Conectar
by Noriko Kojimahara, Yasuto Sato, Yoko Sato, Fumihiro Kojimahara, Katsuyuki Takahashi, Eiji Nakatani
BackgroundLong-term cancer prognosis after initial surgical procedures is an unlikely endpoint for clinical trials. Medical claim databases may aid in addressing this issue regardless of limited information on disease and patient background. However, the long-term prognosis (especially regarding long-term care needs) following surgical procedures remains unclear. This study aimed to assess whether long-term outcomes, such as the exacerbation of long-term care needs and mortality, differ with surgical methods.
MethodsUsing a longitudinal study with linkage between medical claim and long-term care database, patients with primary colorectal cancer who underwent initial colonoscopies were identified through anonymized data in Japan (Shizuoka Kokuho Database, 2012–2018). Odds ratios (ORs) for long-term outcomes (long-term care needs and all-cause mortality during a 6.5-year follow-up period) were analyzed using logistic regression to compare laparoscopy and endoscopic surgery to laparotomy.
ResultsOverall, 3,744 primary colorectal cancer cases (822 laparotomies, 705 laparoscopies, and 2,217 endoscopic surgeries) were included. Compared to the laparotomy group, the crude OR for exacerbation of long-term care needs in the laparoscopic surgery group was 0.376 (95% confidence interval, 0.227, 0.624), while the OR for all-cause mortality was 0.22 (0.329, 0.532).
ConclusionThis is the first study to analyze long-term prognosis after surgery for patients with colorectal cancer to combine medical and long-term needs data. As the national health insurance claim database rarely includes information on cancer stage and comorbidities, better prognosis on endoscopic surgery may need careful interpretation. Therefore, laparoscopy has superior outcomes in terms of long-term care needs and mortality compared to those of laparotomy.
FreshRSS