Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index <20), moderate lockdowns (20–60), and full lockdowns (>60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04384926 . Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include...

No abstract

The short and long-term outcomes between ERC, SLC, and LC are similar. SLC should be considered oncologically as appropiate as the other more extensive resections.

Objective: To study the effect of postoperative complications (POC) on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) after surgical resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Summary Background Data: Morbidity rates after liver resection can reach 45%. The negative impact of POC on oncologic outcomes has been reported in various types of cancer, especially colorectal. However, data on the consequences of POC after CRLM resection on long-term survival are scarce. Methods: Eligible studies examining the association between POC after CRLM resection and OS/DFS were sought using the PubMed and Web of Science databases. A random-effects model was used to calculate pooled effect estimate for OS and DFS hazard ratios (HR), estimating between-study variance with restricted maximum likelihood estimator with Hartung–Knapp adjustment. Subgroup analysis was used to control the effect of POC on OS and DFS for: 1) Method used to define postoperative complications, 2) Exclusion of early postoperative death from survival analysis, 3) Method of data extraction used, and 4) Tumor and treatment characteristics. Results: Forty-one studies were deemed eligible, including 12,817 patients. POC patients had a significant risk of reduced OS compared with no POC group (HR 1.43 [95% CI: 1.3, 1.57], P < 0.0001). POC had also a negative impact on DFS. The HR for reduced DFS was 1.38 [95% CI 1.27, 1.49], P < 0.0001. The negative impact of POC on survival and recurrence was confirmed in subgroup analysis. Conclusions: Our findings evidence the negative impact of POC on survival and recurrence after CRLM resection.