robotic surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Aug;19(8):2485 — View Citation

Law WL, Chu KW, Tung PH. Laparoscopic colorectal resection: a safe option for elderly patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2002 Dec;195(6):768-73. — View Citation

Lee MG, Chiu CC, Wang CC, Chang CN, Lee SH, Lee M, Hsu TC, Lee CC. Trends and Outcomes of Surgical Treatment for Colorectal Cancer between 2004 and 2012- an Analysis using National Inpatient Database. Sci Rep. 2017 May 17;7(1):2006. doi: 10.1038/s41598-01 — View Citation

Li Y, Wang S, Gao S, Yang C, Yang W, Guo S. Laparoscopic colorectal resection versus open colorectal resection in octogenarians: a systematic review and meta-analysis of safety and efficacy. Tech Coloproctol. 2016 Mar;20(3):153-62. doi: 10.1007/s10151-015 — View Citation

Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH, Jang YS, Jun SH. Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for low rectal cancer: case-matched analysis of short-term outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Dec;17(12):3195-202. doi: 10.1245/s10434-010-1162-5. Epub 2010 Jun 30. — View Citation

Park JS, Choi GS, Lim KH, Jang YS, Jun SH. S052: a comparison of robot-assisted, laparoscopic, and open surgery in the treatment of rectal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2011 Jan;25(1):240-8. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1166-z. Epub 2010 Jun 15. — View Citation

Park S, Kim NK. The Role of Robotic Surgery for Rectal Cancer: Overcoming Technical Challenges in Laparoscopic Surgery by Advanced Techniques. J Korean Med Sci. 2015 Jul;30(7):837-46. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2015.30.7.837. Epub 2015 Jun 10. Review. — View Citation

Schlussel AT, Delaney CP, Maykel JA, Lustik MB, Nishtala M, Steele SR. A National Database Analysis Comparing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample and American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in Laparoscopic vs Open Colectomie — View Citation

Schlussel AT, Lustik MB, Johnson EK, Maykel JA, Champagne BJ, Damle A, Ross HM, Steele SR. A nationwide assessment comparing nonelective open with minimally invasive complex colorectal procedures. Colorectal Dis. 2016 Mar;18(3):301-11. doi: 10.1111/codi.1 — View Citation

Seishima R, Okabayashi K, Hasegawa H, Tsuruta M, Shigeta K, Matsui S, Yamada T, Kitagawa Y. Is laparoscopic colorectal surgery beneficial for elderly patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 Apr;19(4):756-65. doi: 10.1007 — View Citation

Singh JA, Kwoh CK, Boudreau RM, Lee GC, Ibrahim SA. Hospital volume and surgical outcomes after elective hip/knee arthroplasty: a risk-adjusted analysis of a large regional database. Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Aug;63(8):2531-9. doi: 10.1002/art.30390. — View Citation

Stocchi L, Nelson H, Young-Fadok TM, Larson DR, Ilstrup DM. Safety and advantages of laparoscopic vs. open colectomy in the elderly: matched-control study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000 Mar;43(3):326-32. — View Citation

Tam MS, Kaoutzanis C, Mullard AJ, Regenbogen SE, Franz MG, Hendren S, Krapohl G, Vandewarker JF, Lampman RM, Cleary RK. A population-based study comparing laparoscopic and robotic outcomes in colorectal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2016 Feb;30(2):455-63. doi: 10 — View Citation

Tan KY, Kawamura Y, Mizokami K, Sasaki J, Tsujinaka S, Maeda T, Konishi F. Colorectal surgery in octogenarian patients--outcomes and predictors of morbidity. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2009 Feb;24(2):185-9. doi: 10.1007/s00384-008-0615-9. Epub 2008 Dec 3. — View Citation

van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA, Fürst A, Lacy AM, Hop WC, Bonjer HJ; COlorectal cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection II (COLOR II) Study Group. Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phas — View Citation

Vignali A, Di Palo S, Tamburini A, Radaelli G, Orsenigo E, Staudacher C. Laparoscopic vs. open colectomies in octogenarians: a case-matched control study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2005 Nov;48(11):2070-5. — View Citation

Washington CW, Derdeyn CP, Dacey RG Jr, Dhar R, Zipfel GJ. Analysis of subarachnoid hemorrhage using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample: the NIS-SAH Severity Score and Outcome Measure. J Neurosurg. 2014 Aug;121(2):482-9. doi: 10.3171/2014.4.JNS131100. Epub 2 — View Citation

* Note: There are 34 references in all — Click here to view all references

Outcome

Type	Measure	Description	Time frame	Safety issue
Primary	In-hospital Complications	Complications to include mechanical wound, infections, urinary, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, systemic, surgical, and any complication	through study completion, an average of 5 days
Secondary	In-hospital mortality	Death during admission	through study completion, an average of 5 days
Secondary	Length of Stay	Length of in hospital stay	through study completion, an average of 5 days
Secondary	Costs and Charges	Hospital charges refer to the total amount billed by the hospital. Hospital cost refers to the amount paid by the insurance provider	through study completion, an average of 5 days

External Links

•   All patient refined diagnosis related groups (APR-DRGs), version 20.0. methodology overview
•   An Aging World: 2015 International Population Reports
•   Overview of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. [Internet].; 2017