EnROL: A multicentre randomised trial of conventional versus laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme

BMC Cancer

Robin H Kennedy⁵  Anne Francis¹  Susan Dutton⁷  Sharon Love⁷  Sarah Pearson¹  Jane M Blazeby³  Philip Quirke⁴  Peter J Franks⁶  David J Kerr² 

[1] Oncology Clinical Trials Office, Dept of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

[2] Nuffield Dept of Clinical Laboratory Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

[3] Academic Unit of Surgical Research, School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol and University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK

[4] Leeds Institute of Molecular Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK

[5] St Mark’s Hospital, Harrow, UK

[6] Centre for Research & Implementation of Clinical Practice, London, UK

[7] Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Dept of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

关键词: EnROL;    Randomised controlled trial;    Fatigue;    Cosmetic assessment;    Health economics;    Fast track surgery;    Enhanced recovery programme;    Rectal cancer;    Colon cancer;    Laparoscopy;   

Others  :  1080426
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2407-12-181

 received in 2012-05-02, accepted in 2012-05-03,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

During the last two decades the use of laparoscopic resection and a multimodal approach known as an enhanced recovery programme, have been major changes in colorectal perioperative care. Clinical outcome improves using laparoscopic surgery to resect colorectal cancer but until recently no multicentre trial evidence had been reported regarding whether the benefits of laparoscopy still exist when open surgery is optimized within an enhanced recovery programme. The EnROL trial (Enhanced Recovery Open versus Laparoscopic) examines the hypothesis that laparoscopic surgery within an enhanced recovery programme will provide superior postoperative outcomes when compared to conventional open resection of colorectal cancer within the same programme.

Methods/design

EnROL is a phase III, multicentre, randomised trial of laparoscopic versus open resection of colon and rectal cancer with blinding of patients and outcome observers to the treatment allocation for the first 7 days post-operatively, or until discharge if earlier. 202 patients will be recruited at approximately 12 UK hospitals and randomised using minimization at a central computer system in a 1:1 ratio. Recruiting surgeons will previously have performed >100 laparoscopic colorectal resections and >50 open total mesorectal excisions to minimize conversion. Eligible patients are those suitable for elective resection using either technique. Excluded patients include: those with acute intestinal obstruction and patients in whom conversion from laparoscopic to open procedure is likely. The primary outcome is physical fatigue as measured by the physical fatigue domain of the multidimensional fatigue inventory 20 (MFI-20) with secondary outcomes including postoperative hospital stay; complications; reoperation and readmission; quality of life indicators; cosmetic assessments; standardized performance indicators; health economic analysis; the other four domains of the MFI-20. Pathological assessment of surgical quality will also be undertaken and compliance with the enhanced recovery programme will be recorded for all patients.

Discussion

Should this trial demonstrate that laparoscopic surgery confers a significant clinical and/or health economic benefit this will further support the transition to this type of surgery, with implications for the training of surgeons and resource allocation.

Trial registration

ISRCTN48516968.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Kennedy et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Abraham NS, Young JM, Solomon MJ: Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 2004, 91(9):1111-1124.
• [2]Veldkamp R, Gholghesaei M, Bonjer HJ, Meijer DW, Buunen M, Jeekel J, Anderberg B, Cuesta MA, Cuschierl A, Fingerhut A, et al.: Laparoscopic resection of colon Cancer: consensus of the European Association of Endoscopic Surgery (EAES). Surg Endosc 2004, 18(8):1163-1185.
• [3]Leung KL, Kwok SP, Lam SC, Lee JF, Yiu RY, Ng SS, Lai PB, Lau WY: Laparoscopic resection of rectosigmoid carcinoma: prospective randomised trial. Lancet 2004, 363(9416):1187-1192.
• [4]Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, Castells A, Taura P, Pique JM, Visa J: Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 2002, 359(9325):2224-2229.
• [5]Weeks JC, Nelson H, Gelber S, Sargent D, Schroeder G: Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomized trial. Jama 2002, 287(3):321-328.
• [6]Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, Heath RM, Brown JM: Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2005, 365(9472):1718-1726.
• [7]Veldkamp R, Kuhry E, Hop WC, Jeekel J, Kazemier G, Bonjer HJ, Haglind E, Pahlman L, Cuesta MA, Msika S, et al.: Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol 2005, 6(7):477-484.
• [8]The Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group: A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 2004, 350(20):2050-2059.
• [9]Bardram L, Funch-Jensen P, Kehlet H: Rapid rehabilitation in elderly patients after laparoscopic colonic resection. Br J Surg 2000, 87(11):1540-1545.
• [10]King PM, Blazeby JM, Ewings P, Franks PJ, Longman RJ, Kendrick AH, Kipling RM, Kennedy RH: Randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer within an enhanced recovery programme. Br J Surg 2006, 93(3):300-308.
• [11]Delaney CP, Kiran RP, Senagore AJ, Brady K, Fazio VW: Case-matched comparison of clinical and financial outcome after laparoscopic or open colorectal surgery. Ann Surg 2003, 238(1):67-72.
• [12]Kehlet H, Buchler MW, Beart RW, Billingham RP, Williamson R: Care after colonic operation - Is it evidence-based? Results from a multinational survey in Europe and the United States. J Am Coll Surgeons 2006, 202(1):45-54.
• [13]Faiz O, Warusavitarne J, Bottle A, Tekkis PP, Darzi AW, Kennedy RH: Laparoscopically Assisted vs. Open Elective Colonic and Rectal Resection: A Comparison of Outcomes in English National Health Service Trusts Between 1996 and 2006. Dis Colon Rectum 2009, 52(10):1695-1704.
• [14]Basse L, Hjort Jakobsen D, Billesbolle P, Werner M, Kehlet H: A clinical pathway to accelerate recovery after colonic resection. Ann Surg 2000, 232(1):51-57.
• [15]Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Von Meyenfeldt M, Revhaug A, Dejong CH, Lassen K, Nygren J, Hausel J, Soop M, Andersen J, et al.: Enhanced recovery after surgery: a consensus review of clinical care for patients undergoing colonic resection. Clin Nutr 2005, 24(3):466-477.
• [16]Anderson AD, McNaught CE, MacFie J, Tring I, Barker P, Mitchell CJ: Randomized clinical trial of multimodal optimization and standard perioperative surgical care. Br J Surg 2003, 90(12):1497-1504.
• [17]Delaney CP, Zutshi M, Senagore AJ, Remzi FH, Hammel J, Fazio VW: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial between a pathway of controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet and traditional postoperative care after laparotomy and intestinal resection. Dis Colon Rectum 2003, 46(7):851-859.
• [18]Varadhan KK, Neal KR, Dejong CH, Fearon KC, Ljungqvist O, Lobo DN: The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway for patients undergoing major elective open colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Nutr 2010, 29(4):434-440.
• [19]Basse L, Jakobsen DH, Bardram L, Billesbolle P, Lund C, Mogensen T, Rosenberg J, Kehlet H: Functional recovery after open versus laparoscopic colonic resection: a randomized, blinded study. Ann Surg 2005, 241(3):416-423.
• [20]Smets EM, Garssen B, Cull A, de Haes JC: Application of the multidimensional fatigue inventory (MFI-20) in cancer patients receiving radiotherapy. Br J Cancer 1996, 73(2):241-245.
• [21]Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B: SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. The Health Institute, New England Medical Centre, Boston; 1993.
• [22]The EuroQol Group: EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy 1990, 16(3):199-208.
• [23]Whistance RN, Gilbert R, Fayers P, Longman RJ, Pullyblank A, Thomas M, Blazeby JM: Assessment of body image in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 2010, 25(3):369-374.
• [24]Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L, Glynn RJ, Berkman LF, Blazer DG, Scherr PA, Wallace RB: A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol 1994, 49(2):M85-94.
• [25]Brown S, Thorpe H, Hawkins K, Brown J: Minimization–reducing predictability for multi-centre trials whilst retaining balance within centre. Stat Med 2005, 24(24):3715-3727.
• [26]Bang H, Ni L, Davis CE: Assessment of blinding in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 2004, 25(2):143-156.
• [27]Lang M, Niskanen M, Miettinen P, Alhava E, Takala J: Outcome and resource utilization in gastroenterological surgery. Br J Surg 2001, 88(7):1006-1014.
• [28]Hopwood P, Fletcher I, Lee A, Al Ghazal S: A body image scale for use with cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 2001, 37(2):189-197.
• [29]Franks PJ, Bosanquet N, Thorpe H, Brown JM, Copeland J, Smith AM, Quirke P, Guillou PJ: Short-term costs of conventional vs laparoscopic assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial). Br J Cancer 2006, 95(1):6-12.
• [30]Quirke P, Steele R, Monson J, Grieve R, Khanna S, Couture J, O'Callaghan C, Myint AS, Bessell E, Thompson LC, et al.: Effect of the plane of surgery achieved on local recurrence in patients with operable rectal cancer: a prospective study using data from the MRC CR07 and NCIC-CTG CO16 randomised clinical trial. Lancet 2009, 373(9666):821-828.
• [31]Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, Marijnen CA, van Krieken JH, Quirke P: Low rectal cancer: a call for a change of approach in abdominoperineal resection. J Clin Oncol 2005, 23(36):9257-9264.
• [32]West NP, Finan PJ, Anderin C, Lindholm J, Holm T, Quirke P: Evidence of the oncologic superiority of cylindrical abdominoperineal excision for low rectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2008, 26(21):3517-3522.
• [33]West NP, Morris EJ, Rotimi O, Cairns A, Finan PJ, Quirke P: Pathology grading of colon cancer surgical resection and its association with survival: a retrospective observational study. Lancet Oncol 2008, 9(9):857-865.
• [34]West NP, Sutton KM, Ingeholm P, Hagemann-Madsen RH, Hohenberger W, Quirke P: Improving the quality of colon cancer surgery through a surgical education program. Dis Colon Rectum 2010, 53(12):1594-1603.
• [35]Vlug MS, Wind J, Hollmann MW, Ubbink DT, Cense HA, Engel AF, Gerhards MF, van Wagensveld BA, van der Zaag ES, van Geloven AA, et al.: Laparoscopy in combination with fast track multimodal management is the best perioperative strategy in patients undergoing colonic surgery: a randomized clinical trial (LAFA-study). Ann Surg 2011, 254(6):868-875.
• [36]Tekkis PP, Fazio VW, Lavery IC, Remzi FH, Senagore AJ, Wu JS, Strong SA, Poloneicki JD, Hull TL, Church JM: Evaluation of the learning curve in ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery. Ann Surg 2005, 241(2):262-268.
• [37]Kok NF, Lind MY, Hansson BM, Pilzecker D, Borg IR Mertens zur, Knipscheer BC, Hazebroek EJ, Dooper IM, Weimar W, Hop WC, et al.: Comparison of laparoscopic and mini incision open donor nephrectomy: single blind, randomised controlled clinical trial. Bmj 2006, 333(7561):221.