International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons survey of surgeons' preference on rectal cancer treatment.

IF 3 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Annals of Coloproctology Pub Date : 2023-08-01 DOI:10.3393/ac.2022.00255.0036
Audrius Dulskas, Philip F Caushaj, Domas Grigoravicius, Liu Zheng, Richard Fortunato, Joseph W Nunoo-Mensah, Narimantas E Samalavicius
{"title":"International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons survey of surgeons' preference on rectal cancer treatment.","authors":"Audrius Dulskas,&nbsp;Philip F Caushaj,&nbsp;Domas Grigoravicius,&nbsp;Liu Zheng,&nbsp;Richard Fortunato,&nbsp;Joseph W Nunoo-Mensah,&nbsp;Narimantas E Samalavicius","doi":"10.3393/ac.2022.00255.0036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Rectal cancer treatment has a wide range of possible approaches from radical extirpative surgery to nonoperative watchful waiting following chemoradiotherapy, with or without, additional chemotherapy. Our goal was to assess the personal opinion of active practicing surgeons on rectal cancer treatment if he/she was the patient.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A panel of the International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ISUCRS) selected 10 questions that were included in a questionnaire that included other items including demographics. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to ISUCRS fellows and other surgeons included in our database and remained open from April 16 to 28, 2020.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One hundred sixty-three specialists completed the survey. The majority of surgeons (n=65, 39.9%) chose the minimally invasive (laparoscopic) surgery for their personal treatment of rectal cancer. For low-lying rectal cancer T1 and T2, the treatment choice was standard chemoradiation+local excision (n=60, 36.8%) followed by local excision±chemoradiotherapy if needed (n=55, 33.7%). In regards to locally advanced low rectal cancer T3 or greater, the preference of the responders was for laparoscopic surgery (n=65, 39.9%). We found a statistically significant relationship between surgeons' age and their preference for minimally invasive techniques demonstrating an age-based bias on senior surgeons' inclination toward open approach.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our survey reveals an age-based preference by surgeons for minimally invasive surgical techniques as well as organ-preserving techniques for personal treatment of treating rectal cancer. Only 1/4 of specialists do adhere to the international guidelines for treating early rectal cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":8267,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Coloproctology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/99/ba/ac-2022-00255-0036.PMC10475796.pdf","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3393/ac.2022.00255.0036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose: Rectal cancer treatment has a wide range of possible approaches from radical extirpative surgery to nonoperative watchful waiting following chemoradiotherapy, with or without, additional chemotherapy. Our goal was to assess the personal opinion of active practicing surgeons on rectal cancer treatment if he/she was the patient.

Methods: A panel of the International Society of University Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ISUCRS) selected 10 questions that were included in a questionnaire that included other items including demographics. The questionnaire was distributed electronically to ISUCRS fellows and other surgeons included in our database and remained open from April 16 to 28, 2020.

Results: One hundred sixty-three specialists completed the survey. The majority of surgeons (n=65, 39.9%) chose the minimally invasive (laparoscopic) surgery for their personal treatment of rectal cancer. For low-lying rectal cancer T1 and T2, the treatment choice was standard chemoradiation+local excision (n=60, 36.8%) followed by local excision±chemoradiotherapy if needed (n=55, 33.7%). In regards to locally advanced low rectal cancer T3 or greater, the preference of the responders was for laparoscopic surgery (n=65, 39.9%). We found a statistically significant relationship between surgeons' age and their preference for minimally invasive techniques demonstrating an age-based bias on senior surgeons' inclination toward open approach.

Conclusion: Our survey reveals an age-based preference by surgeons for minimally invasive surgical techniques as well as organ-preserving techniques for personal treatment of treating rectal cancer. Only 1/4 of specialists do adhere to the international guidelines for treating early rectal cancer.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
国际大学结肠直肠外科学会调查外科医生对直肠癌治疗的偏好。
目的:直肠癌的治疗有多种可能的途径,从根治性切除手术到放化疗后的非手术观察等待,有或没有额外的化疗。我们的目的是评估在职外科医生对直肠癌治疗的个人意见,如果他/她是患者。方法:国际大学结肠直肠外科学会(ISUCRS)的一个小组选择了10个问题,这些问题包括在问卷中,问卷中还包括人口统计学等其他项目。问卷以电子方式分发给ISUCRS研究员和数据库中的其他外科医生,并于2020年4月16日至28日保持开放。结果:共163名专家完成调查。大多数外科医生(n=65, 39.9%)选择微创(腹腔镜)手术治疗直肠癌。对于T1和T2低位直肠癌,治疗选择为标准放化疗+局部切除(n=60, 36.8%),必要时局部切除±放化疗(n=55, 33.7%)。对于局部晚期低位直肠癌T3及以上,应答者倾向于腹腔镜手术(n=65, 39.9%)。我们发现,外科医生的年龄与他们对微创技术的偏好之间存在统计学意义上的关系,表明高龄外科医生倾向于开放入路存在年龄偏见。结论:我们的调查揭示了基于年龄的外科医生对微创手术技术和器官保留技术的个人治疗直肠癌的偏好。只有1/4的专家坚持治疗早期直肠癌的国际指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
3.20%
发文量
73
期刊最新文献
The management of complex fistula in ano by transanal opening of the intersphincteric space (TROPIS): short-term results. Ileostomy volvulus as an underreported problem causing small bowel obstruction in patients living with ostomy: a case report and literature review. What can patients expect in the long term from radiofrequency thermocoagulation of hemorrhoids on bleeding, prolapse, quality of life, and recurrence: "no pain, no gain" or "no pain but a gain"? Garg scoring system to predict long-term healing in cryptoglandular anal fistulas: a prospective validation study. Benefits and risks of diverting stoma creation during rectal cancer surgery.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1