Behman, Ramy

Abstract Background The tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) classification at pathological evaluation determines prognosis following cancer treatment. For rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, whether ypTNM likely confers different prognosis than pTNM. We compared survival outcomes of patients classified by ypTNM vs pTNM staging. Methods Patients with resected locoregional rectal cancer from the National Cancer Database who underwent upfront surgery (pTNM) and had ≥5 years follow-up (2010-2017) were compared with those receiving neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery (ypTNM). To address treatment selection bias, analyses were stratified by receipt of guideline-concordant care. Overall survival (OS) was compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analyses. Results Of 50 436 patients (median age = 60; 61.4% male), 11 732 (23.3%) underwent upfront surgery and 38 704 (76.7%) received neoadjuvant therapy; 78.8% of the upfront surgery group received guideline-concordant care. In analyses stratified by guideline-concordant care, overall survival was similar for stage 0-I (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.05; 95% CI = 0.96 to 1.15) but significantly worse for ypTNM vs pTNM in stage II (HR = 1.50; 95% CI = 1.27 to 1.77; 5-year OS = 75.6% vs 83.2%) and stage III (HR = 1.60; 95% CI = 1.46 to 1.75; 5-year OS = 67.0% vs 78.2%). Multivariable analysis confirmed ypTNM was associated with worse survival at each stage (stage 0-I: HR = 1.14, P = .004; stage II: HR = 1.49, P < .001; stage III: HR = 1.60, P < .001). Conclusion Stage for stage, ypTNM classification is associated with worse survival than pTNM classification, with increasing difference at higher stages. Future staging systems and management guidelines should account for these differences to optimize prognostication and stratification for clinical trials and surveillance strategies.

AbstractBackgroundPost‐operative pain management is a critical component of perioperative care. Patients at risk of poorly controlled post‐operative pain may benefit from early measures to optimize pain management. We sought to identify risk factors for post‐operative pain and opioid consumption in patients undergoing liver resection.MethodsThis is a multi‐institutional prospective nested cohort study of patients undergoing open liver resection. Opioid consumption and pain scores were collected following surgery. To estimate the effects of patient factors on opioid consumption (oral morphine equivalents—OME) and on pain scores (NRS‐11), we used generalized linear models and multivariable linear regression model, respectively.ResultsOne hundred and fifty‐three patients who underwent open liver resection between 2013 and 2016 were included in the study. The mean patient age was 62.2 years, and 43.3% were female. Younger patients were significantly more likely to use more opioids in the early post‐operative period (16.7 OME/10 years, p < 0.001). Patient factors that were significantly associated with increased NRS‐11 pain scores also included younger patient age (difference in pain score of 0.3/10 years with cough and 0.2/10 years at rest, p < 0.01 for both) as well as a history of analgesic use (difference in pain score of 0.9 with cough and 0.6 at rest, p < 0.01 and p = 0.07, respectively).ConclusionYounger patients and those with a history of analgesic use are more likely to report higher post‐operative pain and require higher doses of opioids. Early identification of these patients, and measures to better manage their pain, may contribute to optimal perioperative care.

Objective: Conventional management of pain following open liver resection involves intravenous, patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) or epidural analgesia. The objective of this trial was to assess the efficacy of a regional technique called Medial Open Transversus Abdominis Plane (MOTAP) catheter analgesia compared with IV PCA. Methods: This was a blinded, randomized, controlled parallel-arm trial conducted at 2 high-volume centers. Patients undergoing liver resection through a subcostal incision were enrolled. Using a standardized technique, 2 catheters were placed after resection: one in the plane between internal oblique and transversus abdominis and the other in the posterior rectus sheath. Patients were randomized to receive ropivacaine 0.2% (ROP) or saline (NS) through both catheters for 72 hours. All patients received IV PCA with hydromorphone as part of a multimodality analgesia program. Primary outcome was opioid use over the first 48 hours. Results: One hundred fifty-three patients were included in the analysis (71 ROP, 82 NS). Patients receiving ROP used significantly less opioid than patients with NS at 48 hours (median 39.6 mg morphine-equivalent vs 49.2 mg, P = 0.033) and at 72 hours (median 50.0 vs 66.4 mg, P = 0.046). Pain scores at rest and with coughing were significantly lower at all time points in patients who received ROP (P = 0.002). Median length of hospital stay was 5 days in patients receiving ROP and 6 days in patients who received NS (P = 0.035). There was no difference between groups in complications [ROP 20 (28.2%) vs NS 26 (31.7%), P = 0.63]. Conclusion: MOTAP catheter analgesia reduces opioid requirements, pain, and length of hospital stay compared with IV PCA following open liver resection with subcostal incisions.