Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2012 Jan;27(1):103-9.
doi: 10.1007/s00384-011-1283-8. Epub 2011 Aug 23.

Violation of treatment guidelines -- hazard for rectal cancer patients

Eivind Jullumstrø  1 , Arne Wibe, Stian Lydersen, Tom-Harald Edna
Affiliations

Violation of treatment guidelines -- hazard for rectal cancer patients

Eivind Jullumstrø et al. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2012 Jan.

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate temporal trends in treatment and outcome in rectal cancer diagnosed during 1980-2004 at Levanger Hospital.

Materials and methods: A protocol for prospective registration of rectal cancer treated with total mesorectal excision including operative strategy, radiotherapy and surveillance was established at Levanger Hospital in 1980. In this study, all rectal cancer patients treated during 1980-2004 were included.

Results: More patients received preoperative radiotherapy during 2000-2004, but otherwise there were no significant differences in presentation or treatment during 1980-2004. The 5-year local recurrence rate after resection with curative intent was 4.5% (0-9.7), 18.7% (10.3-27.1) and 2.2% (0-6.7) in 1980-1989, 1990-1999 and 2000-2004 (p = 0.006), respectively. Out of a total of 23 cases of local recurrence, treatment guidelines, mainly with regard to radiotherapy, were violated in 19 cases. The 5-year overall survival after resection with curative intent was 65% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55-76) during 1980-1989, 58% (49-68) in 1990-1999 and 71% (59-83) in 2000-2004 (n.s). The 5-year relative survival was 83% (95% CI 69-95) during 1980-1989, 71% (59-81) in 1990-1999 and 84% (69-98) in 2000-2004 (n.s).

Conclusion: Rectal cancer patients experienced excellent outcomes in the period 1980-1989 and 2000-2004. Due to violations of treatment guidelines, the rate of local recurrence was much too high in the period 1990-1999. This article illustrates the importance of continuous quality assurance in the treatment of rectal cancer to maintain optimized outcomes for the patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD. The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg. 1982;69(10):613–616. doi: 10.1002/bjs.1800691019. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wibe A, Moller B, Norstein J, et al. A national strategic change in treatment policy for rectal cancer—implementation of total mesorectal excision as routine treatment in Norway. A national audit. Dis Colon Rectum. 2002;45(7):857–866. doi: 10.1007/s10350-004-6317-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wibe A, Carlsen E, Dahl O, et al. Nationwide quality assurance of rectal cancer treatment. Colorectal Dis. 2006;8(3):224–229. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1318.2005.00924.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bjerkeset T, Edna TH. Rectal cancer: the influence of type of operation on local recurrence and survival. Eur J Surg. 1996;162(8):643–648. - PubMed
    1. Sobin L, Wittekind C. TNM classification of malignant tumors. New York: John Wiley; 2002.

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources