Aim:The COVID-19 pandemic led to widespread disruption of colorectal cancer services during 2020. Established cancer referral pathways were modified in response to reduced diagnostic availability. The aim of this paper is to assess the impact of COVID-19 on colorectal cancer referral, presentation and stage. Methods: This was a single centre, retrospective cohort study performed at a tertiary referral centre. Patients diagnosed and managed with colorectal adenocarcinoma between January and December 2020 were compared with patients from 2018 and 2019 in terms of demographics, mode of presentation and pathological cancer staging. Results: In all, 272 patients were diagnosed with colorectal adenocarcinoma during 2020 compared with 282 in 2019 and 257 in 2018. Patients in all years were comparable for age, gender and tumour location (P > 0.05). There was a significant decrease in urgent suspected cancer referrals, diagnostic colonoscopy and radiological imaging performed between March and June 2020 compared with previous years. More patients presented as emergencies (P = 0.03) with increased rates of large bowel obstruction in 2020 compared with 2018-2019 (P = 0.01). The distribution of TNM grade was similar across the 3 years but more T4 cancers were diagnosed in 2020 versus 2018-2019 (P = 0.03). Conclusion:This study demonstrates that a relatively short-term impact on the colorectal cancer referral pathway can have significant consequences on patient presentation leading to higher risk emergency presentation and surgery at a more advanced stage. It is therefore critical that efforts are made to make this pathway more robust to minimize the impact of other future adverse events and to consolidate the benefits of earlier diagnosis and treatment.

Background Impaired bowel function after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer is a frequent problem with a major impact on quality of life. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of a defunctioning ileostomy, and time to ileostomy closure on bowel function after LAR for rectal cancer. Methods We performed a systematic review based on the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Comprehensive literature searches were conducted using PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for articles published from 1989 up to August 2019. Analysis was performed using Review Manager (version 5.3) using a random-effects model. Results The search yielded 11 studies (1400 patients) that reported on functional outcome after LAR with at least 1 year follow-up, except for one study. Five scales were used: the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) score, the Wexner score, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre Bowel Function Instrument, the Fecal Incontinence Quality of Life scale, and the Hallbook questionnaire. Based on seven studies, major LARS occurred more often in the ileostomy group (OR 2.84, 95% CI, 1.70–4.75, p < 0.0001: I2 = 60%, X2 = 0.02). Based on six studies, a longer time to stoma closure increased the risk of major LARS with a mean difference in time to closure of 2.39 months (95% CI, 1.28–3.51, p < 0.0001: I2 = 21%, X2 = 0.28) in the major vs. no LARS group. Other scoring systems could not be pooled, but presence of an ileostomy predicted poorer bowel function except with the Hallbook questionnaire. Conclusions The risk of developing major LARS seems higher with a defunctioning ileostomy. A prolonged time to ileostomy closure seems to reinforce the negative effect on bowel function; therefore, early reversal should be an important part of the patient pathway.

Aim:The use of standard CO 2 for insufflation during laparoscopic colorectal surgery may be associated with cooling and drying of the peritoneal cavity, contributing to perioperative hypothermia. The aim of this work was the assess the feasibility of a study to compare insufflation of warmed, humidified CO 2 (WHCO2) (using HumiGard, Fisher and Paykel Healthcare) with standard measures and its impact on the quality of recovery of surgical patients.Method: A single-centre, triple-blind, feasibility, randomized controlled trial (RCT) of adults scheduled for planned laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The primary outcome was recruitment. Secondary outcomes included feasibility of blinding, acceptability to patients and suitability of objective measures: patient-reported quality of recovery using a validated questionnaire (QoR-40), patient pain scores and semi-continuous core temperature measurements.Results: Thirty-nine participants were randomized to either the WHCO2 group (n = 19) or standard care alone (n = 20). Recruitment to the study was successful and acceptable to patients. Blinding of the surgeons, patients and assessors was effective. Response rates to QoR-40 were high but ceiling effects were observed, indicating that the tool was unsuitable in this population. Fewer patients in the WHCO2 group reported postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) at days 1 (53% vs. 65%) and 3 (37% vs. 60%). The median hospital length of stay was 5.5 days in the standard care group and 4 days in the WHCO2 group. Conclusion:A study of WHCO2 for insufflation in laparoscopic colorectal surgery would be highly acceptable to both patients and researchers. Potential reductions in PONV and hospital length of stay in patients treated with WHCO2 merit further investigation. The design of the full-scale RCT will benefit from this feasibility study.

No abstract