Many different options of neoadjuvant treatments for advanced colon cancer are emerging. An accurate preoperative staging is crucial to select the most appropriate treatment option. A retrospective study was carried out on a national series of operated patients with T4 tumors. Considering the anatomo-pathological analysis of the surgical specimen as the gold standard, a diagnostic accuracy study was carried out on the variables T and N staging and the presence of peritoneal metastases (M1c). The parameters calculated were sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios, as well as the overall accuracy. A total of 50 centers participated in the study in which 1950 patients were analyzed. The sensitivity of CT for correct staging of T4 colon tumors was 57%. Regarding N staging, the overall accuracy was 63%, with a sensitivity of 64% and a specificity of 62%; however, the positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.7 and 0.58, respectively. For the diagnosis of peritoneal metastases, the accuracy was 94.8%, with a sensitivity of 40% and specificity of 98%; in the case of peritoneal metastases, the positive and negative likelihood ratios were 24.4 and 0.61, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of CT in the setting of advanced colon cancer still has some shortcomings for accurate diagnosis of stage T4, correct classification of lymph nodes, and preoperative detection of peritoneal metastases.

Background: Prehabilitation has become an essential component of perioperative care in colorectal surgery, aiming to improve postoperative outcomes through multimodal interventions. However, its real-world implementation remains heterogeneous. This study aimed to evaluate the degree of implementation and variability of prehabilitation programs across colorectal surgery units in Spain. Methods: A national multicenter cross-sectional survey (VAPPER Survey) was conducted among colorectal surgery units. The questionnaire included 83 items addressing organizational structure, nutritional assessment, frailty screening, and multidisciplinary collaboration. Data were analyzed descriptively and expressed as frequencies and percentages. Results: A total of 104 hospitals participated. Prehabilitation programs were present in 79% (n = 82) of centers, while 21% (n = 22) reported no program. Nutritional screening was not performed in 21% (n = 22) of hospitals. Among those performing screening, MUST was the most frequently used tool (68%, n = 56), although considerable variability existed. Systematic use of GLIM criteria was reported in only 24% (n = 20), whereas 35% (n = 28) did not use GLIM and 41% (n = 34) applied it selectively. Frailty screening in patients ≥70 years was absent in 54% (n = 44) of centers, and geriatric involvement was limited and non-standardized. Conclusions: Prehabilitation is widely implemented in Spain but remains highly heterogeneous across all dimensions. The most relevant deficits are concentrated in systematic nutritional assessment, malnutrition diagnosis using standardized criteria, geriatric integration, and psychological support. Standardization of protocols, strengthening of multidisciplinary teams, and enhanced training in perioperative nutrition are priorities for optimizing outcomes in colorectal surgery.