Download PDF
Clin Colon Rectal Surg 2020; 33(05): 318-324
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1713749
Review Article

Improving Rectal Cancer Outcomes with the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer

Steven D. Wexner
1   Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida
,
Christopher M. White
1   Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston, Florida
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background The treatment of rectal cancer has undergone dramatic changes over the past 50 years. It has evolved from a rather morbid disease usually requiring a permanent stoma, almost exclusively managed by surgeons, to one that involves experts across numerous disciplines to provide the best care for the patient. With significant improvements in surgical techniques, the use of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, advanced imaging, and standardization of pathological assessment, the perioperative morbidity and permanent colostomy rates have significantly decreased. We have seen improvements in the quality of the specimen and rates of recurrence as well as disease-free survival. Rectal cancer, as demonstrated in European trials, has now been recognized as a disease best managed by a multidisciplinary team.

Objective The aim of this article is to evaluate the main body of literature leading to the advances made possible by the new American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer.

Results Following the launch of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer, we expect dramatic increases in membership and accreditation, with associated improvement in center performance and, ultimately, in patient outcomes.

Limitations The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer began in 2017. To date, the only data that have been analyzed are from the preintervention phase.

Conclusions Based on the results of studies within the United States and on the successes demonstrated in Europe, it remains our hope and expectation that the management of rectal cancer in the United States will rapidly improve.

Keywords

rectal cancer - accreditation - multidisciplinary team - quality programs


Publication History

Article published online:
25 July 2020

Thieme Medical Publishers
333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

 

  • References

  • 1 Goligher JC. Surgery of the Anus, Rectum, and Colon. 1st ed. Springfield, IL: Thomas; 1961
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Pollett WG, Nicholls RJ. The relationship between the extent of distal clearance and survival and local recurrence rates after curative anterior resection for carcinoma of the rectum. Ann Surg 1983; 198 (02) 159-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Williams NS, Dixon MF, Johnston D. Reappraisal of the 5 centimetre rule of distal excision for carcinoma of the rectum: a study of distal intramural spread and of patients' survival. Br J Surg 1983; 70 (03) 150-154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 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
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Quirke P, Durdey P, Dixon MF, Williams NS. Local recurrence of rectal adenocarcinoma due to inadequate surgical resection. Histopathological study of lateral tumour spread and surgical excision. Lancet 1986; 2 (8514): 996-999
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Vernava III AM, Moran M, Rothenberger DA, Wong WD. A prospective evaluation of distal margins in carcinoma of the rectum. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1992; 175 (04) 333-336
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group. Prolongation of the disease-free interval in surgically treated rectal carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1985; 312 (23) 1465-1472
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cedermark B, Dahlberg M, Glimelius B, Påhlman L, Rutqvist LE, Wilking N. ; Swedish Rectal Cancer Trial. Improved survival with preoperative radiotherapy in resectable rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 1997; 336 (14) 980-987
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Fisher B, Wolmark N, Rockette H. , et al. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy for rectal cancer: results from NSABP protocol R-01. J Natl Cancer Inst 1988; 80 (01) 21-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Wolmark N, Wieand HS, Hyams DM. , et al. Randomized trial of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy for carcinoma of the rectum: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol R-02. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92 (05) 388-396
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Nougaret S, Reinhold C, Mikhael HW, Rouanet P, Bibeau F, Brown G. The use of MR imaging in treatment planning for patients with rectal carcinoma: have you checked the “DISTANCE”?. Radiology 2013; 268 (02) 330-344
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Brown G, Radcliffe AG, Newcombe RG, Dallimore NS, Bourne MW, Williams GT. Preoperative assessment of prognostic factors in rectal cancer using high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Surg 2003; 90 (03) 355-364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Taylor FG, Quirke P, Heald RJ. , et al; MERCURY Study Group. One millimetre is the safe cut-off for magnetic resonance imaging prediction of surgical margin status in rectal cancer. Br J Surg 2011; 98 (06) 872-879
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wibe A, Møller B, Norstein J. , et al; Norwegian Rectal Cancer Group. 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 (07) 857-866
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Martling A, Holm T, Rutqvist LE. , et al. Impact of a surgical training programme on rectal cancer outcomes in Stockholm. Br J Surg 2005; 92 (02) 225-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bülow S, Harling H, Iversen LH, Ladelund S. ; Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. Survival after rectal cancer has improved considerably in Denmark–secondary publication [in Danish]. Ugeskr Laeger 2009; 171 (38) 2735-2738
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ortiz H, Wibe A, Ciga MA, Lujan J, Codina A, Biondo S. ; Spanish Rectal Cancer Project. Impact of a multidisciplinary team training programme on rectal cancer outcomes in Spain. Colorectal Dis 2013; 15 (05) 544-551
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Dietz DW. ; Consortium for Optimizing Surgical Treatment of Rectal Cancer (OSTRiCh). Multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer: the OSTRICH. J Gastrointest Surg 2013; 17 (10) 1863-1868
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ricciardi R, Virnig BA, Madoff RD, Rothenberger DA, Baxter NN. The status of radical proctectomy and sphincter-sparing surgery in the United States. Dis Colon Rectum 2007; 50 (08) 1119-1127 , discussion 1126–1127
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ricciardi R, Roberts PL, Read TE, Marcello PW, Schoetz DJ, Baxter NN. Variability in reconstructive procedures following rectal cancer surgery in the United States. Dis Colon Rectum 2010; 53 (06) 874-880
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Ricciardi R, Roberts PL, Read TE, Baxter NN, Marcello PW, Schoetz DJ. Presence of specialty surgeons reduces the likelihood of colostomy after proctectomy for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2011; 54 (02) 207-213
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Ricciardi R, Roberts PL, Read TE, Baxter NN, Marcello PW, Schoetz DJ. Who performs proctectomy for rectal cancer in the United States?. Dis Colon Rectum 2011; 54 (10) 1210-1215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Baek JH, Alrubaie A, Guzman EA. , et al. The association of hospital volume with rectal cancer surgery outcomes. Int J Colorectal Dis 2013; 28 (02) 191-196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Brady JT, Xu Z, Scarberry KB. , et al. Evaluating the current status of rectal cancer care in the US: where we stand at the start of the Commission on Cancer's National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer. J Am Coll Surg 2017; 225 (04) S40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 American College of Surgeons. The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer Standards Manual: 2017. https://www.facs.org/~/media/files/quality%20programs/cancer/naprc/naprc%20standards%20manual.ashx . Accessed April 25, 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Levit L, Balogh E, Nass S, Ganz P. Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2013
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Maggio PM, Brundage SI, Hernandez-Boussard T, Spain DA. Commitment to COT verification improves patient outcomes and financial performance. J Trauma 2009; 67 (01) 190-194 , discussion 194–195
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Cohen ME, Liu Y, Ko CY, Hall BL. Improved surgical outcomes for ACS NSQIP hospitals over time: evaluation of hospital cohorts with up to 8 years of participation. Ann Surg 2016; 263 (02) 267-273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program. https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/mbsaqip . Accessed May 21, 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Berger ER, Clements RH, Morton JM. , et al. The impact of different surgical techniques on outcomes in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomies: the first report from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP). Ann Surg 2016; 264 (03) 464-473
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar