SRS70 - Evaluating quality of colorectal cancer surgery across elective and emergency health systems: a secondary analysis of prospective cohort studies in 95 countries

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer is the world’s third most common malignancy and second leading cause of cancer death, yet 30% of patients still present as a surgical emergency. We aimed to determine whether surgical quality differs between potentially curative emergency and elective colorectal resections. Methods This pre-planned secondary analysis included patients undergoing curative-intent colorectal cancer surgery from three global prospective cohort studies (GlobalSurg-3, n = 5506; CovidSurg-Cancer, n = 6719; APOLLO, n = 876). Surgical quality was measured by margin-positive resection. Hierarchical multilevel logistic regression adjusted for patient-, disease- and health-system factors. Bootstrap simulations assessed modification by country income, cancer stage, and tumour site. Results Among 13 101 patients from 95 countries, 678 (5.4%) had margin-positive resections, with higher rates in emergency versus elective surgery (13.7 versus 4.5%, P < 0.0001). Emergency surgery independently increased odds of margin positivity (adjusted OR 2.45, 95% c.i. 1.86–3.22), consistent across all income groups. Bootstrap-derived absolute risk differences were greatest in stage III–IV rectal cancer: 12.6% (95% c.i. 10.2–15.7) in high-income countries, 19.0% (95% c.i. 13.6–23.9) in upper-middle, and 14.1% (95% c.i. 10.9–16.5) in lower-middle/low-income countries. Hospital- and country-level factors explained 76% of observed variation versus 23% at the patient level. Conclusions Emergency surgery conferred a two- to three-fold higher risk of margin positivity globally, independent of resources. These findings challenge the assumption that poor outcomes are solely due to advanced disease and highlight the urgent need for enhanced resectability assessment, specialist availability, and bridge-to-surgery pathways.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British journal of surgery
Published
2026-03-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znag018.080
Primary Topic
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

SRS70 - Evaluating quality of colorectal cancer surgery across elective and emergency health systems: a secondary analysis of prospective cohort studies in 95 countries

Sivesh Kathir Kamarajah
British journal of surgery
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
article

SRS70 - Evaluating quality of colorectal cancer surgery across elective and emergency health systems: a secondary analysis of prospective cohort studies in 95 countries

Sivesh Kathir Kamarajah
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Colorectal cancer is the world’s third most common malignancy and second leading cause of cancer death, yet 30% of patients still present as a surgical emergency. We aimed to determine whether surgical quality differs between potentially curative emergency and elective colorectal resections. Methods This pre-planned secondary analysis included patients undergoing curative-intent colorectal cancer surgery from three global prospective cohort studies (GlobalSurg-3, n = 5506; CovidSurg-Cancer, n = 6719; APOLLO, n = 876). Surgical quality was measured by margin-positive resection. Hierarchical multilevel logistic regression adjusted for patient-, disease- and health-system factors. Bootstrap simulations assessed modification by country income, cancer stage, and tumour site. Results Among 13 101 patients from 95 countries, 678 (5.4%) had margin-positive resections, with higher rates in emergency versus elective surgery (13.7 versus 4.5%, P < 0.0001). Emergency surgery independently increased odds of margin positivity (adjusted OR 2.45, 95% c.i. 1.86–3.22), consistent across all income groups. Bootstrap-derived absolute risk differences were greatest in stage III–IV rectal cancer: 12.6% (95% c.i. 10.2–15.7) in high-income countries, 19.0% (95% c.i. 13.6–23.9) in upper-middle, and 14.1% (95% c.i. 10.9–16.5) in lower-middle/low-income countries. Hospital- and country-level factors explained 76% of observed variation versus 23% at the patient level. Conclusions Emergency surgery conferred a two- to three-fold higher risk of margin positivity globally, independent of resources. These findings challenge the assumption that poor outcomes are solely due to advanced disease and highlight the urgent need for enhanced resectability assessment, specialist availability, and bridge-to-surgery pathways.

British journal of surgeryVol. 113(Supplement_2)
NIHR Birmingham Biomedical Research Centre (GB)
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

SRS70 - Evaluating quality of colorectal cancer surgery across elective and emergency health systems: a secondary analysis of prospective cohort studies in 95 countries — Sivesh Kathir Kamarajah · British journal of surgery (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS