C-reactive protein (CRP) trajectory as a predictor of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer resection: A multicentre cohort study
- PMID: 34706131
- PMCID: PMC9298339
- DOI: 10.1111/codi.15963
C-reactive protein (CRP) trajectory as a predictor of anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer resection: A multicentre cohort study
Abstract
Aim: This study aimed to identify whether CRP-trajectory measurement, including increase in CRP-level of 50 mg/l per day, is an accurate predictor of anastomotic leakage (AL) in patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer.
Methods: A prospective multicentre database was used. CRP was recorded on the first three postoperative days. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve were used to analyse performances of CRP-trajectory measurements between postoperative day (POD) 1-2, 2-3, 1-3 and between any two days.
Results: A total of 271 patients were included in the study. AL was observed in 12.5% (34/271). Increase in CRP-level of 50 mg/l between POD 1-2 had a negative predictive value of 0.92, specificity of 0.71 and sensitivity of 0.57. Changes in CRP-levels between POD 2-3 were associated with a negative predictive value, specificity and sensitivity of 0.89, 0.93 and 0.26, respectively. Changes in CRP-levels between POD 1-3 showed a negative predictive value of 0.94, specificity of 0.76 and sensitivity of 0.65. In addition, 50 mg/l changes between any two days showed a negative predictive value of 0.92, specificity of 0.66 and sensitivity of 0.62. The area under the ROC curve for all CRP-trajectory measurements ranged from 0.593-0.700.
Conclusion: The present study showed that CRP-trajectory between postoperative days lacks predictive value to singularly rule out AL. Early and safe discharge in patients undergoing rectal surgery for adenocarcinoma cannot be guaranteed based on this parameter. High negative predictive values are mainly caused by the relatively low prevalence of AL.
Keywords: C-reactive protein; anastomotic leakage; rectal surgery.
© 2021 The Authors. Colorectal Disease published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland.
Conflict of interest statement
Nothing to disclose.
Comment in
-
Editor's Choice - February 2022.Colorectal Dis. 2022 Feb;24(2):152. doi: 10.1111/codi.16090. Colorectal Dis. 2022. PMID: 35239256 No abstract available.
References
-
- Frouws MA, Snijders HS, Malm SH, Liefers G‐J, Van de Velde CJH, Neijenhuis PA, et al. Clinical relevance of a grading system for anastomotic leakage after low anterior resection: analysis from a national cohort database. Dis Colon Rectum. 2017;60(7):706–13. - PubMed
-
- Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MHGM, de Lange‐de Klerk ESM, et al. A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(14):1324–32. - PubMed
-
- McDermott FD, Heeney A, Kelly ME, Steele RJ, Carlson GL, Winter DC. Systematic review of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leaks. Br J Surg. 2015;102(5):462–79. - PubMed
-
- Parthasarathy M, Greensmith M, Bowers D, Groot‐Wassink T. Risk factors for anastomotic leakage after colorectal resection: a retrospective analysis of 17 518 patients. Colorectal Dis. 2017;19(3):288–98. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
Miscellaneous
