Systematic review and a meta-analysis of hospital and surgeon volume/outcome relationships in colorectal cancer surgery

Supervised training of laparoscopic colorectal cancer resections does not adversely affect short- and long-term outcomes: a Propensity-score-matched cohort study

Background

Supervised training of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery to fellows and consultants (trainees) may raise doubts regarding safety and oncological adequacy. This study investigated these concerns by comparing the short- and long-term outcomes of matched supervised training cases to cases performed by the trainer himself.

Methods

A prospective database was analysed retrospectively. All elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer resections in curative intent of adult patients (≥ 18 years) which were performed (non-training cases) or supervised to trainees (training cases) by a single laparoscopic expert surgeon (trainer) were identified. All trainees were specialist surgeons in training for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Supervised training was standardised. Training cases were 1:1 propensity-score matched to non-training cases using age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, tumour site (rectum, left and right colon) and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumour stage. The resulting groups were analysed for both short- (operative, oncological, complications) and long-term (time to recurrence, overall and disease-free survival) outcomes.

Results

From 10/2006 to 2/2016, a total of 675 resections met the inclusion criteria, of which 95 were training cases. These resections were matched to 95 non-training cases. None of the matched covariates exhibited an imbalance greater than 0.25 (│d│>0.25). There were no significant differences in short- (length of procedure, conversion rate, blood loss, postoperative complications, R0 resections, lymph node harvest) and long-term outcomes. When comparing training cases to non-training cases, 5-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 71.6% (62.4–82.2) versus 81.9% (74.2–90.4) and 70.0% (60.8–80.6) versus 73.6% (64.9–83.3), respectively (not significant). The corresponding hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals, p) were 0.57 (0.32–1.02, p = 0.057) and 0.87 (0.51–1.48, p = 0.61), respectively (univariate Cox proportional hazard model).

Conclusions

Standardised supervised training of laparoscopic colorectal cancer procedures to specialist surgeons may not adversely impact short- and long-term outcomes. This result may also apply to newer surgical techniques as long as standardised teaching methods are followed.

Comparison of surgical outcomes for colostomy closure performed by acute care surgeons versus a dedicated colorectal surgery service

BACKGROUND

Despite colostomy closure being a common procedure, it remains highly morbid. Previous literature suggests that complication rates, including surgical site infections, intra-abdominal abscess, and anastomotic failures, reach as high as 50%. With the creation of a dedicated colorectal service, colostomy reversals have been largely migrated from the acute care surgery services. This study analyzes the differences in outcomes in colostomy closures performed between colorectal surgeons and acute care surgeons.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed our experience with 127 colostomy closures performed in our hospital system by acute care surgeons and colorectal surgeons from 2016 through 2020. Demographic data, operative data, and outcomes such as abscess formation, anastomotic leak, and readmission were analyzed. Multivariate regression analysis was performed for intraabdominal abscesses and anastomotic leaks.

RESULTS

In total, 71 colostomy closures were performed by colorectal surgeons (56%) and 56 by acute care surgeons (43%). The majority of colostomy reversals were after Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis. No differences in demographics were identified, except for a shorter interval to closure in the acute care surgeons group (10.0 vs 7.2 months; P = .049). Two (3.6%) acute care surgeon patients required colorectal surgeon consultation during the definitive repair. Regression analysis identified body mass index (odds ratio 2.43; P = .001), male gender (odds ratio -2.39; P = .18), and colorectal surgeons (odds ratio -2.28; P = .025) as significant risk factors for anastomotic leak.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of the current series identified female gender and increased body mass index as higher risk, while procedures performed by colorectal surgeons were at decreased risk for anastomotic leak. Our study identified colostomy reversals performed by a dedicated colorectal service decreased the rate of anastomotic leak.

Transanal Endoscopic Surgery: Who Should Be Doing This Procedure?

Transanal endoscopic surgery (TES) was introduced in the 1980s, but more widely adopted in the late 2000s with innovations in instrumentation and training. Moreover, the global adoption of minimally invasive approaches to abdominal procedures has led to translatable skills for TES among colorectal and general surgeons. While there are similarities to laparoscopic surgery, TES has unique challenges related to the narrow confines of intraluminal surgery, angled instrumentation, and relatively uncommon indications limiting the opportunity to practice. The following review discusses the current evidence on TES learning curves, including potential limitations related to the broad adoption of TES by general surgeons. This article aims to provide general recommendations for the safe expansion of TES.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Early postoperative discharge after colorectal surgery within the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines has been demonstrated to be safe, although its applicability has not been universal. The primary aim of this study was to identify the predictors of early discharge and readiness for discharge in a study population.

Methods

Early discharge was defined as discharge occurring in 72 h or less after surgery. The characteristics and clinical outcomes of the patients in the early and non-early discharge groups were compared, and variables associated with early discharge were identified. Additionally, independent variables associated with the readiness for discharge within 48 h were evaluated.

Results

Of 965 patients who underwent colorectal surgery between January 2015 and July 2020, 788 were included in this study. No differences in readmission, reoperation, or 30-day mortality were observed between the early and non-early discharge groups. Both early discharge and readiness for discharge had a positive association with adherence to 80 per cent or more of the ERAS items and a negative association with the female sex, duration of surgery, drain positioning, and postoperative complications.

Conclusion

Early discharge after colorectal surgery is safe and feasible, and is not associated with a high risk of readmission or reoperation. Discharge at 48 h can be reliably predicted in a subset of patients. Future studies should collect prospective data on early discharge related to safety, as well as patients’ expectations, possible organizational issues, and effective costs reduction in Italian clinical practice.

The Effect of Facility Volume on Survival Following Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Prior studies assessing colorectal cancer survival have reported better outcomes when operations are performed at high-volume centers. These studies have largely been cross-sectional, making it difficult to interpret their estimates. We aimed to assess the effect of facility volume on survival following proctectomy for rectal cancer.

METHODS

Using data from the National Cancer Database, we included all patients with complete baseline information who underwent proctectomy for non-metastatic rectal cancer between 2004 and 2016. Facility volume was defined as the number of rectal cancer cases managed at the treating center in the calendar year prior to the patient's surgery. Overall survival estimates were obtained for facility volumes ranging from 10 to 100 cases/year. Follow-up began on the day of surgery and continued until loss to follow-up or death.

RESULTS

A total of 52,822 patients were eligible. Patients operated on at hospitals with volumes of 10, 30, and 50 cases/year had similar distributions of grade, clinical stage, and neoadjuvant therapies. 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival all improved with increasing facility volume. One-year survival was 94.0% (95% CI: 93.7, 94.3) for hospitals that performed 10 cases/year, 94.5% (95% CI: 94.2, 94.7) for 30 cases/year, and 94.8% (95% CI: 94.5, 95.0) for 50 cases/year. Five-year survival was 68.9% (95% CI: 68.0, 69.7) for hospitals that performed 10 cases/year, 70.8% (95% CI: 70.1, 71.5) for 30 cases/year, and 72.0% (95% CI: 71.2, 72.8) for 50 cases/year.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment at a higher volume facility results in improved survival following proctectomy for rectal cancer, though the small benefits are less profound than previously reported.

European Society of Gynaecological Oncology quality indicators for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Quality of surgical care as a crucial component of a comprehensive multi-disciplinary management improves outcomes in patients with endometrial carcinoma, notably helping to avoid suboptimal surgical treatment. Quality indicators (QIs) enable healthcare professionals to measure their clinical management with regard to ideal standards of care.

OBJECTIVE

In order to complete its set of QIs for the surgical management of gynecological cancers, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) initiated the development of QIs for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma.

METHODS

QIs were based on scientific evidence and/or expert consensus. The development process included a systematic literature search for the identification of potential QIs and documentation of the scientific evidence, two consensus meetings of a group of international experts, an internal validation process, and external review by a large international panel of clinicians and patient representatives. QIs were defined using a structured format comprising metrics specifications, and targets. A scoring system was then developed to ensure applicability and feasibility of a future ESGO accreditation process based on these QIs for endometrial carcinoma surgery and support any institutional or governmental quality assurance programs.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine structural, process and outcome indicators were defined. QIs 1-5 are general indicators related to center case load, training, experience of the surgeon, structured multi-disciplinarity of the team and active participation in clinical research. QIs 6 and 7 are related to the adequate pre-operative investigations. QIs 8-22 are related to peri-operative standards of care. QI 23 is related to molecular markers for endometrial carcinoma diagnosis and as determinants for treatment decisions. QI 24 addresses the compliance of management of patients after primary surgical treatment with the standards of care. QIs 25-29 highlight the need for a systematic assessment of surgical morbidity and oncologic outcome as well as standardized and comprehensive documentation of surgical and pathological elements. Each QI was associated with a score. An assessment form including a scoring system was built as basis for ESGO accreditation of centers for endometrial cancer surgery.

Hospital Volume of Emergency General Surgery and its Impact on Inpatient Mortality for Geriatric Patients: Analysis From 3994 Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Previous investigations have shown a positive association between hospital volume of operations and clinical outcomes. However, it is unclear whether such relationships also apply to emergency surgery. We sought to examine the association between hospital case volume and inpatient mortality for 7 common emergency general surgery (EGS) operations among geriatric patients.

METHODS

This is a population based retrospective cohort study using the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Limited Dataset Files (LDS) from 2011 to 2013. The 7 most common emergency surgeries included (1) partial colectomy, (2) small-bowel resection (SBR), (3) cholecystectomy, (4) appendectomy, (5) lysis of adhesions (LOA), (6) operative management of peptic ulcer disease (PUD), and (7) laparotomy with the primary outcome being inpatient mortality. Risk-adjusted inpatient mortality was plotted against operative volume. Subsequently an operative volume threshold was calculated using a best fit regression method. Based on these estimates, high- and low-volume hospitals were compared to examine significance of outcomes. Significance was defined as P-value < .05.

RESULTS

The final cohort comprised of 414 779 patients from 3994 hospitals. The standardized mortality ratio (SMR) for high-volume centers were lower in 6 out of 8 surgeries examined. Small-bowel resection and partial colectomy operations had a significant decrease in mortality based on a volume threshold.

CONCLUSION

We observed decreased mortality with higher surgical volume for small-bowel resection and partial colectomy operations. Such differences may be related to practice patterns during the perioperative period, as complications related to the perioperative care were significantly lower for high-volume centers.

German oncology certification system for colorectal cancer - relative survival rates of a single certified centre vs. national and international registry data

Objectives

To evaluate how the certification of specialised Oncology Centres in Germany affects the relative survival of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) by means of national and international comparison.

Methods

Between 2007 and 2013, 675 patients with colorectal cancer, treated at the Hildesheim Hospital, an academic teaching hospital of the Hannover Medical School (MHH), were included. A follow-up of the entire patient group was performed until 2014. To obtain international data, a SEER-database search was done. The relative survival of 148,957 patients was compared to our data after 12, 36 and 60 months. For national survival data, we compared our rates with 41,988 patients of the Munich Cancer Registry (MCR).

Results

Relative survival at our institution tends to be higher in advanced tumour stages compared to national and international cancer registry data. Nationally we found only little variation in survival rates for low stages CRC (UICC I and II), colon, and rectal cancer. There were notable variations regarding relative survival rates for advanced CRC tumour stages (UICC IV). These variations were even more distinct for rectal cancer after 12, 36 and 60 months (Hildesheim Hospital: 89.9, 40.3, 30.1%; Munich Cancer Registry (MCR): 65.4, 28.7, 16.6%). The international comparison of CRC showed significantly higher relative survival rates for patients with advanced tumour stages after 12 months at our institution (77 vs. 54.9% for UICC IV; raw p<0.001).

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that patients with advanced tumour stages of CRC and especially rectal cancer benefit most from a multidisciplinary and guidelines-oriented treatment at Certified Oncology Centres. For a better evaluation of cancer treatment and improved national and international comparison, the creation of a centralised national cancer registry is necessary.

Association of age with treatment at high-volume hospitals and distance traveled for care, in patients with rectal cancer who seek curative resection

BACKGROUND

The association between volume and outcomes has led to recommendations that patients undergo surgery at high-volume centers. We aimed to determine if older patients with rectal cancer are undergoing operations at high-volume centers.

METHODS

We identified patients ≥50 years old who underwent rectal cancer resection using the NCDB (2004-2015). Tertiles were used to categorize facility volume and distance traveled.

RESULTS

Higher facility volume was associated with improved outcomes. Patients >75 years old were less likely than patients 50-59 years old to be treated at high-volume centers. Traveling >16.8 miles was associated with treatment at high-volume facilities, however patients >75 years old were less likely to travel >16.8 miles.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher facility volume is associated with improved outcomes after rectal cancer resection. However, older patients are less likely to be treated at high-volume facilities. Older patients travel shorter distances for care, suggesting that care integration across networks must be optimized.

Decline in surgeon volume after successful implementation of advanced laparoscopic surgery in gynecology: An undesired side effect?

INTRODUCTION

The implementation of advanced minimally invasive surgical (MIS) techniques has broadened. An extensive body of literature shows that high hospital and surgeon volumes lead to better patient outcomes. However, no information is available regarding volume trends in the post-implementation phase of MIS. This study investigated these trends and poses suggestions to adjust these developments. This knowledge can provide guidance to optimize patient safe performance of new surgical techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A national retrospective cohort study in the Netherlands. The number of advanced laparoscopic (level 3 and 4) and robotic procedures and the number of gynecologists performing them were collected through a web-based questionnaire to determine hospital and gynecological surgeon volume. These volumes were compared with our previously collected data from 2012.

RESULTS

The response rate was 85%. Hospitals produced larger volumes for advanced laparoscopic and robotic procedures. However, still 63% of the hospitals perform low-volume level 4 laparoscopic procedures. Additionally, gynecological surgeon volumes appeared to decrease for level 3 procedures, as the group of gynecologists performing fewer than 20 procedures expanded (64% vs. 44% in 2012), with 15% of the gynecologists performing fewer than ten procedures. Despite an increase in surgeon volumes for level 4 laparoscopy and robotic surgery, volumes continued to be low, as still 49% of gynecologists performed fewer than 10 level 4 procedures per year and 41% performed fewer than 20 robotic procedures per year.

CONCLUSIONS

The broad implementation of advanced MIS procedures resulted in an increasing number of these procedures with increasing hospital volumes. However, as a side-effect, a disproportionate rise in number of gynecologists performing these procedures was observed. Therefore, surgeon volumes remain low and even decreased for some procedures. Centralization of complex procedures and training of specialized MIS gynecologists could improve surgeon volumes and therefore consequently enhance patient safety.

Clarifying the Role of the Modern General Surgeon: The Effect of Specialization on Inpatient Practice Patterns in General Surgery

OBJECTIVE

The growing concentration of fellowship-trained and integrated residency-trained subspecialty surgeons has encroached on the breadth and volume of a so-called "true" general surgery practice, leaving the role of new general surgeons in flux. We aimed to describe the surgical practice of new general surgeons with and without subspecialty fellowship training.

DESIGN

In this retrospective cohort study, state discharge data was linked to American Medical Association Masterfile and American Hospital Association annual survey data. New-to-practice general surgeons with and without subspecialty board-certification in colorectal surgery (CRS) or cardiothoracic surgery (CTS) were identified in 2008, and followed over 10 years. Surgeon overall inpatient case volume, colorectal resection case volume, and thoracic lobectomy case volume were compared between surgeons with and without related subspecialty training.

SETTING

NY and FL (2008-2017).

PARTICIPANTS

The study population included 276 new-to-practice surgeons with mean age of 36.9 years. New-to-practice surgeons were defined as those with zero to three years of experience in 2008.

RESULTS

Of all surgeons, 11.2% were subspecialty board-certified in CRS and 11.6% were subspecialty board-certified in CTS. Board-certified CRS surgeons performed more colorectal resections than the non-CRS general surgeons each year (p-value <0.001 for all). Overall, non-CRS general surgeons performed 60.7% of all colorectal resections. Board-certified CTS surgeons performed more thoracic lobectomies than non-CTS surgeons each year. Non-CTS surgeons performed 1.1% of all thoracic lobectomies.

CONCLUSIONS

On average, new subspecialty surgeons perform significantly more specialty operations than non-subspecialty new general surgeons. However, as a group, new non-colorectal general surgeons perform the majority of colorectal resections. In contrast, new non-cardiothoracic general surgeons perform less than two percent of the thoracic lobectomies. This may have implications for a shift in the training paradigm going forward.

Defining a minimum hospital volume threshold for minimally invasive colon cancer resections

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic colectomy is considered the standard of care in colon cancer treatment when appropriate expertise is available. However, guidelines do not delineate what experience is required to implement this approach safely and effectively. This study aimed to establish a data-derived, hospital-level annual volume threshold for laparoscopic colectomy at which patient outcomes are optimized.

METHODS

This evaluation included 44,157 stage I to III adenocarcinoma patients aged ≥40 years who underwent laparoscopic colon resection between 2010 and 2015 within the National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was overall survival, with 30- and 90-day mortality, duration of stay, days to receipt of chemotherapy, and number of lymph nodes examined as secondary. Segmented logistic and Cox regression models were used to identify volume thresholds which optimized these outcomes.

RESULTS

In hospitals performing ≥30 laparoscopic colectomies per year there were incremental improvements in overall survival for each additional resection beyond 30. Hospitals performing ≥30 procedures/year demonstrated improved 30-day mortality (1.3% vs 1.7%, P < .001), 90-day mortality (2.3% vs 2.9%, P < .001), and overall survival (84.3% vs 82.3%, P < .001). Those hospitals performing <30 procedures/year had no significant benefit in overall survival. Thresholds were not identified for any other outcomes. Results were comparable in colon cancer patients with stage IV or multiple cancers.

CONCLUSION

A high-volume hospital threshold of ≥30 cases/year for laparoscopic colectomies is associated with improved patient survival and outcomes. A minimum volume standard may help providers determine which approach is most suitable for their hospital's practice as open procedures may yield better oncologic results in low volume settings.

Postoperative morbidity and mortality after surgical resection of small bowel neuroendocrine neoplasms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Although small bowel resection is generally considered a low risk gastrointestinal procedure, this might not be true for small bowel neuroendocrine neoplasms (SB-NEN) as a result of potential central mesenteric involvement. We aimed to determine the reported morbidity and mortality after resection of SB-NEN in the literature and assess the effect of hospital volume on postoperative morbidity and mortality. A systematic review was performed by searching MEDLINE and Embase in March 2021. All studies reporting morbidity and/or mortality after SB-NEN resection were included. Pooled proportions of overall morbidity (Clavien-Dindo I-IV), severe morbidity (Clavien-Dindo III-IV), 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality and in-hospital mortality were calculated, as well as the association with hospital volume (high volume defined as the fourth quartile). Thirteen studies were included, with a total of 1087 patients. Pooled proportions revealed an overall morbidity of 13% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 7%-24%, I²  = 90%), severe morbidity of 7% (95% CI = 4%-14%, I²  = 70%), 30-day mortality of 2% (95% CI = 1%-3%, I²  = 0%), 90-day mortality of2% (95% CI = 2%-4%, I²  = 35%) and in-hospital mortality of 1% (95% CI = 0%-2%, I²  = 0%). An annual hospital volume of nine or more resections was associated with lower overall and severe morbidity compared to lower volume: 10% vs 15% and 4% vs 9%, respectively. Thirty-day mortality was similar (2% vs 1%) and 90-day mortality was higher in high-volume hospitals: 4% vs 1%. This systematic review with meta-analyses showed severe morbidity of 7% and low mortality rates after resection of SB-NEN. The currently available literature suggests a certain impact of hospital volume on postoperative outcomes, although heterogeneity among the included studies constrains interpretation.

Surgery for rectal cancer: Differences in resection rates among hospitals in the Netherlands

AIM

Numerous quality improvement initiatives for rectal cancer surgery have focused on textbook outcome parameters. In these studies, resection rate and patients who did not undergo surgery are not included, but these parameters might help to evaluate the surgical care for rectal cancer. The aim of this study is to assess the variation of non-metastatic rectal cancer resection rates among hospitals and its effect on patient outcomes.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with non-metastatic rectal cancer between 2013 and 2018 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Hospitals were categorized in quartiles according to resection rates. A multivariable logistic analysis was performed to determine variation in resection rate between these quartiles using a logistic regression analysis to correct for confounders. The association between resection rates and survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox-regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 22,530 patients were included in the analysis. Resection rates varied from 68 to 89% between hospitals. After multivariable analysis, resection rate remained significantly different among the quartiles when correcting for several factors (odds ratio (95%Confidence-interval) 1.71 (1.56-1.88), 2.42 (2.19-2.67), and 4.04 (3.61-4.53) for increasing resection rate quartiles, in reference to the lowest quartile). A higher resection rate was associated with better overall survival, in multivariable analysis this survival benefit could no longer be identified.

CONCLUSION

There is a substantial variation in resection rates for rectal cancer among hospitals in the Netherlands with an impact on overall survival. This may be a relevant issue when analyzing the overall quality of rectal cancer care.

Volume-outcome relationship in rectal cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Hospital centralization effect is reported to lower complications and mortality for high risk and complex surgery operations, including colorectal surgery. However, no linear relation between volume and outcome has been demonstrated. Aim of the study was to evaluate the increased surgical volume effect on early outcomes of patient undergoing laparoscopic restorative anterior rectal resection (ARR).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients undergoing ARR with primary anastomosis between November 2016 and December 2020 after centralization of rectal cancer cases in an academic Centre. Short-term outcomes are compared to those of patients operated in the same unit during the previous 10 years before service centralization. The primary outcome was estimated anastomotic leak rate. Mean operative time, need of conversion, postoperative use of blood transfusion, radicality, in-hospital stay, number and type of complications, readmission and reoperation rate, mortality and 1-year and stoma persistence rates were evaluated as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

86 patients were operated in the study period and outcomes compared to those of 101 patients operated during the previous ten years. Difference in volume of surgery was significant between the two periods (p 0.019) and the estimated leak rate was significantly lower in the higher volume unit (p 0.047). Mean operative time, need of conversion, postoperative use of blood transfusion and in-hospital stay (p < 0.05) were also significantly reduced in Group A.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that the shift toward higher volume in rectal cancer surgery is associated to decreased anastomotic leak rate. Potentiation of lower volume surgical units may yield optimal perioperative outcomes.

Simultaneous Resection of Primary Colorectal Cancer and Synchronous Liver Metastases: Contemporary Practice, Evidence and Knowledge Gaps

The timing of surgical resection of synchronous liver metastases from colorectal cancer has been debated for decades. Several strategies have been proposed, but high-level evidence remains scarce. Simultaneous resection of the primary tumour and liver metastases has been described in numerous retrospective audits and meta-analyses. The potential benefits of simultaneous resections are the eradication of the tumour burden in one procedure, overall shorter procedure time, reduced hospital stay with the likely benefits on quality of life and an expected reduction in the use of health care services compared to staged procedures. However, concerns about accumulating complications and oncological outcomes remain and the optimal selection criteria for whom simultaneous resections are beneficial remains undetermined. Based on the current level of evidence, simultaneous resection should be restricted to patients with a limited liver tumour burden. More high-level evidence studies are needed to evaluate the quality of life, complication burden, oncological outcomes, as well as overall health care implications for simultaneous resections.

Reasons for delay in timely administration of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer: a multicentre cohort study from the McGill University Department of Oncology

PURPOSE

Adjuvant chemotherapy within 56 or 84 days following curative resection is globally accepted as the standard of care for stage III colon cancer as it has been associated with improved overall survival. Initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy within this time frame is therefore recommended by clinical practice guidelines, including the European Society for Medical Oncology. The objective of this study was to evaluate adherence to these clinical practice guidelines for patients with stage III colon cancer across the Rossy Cancer Network (RCN); a partnership of McGill University's Faculty of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Jewish General Hospital and St Mary's Hospital Center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

187 patients who had been diagnosed with stage III colon cancer and received adjuvant chemotherapy within the RCN partner hospitals from 2012 to 2015 were included. Patient and treatment information was retrospectively determined by chart review. Χ² and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to measure associations and a multivariate Cox regression model was used to determine risk factors contributing to delays in administration of adjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The median turnaround time between surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy was 69 days. Importantly, only 27% of patients met the 56-day target, and 71% met the 84-day target. Increasing age, having more than one surgical complication and being diagnosed between 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 reduced the likelihood that patients met these targets. Furthermore, delays were observed at most intervals from surgery to first adjuvant chemotherapy treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our study found that within these academic hospital settings, 27% of patients met the 56-day target, and 71% met the 84-day target. Delays were associated with hospital, surgeon and patient-related factors. Initiatives in quality improvement are needed in order to improve adherence to recommended treatment guidelines for prompt administration of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer.

Outcomes after the regionalization of care for high-grade endometrial cancers: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

In June 2013, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), the agency responsible for advancing cancer care in Ontario, Canada, published practice guidelines recommending that gynecologic oncologists at tertiary care centers manage the treatment of patients with high-grade endometrial cancers. This study examines the effects of this regionalization of care on patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the regionalization of surgery for high-grade endometrial cancer on patient and treatment outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

In this retrospective cohort study, patients diagnosed with nonendometrioid high-grade endometrial cancer from 2003 to 2017 were identified using province-wide administrative databases. To allow 6 months for knowledge translation, 2 periods were defined, with January 1, 2014, as the cutoff. Methods for segmented regression were used to test the effect of the guidelines. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate whether regionalization of care had an impact on patient survival.

RESULTS

There were 3518 patients with nonendometrioid high-grade endometrial cancer identified. The case mix as represented by patient comorbidities and the disease stage distribution did not differ significantly between the 2 regionalization periods. There was a significant increase (69%-85%; P<.001) in the proportion of primary surgeries performed by gynecologic oncologists after regionalization, which was not explained by secular trends. After regionalization, the proportion of patients who had surgical staging (50%-63%; P<.001) and the proportion of patients who received adjuvant treatment (65%-71%; P<.001) increased significantly. After adjusting for age, stage, and comorbidities, there was a decrease in the hazard of mortality (hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.99]; P=.04) after regionalization.

CONCLUSION

The publication of a regionalization policy for the treatment of high-grade endometrial cancers in Ontario led to an increase in the proportion of surgeries performed by gynecologic oncologists. This also translated into a significant improvement in patient survival.

Subtotal colectomy, extended right hemicolectomy, left hemicolectomy, or splenic flexure colectomy for splenic flexure tumors: a network meta-analysis

AIM

To perform a network meta-analysis of the current literature to evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes of four operations for splenic flexure tumors.

METHODS

An electronic literature search of PubMed, Baidu Scholar, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was performed up to August 2020. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was utilized to compare the outcomes involved in subtotal colectomy (STC), extended right hemicolectomy (ERHC), standard left hemicolectomy (LHC), and splenic flexure colectomy (SFC) by using R software.

RESULTS

A total of 10 non-randomized studies were included in this meta-analysis. There was no statistically significant difference among these 4 surgical techniques in terms of the utilization rate of minimally invasive surgery, reoperative surgery, anastomotic dehiscence, mortality, the proportion of patients with the number of lymph nodes harvested ≥ 12, local recurrence, distant recurrence and overall survival. Although ERHC was associated with a higher risk of postoperative ileus (ERHC vs SFC, OR = 6.4, 95% CI 1.4-45.0, P = 0.019), it has an advantage of a higher rate of primary anastomosis (ERHC vs LHC, OR = 4.2, 95% CI 1.3-18.0, P = 0.019) and a non-significant trend for lower anastomotic dehiscence when compared with more restrict resections.

CONCLUSION

SFC, LHC, ERHC and STC for the curative resection of splenic flexure tumors provide similar survival. An individualized surgical plan considering both long-term and short-term outcomes is necessary to select the appropriate operations.

Impact of Treatment Coordination on Overall Survival in Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer treatment is often multimodal, comprising of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy. However, the impact of coordination between these modalities is currently unknown. We aimed to assess whether delivery of nonsurgical therapy within same facility as surgery impacts survival in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

A patient cohort with rectal cancer stages II to IV who received multimodal treatment between 2004 and 2016 from National Cancer Database was retrospectively analyzed. Patients were categorized into three groups: (A) surgery + chemotherapy + radiotherapy at same facility (surgery + 2); (B) surgery + chemotherapy or radiotherapy at same facility (surgery + 1); or (C) only surgery at reporting facility (chemotherapy + radiotherapy elsewhere; surgery + 0). The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS), analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and Cox proportional-hazards models.

RESULTS

A total of 44,716 patients (16,985 [37.98%] surgery + 2, 12,317 [27.54%] surgery + 1, and 15,414 [34.47%] surgery + 0) were included. In univariate analysis, we observed that surgery+2 patients had significantly greater 5-year OS compared to surgery + 1 or surgery + 0 patients (5-year OS: 63.46% vs 62.50% vs 61.41%, respectively; P= .002). We observed similar results in multivariable Cox proportional-hazards analysis, with surgery + 0 group demonstrating increased hazard of mortality when compared to surgery + 2 group (HR: 1.09; P< .001). These results held true after stratification by stage for stage II (HR 1.10; P= .022) and stage III (HR 1.12; P< .001) but not for stage IV (P= .474).

CONCLUSION

Greater degree of care coordination within the same facility is associated with greater OS in patients with stage II to III rectal cancer. This finding illustrates the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration in multimodal rectal cancer therapy.

The Influence of Hospital Volume on the Outcomes of Nasopharyngeal, Sinonasal, and Skull-Base Tumors: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Objective: The center of excellence model of health care hypothesizes that increased volume in a specialized center will lead to better and more affordable care. We sought to characterize the volume-outcome data for surgically treated sinonasal and skull base tumors and (chemo) radiation-treated nasopharyngeal malignancy.

Design:  Systematic review of the literature.

Setting: This review included national database and multi-institutional studies published between 1990 and 2019.

Participants: PubMed was interrogated for keywords “hospital volume,” “facility volume,” and outcomes for “Nasopharyngeal carcinoma,” “Sinonasal carcinomas,” “Pituitary Tumors,” “Acoustic Neuromas,” “Chordomas,” and “Skull Base Tumors” to identify studies. Single-institution studies and self-reported surveys were excluded.

Main outcome measures: The main outcome of interest in malignant pathologies was survival; and in benign pathologies it was treatment-related complications.

Results: A total of 20 studies met inclusion criteria. The average number of patients per study was 4,052, and ranged from 394 to 9,950 patients. Six of seven studies on malignant pathology demonstrated improved survival with treatment in high volume centers and one showed no association with survival. Ten of thirteen studies on benign disease showed reduced risk of complications, while one study demonstrated both an increased and decreased association of complications. Two studies showed no volume-outcome associations.

Conclusion: This systematic review demonstrates that a positive volume–outcome relationship exists for most pathologies of the skull base, with some exceptions. The relative dearth of literature supports further research to understand the effect of centralization of care on treatment outcomes.

Facility volume-survival relationship in patients with early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

There is evidence that neoadjuvant therapy is associated with improved survival compared with upfront pancreatectomy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Treatment at high-volume pancreatic surgery centers is associated with improved short-term postoperative outcomes compared with low-volume centers. We compared overall survival of patients with early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant therapy before resection stratified by facility volume.

METHODS

Patients with clinical T0 to T2 pancreatic adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant therapy before pancreatoduodenectomy were identified in the National Cancer Database (2010-2016). High-volume pancreatic surgery centers performed ≥36 pancreatectomies/year. Patients were matched 1:1 by propensity score. Pathologic outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and overall survival were compared.

RESULTS

Before matching, 1,449 patients were treated at low-volume centers and 250 at high-volume pancreatic surgery centers. After matching, there were 177 patients per group. High-volume pancreatic surgery centers were more commonly academic/research facilities (99.4% vs 54.0%; P < .001), and patients traveled greater distances (65 vs 13 miles; P < .001). Time from diagnosis to neoadjuvant therapy and surgery was similar. Treatment at high-volume pancreatic surgery centers was associated with shorter duration of stay (7 vs 8 days; P = .003) and lower 90-day mortality rate after pancreatoduodenectomy (0.0% vs 5.0%; P = .01). Patients treated at high-volume pancreatic surgery centers had improved overall survival (36.3 vs 29.4 months; P = .03; hazard ratio 0.73). On subset analysis of academic/research facilities, high-volume pancreatic surgery centers remained associated with shorter duration of stay, lower 90-day mortality, and greater overall survival.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy for early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma received care at low-volume centers. Treatment at high-volume pancreatic surgery centers was associated with improved overall survival and short-term postoperative outcomes.

Hybrid Surgical Simulator: A Temporal Bone Simulator Validation Study of the Stryker Surgical Simulator (S3)

INTRODUCTION

The Stryker Surgical Simulator is a hybrid, temporal bone simulator that uses both tactile and haptic feedback combined with a computer interface. We sought to validate this simulator as an otolaryngology resident training tool for performing tympanomastoidectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

15 residents and staff performed five basic cortical mastoidectomies. Staff surgeons comprised the "expert" cohort and resident surgeons comprised the "trainee" cohort. Subjective evaluation of the face validity and content validity was assessed via pre- and postquestionnaires. Objective evaluation of content validity was assessed through grading of each temporal bone dissection specimen, comparing time to task completion, and calculating the rate of injury to critical structures. Study approved by the Institutional Review Board (2013.0001).

RESULTS

Post hoc questionnaires showed that both staff and residents subjectively rated the simulator favorably on face validity, content validity, and all global assessment categories, though there were no significant distinctions between groups (P > 0.05). The resident group had a significantly longer drilling time compared with the staff group throughout the series of tympanomastoidectomies (P = 0.008), and both groups showed a decrease in time to task completion with repetitive drilling. However, there were no significant differences in surgical performance as evaluated by a blinded senior neurotologist (P = 0.52). There were also no critical injuries recorded by the simulator in any of the 75 trials, preventing any evaluation on this measure.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite favorable subjective evaluations by both staff and residents, objective discrimination between experienced and novice participants was not achieved. This was likely in part due to inherent design flaws of the simulator. This emphasizes the potential shortcomings of surgical simulation models for highly technical procedures and points to the importance of intensive study and validation prior to incorporation of commercial training models into surgical training programs.

Risk Factors of Redo Surgery After Unilateral Focused Parathyroidectomy: Conclusions From a Comprehensive Nationwide Database of 13,247 Interventions Over 6 Years

BACKGROUND

Surgical removal of hyperfunctional parathyroid gland is the definitive treatment for primary hyperparathyroidism (pHPT). Postoperative follow-up shows variability in persistent/recurrent disease rate throughout different centers.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incidence of redo surgery after targeted parathyroidectomy for pHPT.

METHODS

We performed a nationwide retrospective cohort study on the "Programme de Medicalisation des Systemes d'Information," the French administrative database that collects information on all healthcare facilities' discharges. We extracted data from 2009 to 2018 for all patients who underwent parathyroidectomy for pHPT between January 2011 to December 2016. The primary outcome was the reoperation rate within 2 years since first surgery. Patients who had a first attempt of surgery within the previous 24 months, familial hyperparathyroidism, multiglandular disease, and renal failure were excluded. Results were adjusted according to sex and the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. Operative volume thresholds to define high-volume centers were achieved by the Chi-Squared Automatic Interaction Detector method.

RESULTS

In the study period, 13,247 patients (median age 63, F/M=3.6) had a focused parathyroidectomy by open (88.7%) or endoscopic approach. Need of remedial surgery was 2.8% at 2 years. In multivariate analysis, factors predicting redo surgery were: cardiac history (P=0.008), obesity (P=0.048), endoscopic approach (P=0.005), and low-volume center (P<0.001). We evaluated that an annual caseload of 31 parathyroidectomies was the best threshold to discriminate high-volume centers and carries the lowest morbidity/failure rate.

CONCLUSION

Although focused parathyroidectomy represents a standardized operation, cure rate is strongly associated with annual hospital caseload, type of procedure (endoscopic), and patients' features (obesity, cardiac history). Patients with risk factors for redo surgery should be considered for an open surgery in a high-volume center.

Distribution of Elective Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis Cases for Ulcerative Colitis: a Study Utilizing the University Health System Consortium Database

BACKGROUND

Trends and distribution of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) procedures for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are unknown. We examined the frequency, distribution, and volume-outcome relationship for this relatively infrequent procedure using a large national data source.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC) for patients with a primary diagnosis of UC admitted electively and who underwent surgical intervention between 2012 and 2015.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study population (n = 6875) was 43 years and 57% were men. Among these, one-third (n = 2307) underwent an IPAA, while 24% (n = 1160) underwent total abdominal colectomy, 16% (n = 1134) underwent proctectomy, and 2% (n = 108) underwent total proctocolectomy with end ileostomy. The frequency of IPAA cases among all elective surgical cases was relatively stable at 33-35% over the study period. A total of 131 hospitals, out of 279 hospitals participating in the UHC (47%), performed IPAA. UHC contains all inpatient data on more than 140 (> 90%) academic medical centers in the US and their affiliates. Most hospitals (101) performed < 5 cases annually. The median number of IPAA cases performed annually was 1.8 [IQR 0.8 - 4.3]. The top 10 hospitals performed one-half (48%) of IPAA cases, but only 18% of another type of complex pelvic dissection cases such as low anterior resection. Short-term postoperative complications after IPAA, however, were similar regardless of IPAA volume.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one-half of IPAA cases were performed at only 10 hospitals out of the 131 hospitals performing IPAA in the study. IPAA procedures are infrequently performed by most academic medical centers in the US. The redistribution of IPAA procedures, likely a result of previously established referral patterns and centralization, has a potential impact on the training of future colorectal fellows as well as access to care.

Do small hospitals have lower quality? Evidence from the English NHS

We investigate the extent to which small hospitals are associated with lower quality. We first take a patient perspective, and test if, controlling for casemix, patients admitted to small hospitals receive lower quality than those admitted to larger hospitals. We then investigate if differences in quality between large and small hospitals can be explained by hospital characteristics such as hospital type and staffing. We use a range of quality measures including hospital mortality rates (overall and for specific conditions), hospital acquired infection rates, waiting times for emergency patients, and patient perceptions of the care they receive. We find that small hospitals, with fewer than 400 beds, are generally not associated with lower quality before or after controlling for hospital characteristics. The only exception is heart attack mortality, which is generally higher in small hospitals.

Provider caseload volume and short-term outcomes following colorectal surgeries in New Brunswick: a provincial-level cohort study

BACKGROUND

American studies have shown that higher provider and hospital volumes are associated with reduced risk of mortality following colorectal surgical interventions. Evidence from Canada is limited, and to our knowledge only a single study has considered outcomes other than death. We describe associations between provider surgical volume and all-cause mortality and postoperative complications following colorectal surgical interventions in New Brunswick.

METHODS

We used hospital discharge abstracts linked to vital statistics, the provincial cancer registry and patient registry data. We considered all admissions for colorectal surgeries from 2007 through 2013. We used logistic regression to identify odds of dying and odds of complications (from any of anastomosis leak, unplanned colostomy, intra-abdominal sepsis or pneumonia) within 30 days of discharge from hospital according to provider volume (i.e., total interventions performed over the preceding 2 years) adjusted for personal, contextual, provider and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

Overall, 9170 interventions were performed by 125 providers across 18 hospitals. We found decreased odds of experiencing a complication following colorectal surgery per increment of 10 interventions performed per year (odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.91-0.96). We found no associations with mortality. Associations remained consistent across models restricted to cancer patients or to interventions performed by general surgeons and across models that also considered overall hospital volumes.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that increased caseloads are associated with reduced odds of complications, but not with all-cause mortality, following colorectal surgery in New Brunswick. We also found no evidence of volume having differential effects on outcomes from colon and rectal procedures.

Patterns and characteristics of patients' selection of cancer surgeons

OBJECTIVE

Despite evidence of volume-outcome relationships for cancer surgery, treatment at low-volume hospitals remains common. Our objective was to evaluate whether individuals actively involved in selecting their cancer surgeon were more likely to go to hospitals recognized for quality cancer care.

METHODS

Individuals diagnosed with breast, prostate and colorectal cancer in 2015 completed online surveys in 2017-2018. Participants were categorized as "directed" to a surgeon (relied on referral) or "active" (sought additional information), and hospitals were categorized by NCI-designation, CoC accreditation, and academic affiliation.

RESULTS

Of 299 participants, 42% were active. Individuals with breast cancer were more active (aOR = 2.46,95%CI:1.32-4.59). Active participants had nonsignificantly higher odds of surgery at NCI-designated facilities (aOR = 2.04,95%CI:0.95-4.38), or academic centers (aOR = 1.51,95%CI:0.86-2.64).

CONCLUSIONS

While most participants were directed to their cancer surgeon, active participants tended to select NCI-designated/academic hospitals. Although centralization of cancer care would require altering referral patterns, decision-support resources may help patients make informed choices.

Provider Viewpoints in the Management and Referral of Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with rectal cancer treated at specialized or high-volume hospitals have better outcomes, but a minority of these patients are treated there. Physician recommendations are important considerations for patients with rectal cancer when making treatment decisions, yet little is known about the factors that affect these physician referral patterns.

METHODS

Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted in 2018-2019 with Iowa gastroenterologists (GIs) and general surgeons (GSs) who performed colonoscopies in a community setting. A thematic approach was used to analyze and code qualitative data.

RESULTS

We interviewed 10 GIs and 6 GSs with self-reported averages of 15.5 y in practice, 1100 endoscopic procedures annually, and 6 rectal cancer diagnoses annually. Physicians believed surgeon experience and colorectal specialization were directly related to positive outcomes in rectal cancer resections. Most GSs performed resections on patients they diagnosed and typically only referred patients to colorectal surgeons (CRS) in complex cases. Conversely, GIs generally referred to CRS in all cases. Adhering to existing referral patterns due to the pressure of health care networks was a salient theme for both GIs and GSs.

CONCLUSIONS

While respondents believe that high volume/specialization is related to improved surgical outcomes, referral recommendations are heavily influenced by existing referral networks. Referral practices also differ by diagnosing specialty and suggest rural patients may be less likely to be referred to a CRS because more GSs perform colonoscopies in rural areas and tend to keep patients for resection. System-level interventions that target referral networks may improve rectal cancer outcomes at the population level.

Impact of hospital volume on outcomes after emergency management of obstructive colon cancer: a nationwide study of 1957 patients

PURPOSE

Volume-outcome relationship is well established in elective colorectal surgery for cancer, but little is known for patients managed for obstructive colon cancer (OCC). We aimed to compare the management and outcomes according to the hospital volume in this particular setting.

METHODS

Patients managed for OCC between 2005 and 2015 in centers of the French National Surgical Association were retrospectively analyzed. Hospital volume was dichotomized between low and high volume on the median number of patients included per center during the study period.

RESULTS

A total of 1957 patients with OCC were managed in 56 centers with a median number of 28 (1-123) patients per center: 298 (15%) were treated in low-volume hospitals (LVHs) and 1659 (85%) in high-volume hospitals (HVHs). Patients in LVH were significantly younger, and had fewer comorbidities and synchronous metastases. Proximal diverting stoma was the preferred surgical option in LVH (p < 0.0001), whereas tumor resection with primary anastomosis was more frequently performed in HVH (p < 0.0001). Cumulative morbidity (59 vs. 50%, p = 0.003), mortality (13 vs. 8%, p = 0.03), and length of hospital stay (22 ± 19 vs. 18 ± 14 days, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in LVH. At multivariate analysis, LVH was a predictor for cumulative morbidity (p < 0.0001) and mortality (p = 0.03). There was no difference between the two groups for tumor resection and stoma rates, and for oncological outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The hospital volume has no impact on outcomes after the first-stage surgery in OCC patients. When all surgical stages are considered, hospital volume influences cumulative postoperative morbidity and mortality but has no impact on oncological outcomes.

Comparison of survival of stage I-III colon cancer by travel distance and hospital volume

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated improved outcomes at high-volume colorectal surgery centers; however, the benefit for patients who live far from such centers has not been assessed relative to local, low-volume facilities.

METHODS

The 2010-2015 National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with stage I-III colon adenocarcinoma undergoing treatment at a single center. A 'local, low-volume' cohort was constructed of 12,768 patients in the bottom quartile of travel distance at the bottom quartile of institution surgical volume and a 'travel, high-volume' cohort of 11,349 patients in the top quartile of travel distance at the top quartile of institution surgical volume.

RESULTS

In unadjusted analysis, patients in the travel cohort had improved rates of positive resection margins (3.7% vs. 5.5%, p < 0.001), adequate lymph-node harvests (92% vs. 83.6%, p < 0.001), and 30- (2.2% vs. 3.9%, p < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (3.7% vs. 6.4%, p < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusting for patient demographic, tumor, and facility characteristics, the cohorts demonstrated equivalent overall survival (HR: 0.972, p = 0.39), with improved secondary outcomes in the 'travel' cohort of adequate lymph-node harvesting (OR: 0.57, p < 0.001), and 30- (OR 0.79, p = 0.019) and 90-day mortality (OR 0.80, p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with stage I-III colon cancer, traveling to high-volume institutions compared to local, low-volume centers does not convey an overall survival benefit. However, given advantages including 30- and 90-day mortality and adequate lymph-node harvest, nuanced patient recommendations should consider both these differences and the unquantified benefits to local care, including cost, travel time, and support systems.

Implementing new surgical technology: a national perspective on case volume requirement for proficiency in transanal total mesorectal excision

Background

Early data suggest that transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a safe alternative to the abdominal approach for rectal cancer. This study aims to understand the approach to the management of rectal cancer in Canada and to ascertain perspectives on introducing TaTME.

Methods

Surgeons were invited to complete a survey that asked about their management practices relating to rectal cancer and their opinions regarding TaTME.

Results

Ninety-four surgeons completed the survey (38% response rate). The number of rectal cancer cases handled annually by surgeons varied widely (1–80 cases, median 15 cases). Twenty-seven percent of respondents performed TaTME at the time of the survey, and 43% of those who did not said they planned on learning the technique. Surgeons who performed TaTME felt that a higher annual volume of rectal cancer cases was required to maintain proficiency than did non-TaTME surgeons (median 20 cases [interquartile range (IQR) 15–25 cases] v. 15 cases [IQR 10–20 cases]). Surgeons who performed TaTME also felt that a higher annual volume of TaTME cases was required to maintain proficiency (median 12 cases [IQR 10–19 cases] v. 9 cases [IQR 5–10 cases]).

Conclusion

These findings help define the current practice environment for rectal cancer surgeons in Canada and highlight the complex issues associated with learning TaTME.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between laparoscopic and open surgery for left-sided colon cancer: a nationwide population-based study

The role of laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer has been supported by the results of randomized controlled trials. However, its benefits and disadvantages in the real world setting should be further assessed with population-based studies.The hospitalization data of patients undergoing open or laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer were sourced from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Patient and hospital characteristics and perioperative outcomes including length of hospital stay, operation time, opioid use, blood transfusion, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and use of mechanical ventilation were compared. The overall survival was also assessed. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery had shorter hospital stay (p < 0.0001) and less demand for opioid analgesia (p = 0.0005). Further logistic regression revealed that patients undergoing open surgery were 1.70, 2.89, and 3.00 times more likely to have blood transfusion, to be admitted to ICU, and to use mechanical ventilation than patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Operations performed in medical centers were also associated with less adverse events. The overall survival was comparable between the 2 groups.With adequate hospital quality and volume, laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer was associated with improved perioperative outcomes. The long-term survival was not compromised.

State-wide outcomes in elective rectal cancer resection: is there a case for centralization in Victoria?

BACKGROUND

The role of service centralization in rectal cancer surgery is controversial. Recent studies suggest centralization to high-volume centres may improve postoperative mortality. We used a state-wide administrative data set to determine the inpatient mortality for patients undergoing elective rectal cancer surgery and to compare individual hospital volumes.

METHODS

The Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset was explored using the Dr Foster Quality Investigator tool. The inpatient mortality rate, 30-day readmission rate and the proportion of patients with increased length of stay were measured for all elective admissions for rectal cancer resections between 2012 and 2016. A peer group of 14 hospitals were studied using funnel plots to determine inter-hospital variation in mortality. Procedure types were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

There were 2241 elective resections performed for rectal cancer in Victoria over 4 years. The crude inpatient mortality rate was 1.1%. There were no significant differences in mortality among 14 hospitals within the peer group. The number of elective resections over 4 years ranged from 14 to 136 (median 65) within these institutions. Ultralow anterior resection was the commonest procedure performed.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient mortality after elective rectal cancer surgery in Victoria is rare and compares favourably internationally. Based on inpatient mortality alone, there is no compelling evidence to further centralize elective rectal cancer surgery in Victoria. More work is needed to develop data sets with oncological information capable of providing accurate complete state-wide data which will be essential for future service planning, training and innovation.

Outcomes following colorectal cancer surgery: Results from a population-based study in Queensland, Australia, using quality indicators

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers diagnosed worldwide, and rates are continuing to rise. Surgery is the primary treatment for CRC, and our aim was to examine clinical outcomes following major resection using a series of established quality indicators and to identify factors associated with poor clinical outcomes.

METHOD

This population-based retrospective study included 4321 patients with diagnosed with CRC in 2012 and 2014 in Queensland, Australia, who underwent a major resection. Primary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, 30-day unplanned readmission, extended hospital stay (>21 days), and 30- and 90-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was conducted to establish factors independently associated with each outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Overall, in-hospital mortality was 1.5%, 3.0% had an unplanned readmission, 8% had an extended hospital stay, and 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality was 1.6% and 3.1%, respectively. After adjustment, we found that factors such as older age, presence of comorbidities, emergency admission, and stoma formation were significantly associated with poorer outcomes with these findings being consistent across each of the outcomes of interest. In addition to these factors, the risk of 90-day mortality was significantly elevated for patients with advanced stage disease (OR = 1.95, CI 1.35-2.82). Sex, primary site, hospital volume, residential location, nor socioeconomic status was found to be associated with any of the outcomes of interest.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the risk of poorer clinical outcomes for CRC patients in Queensland, Australia, is low. There is however a subgroup of patients at particularly elevated risk of poorer outcomes following CRC. Strategies to reduce the poorer clinical outcomes this group of patients experience should be explored.

Guideline-Recommended Chemoradiation for Patients With Rectal Cancer at Large Hospitals: A Trend in the Right Direction

BACKGROUND

Many patients with rectal cancer are treated at small, low-volume hospitals despite evidence that better outcomes are associated with larger, high-volume hospitals.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to examine trends of patients with rectal cancer who are receiving care at large hospitals, to determine the patient characteristics associated with treatment at large hospitals, and to assess the relationships between treatment at large hospitals and guideline-recommended therapy.

DESIGN

This study was a retrospective cohort analysis to assess trends in rectal cancer treatment.

SETTINGS

Data from the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Patterns of Care studies were used.

PATIENTS

The study population consisted of adults diagnosed with stages II/III rectal cancer in 1990/1991, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was treatment at large hospitals (≥500 beds). The receipt of guideline-recommended preoperative chemoradiation therapy and postoperative chemotherapy was assessed for patients diagnosed in 2005+.

RESULTS

Two thousand two hundred thirty-one patients were included. The proportion treated at large hospitals increased from 19% in 1990/1991 to 27% in 2015 (ptrend < 0.0001). Black race was associated with treatment at large hospitals (vs white) (OR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.30-2.31), as was being 55 to 64 years of age (vs 75+), and diagnosis in 2015 (vs 1990/1991). Treatment in large hospitals was associated with twice the odds of preoperative chemoradiation, as well as younger age and diagnosis in 2010 or 2015 (vs 2005).

LIMITATIONS

The study did not account for the change in the number of large hospitals over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that patients with rectal cancer are increasingly being treated in large hospitals where they receive more guideline-recommended therapy. Although this trend is promising, patients receiving care at larger, higher-volume facilities are still the minority. Initiatives increasing patient and provider awareness of benefits of specialized care, as well as increasing referrals to large centers may improve the use of recommended treatment and ultimately improve outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A994. QUIMIORRADIACIÓN RECOMENDADA EN GUÍAS PARA PACIENTES CON CÁNCER RECTAL EN HOSPITALES DE GRAN TAMAÑO: UNA TENDENCIA EN LA DIRECCIÓN CORRECTA: Muchos pacientes con cáncer rectal se tratan en hospitales pequeños y de bajo volumen a pesar de evidencia de que los mejores resultados se asocian con hospitales más grandes y de gran volumen.

OBJETIVOS

Examinar las tendencias en los pacientes con cáncer rectal que reciben atención en hospitales de gran tamaño, determinar las características de los pacientes asociadas con el tratamiento en hospitales grandes y evaluar la relación entre el tratamiento en hospitales grandes y la terapia recomendada en guías. DISEÑO:: Este estudio fue un análisis de cohorte retrospectivo para evaluar las tendencias en el tratamiento del cáncer de recto.

ESCENARIO

Se utilizaron datos de los estudios del programa Patrones de Atención, Vigilancia, Epidemiología y Resultados Finales (SEER) del Instituto Nacional de Cáncer (NIH).

PACIENTES

La población de estudio consistió en adultos diagnosticados con cáncer rectal en estadio II / III en 1990/1991, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 y 2015.

PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO

El resultado primario fue el tratamiento en hospitales grandes (≥500 camas). La recepción de quimiorradiación preoperatoria recomendada según las guías y la quimioterapia posoperatoria se evaluaron para los pacientes diagnosticados en 2005 y posteriormente.

RESULTADOS

Se incluyeron 2,231 pacientes. La proporción tratada en los hospitales grandes aumentó del 19% en 1990/1991 al 27% en 2015 (ptrend < 0.0001). La raza afroamericana se asoció con el tratamiento en hospitales grandes (vs. blanca) (OR, 1.73; IC 95%, 1.30-2.31), al igual que 55-64 años de edad (vs ≥75) y diagnóstico en 2015 (vs 1990/1991). El tratamiento en los hospitales grandes se asoció con el doble de probabilidad de quimiorradiación preoperatoria, así como con una edad más temprana y diagnóstico en 2010 o 2015 (vs 2005).

LIMITACIONES

El estudio no tomó en cuenta el cambio en el número de hospitales grandes a lo largo del tiempo.

CONCLUSIONES

Los resultados sugieren que los pacientes con cáncer rectal reciben cada vez más tratamiento en hospitales grandes donde reciben terapia recomendada por las guías mas frecuentemente. Aunque esta tendencia es prometedora, los pacientes que reciben atención en hospitales más grandes y de mayor volumen siguen siendo una minoría. Las iniciativas que aumenten la concientización del paciente y del proveedor de servicios médicos sobre los beneficios de la atención especializada, así como el aumento de las referencias a centros grandes podrían mejorar el uso del tratamiento recomendado y, en última instancia, mejorar los resultados. Vea el Resumen en video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A994.

Surgeon perceived most important factors to achieve the best hospital performance on colorectal cancer surgery: a Dutch modified Delphi method

OBJECTIVES

Hospital variation in risk-adjusted outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery has been shown. However, explanatory factors are not sufficiently clear. The objective of this study was to identify factors perceived by gastrointestinal surgeons as important to achieve excellent casemix-adjusted outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery.

DESIGN

Based on literature and experts' opinion, 86 factors associated with serious complications, failure to rescue and mortality were listed. These were presented to gastrointestinal surgeons through two web-based surveys and an expert meeting. Participants were asked to choose their top 10 of most important factors.

PARTICIPANTS

Dutch gastrointestinal surgeons (n=52) of different hospitals and different hospital types (general/teaching/academic).

RESULTS

Of 31 invited experts for the first survey and meeting, 71% responded. Of 130 invited surgeons, 34 responded to the second survey. Factors deemed important were: procedural hospital volume (46% in top 10), specialised surgeons performing surgery, (elective 87%, emergency 60% and reoperations 62% in top 10), accessibility of, and daily ward rounds by specialised surgeons (41% and 38% in top 10), preoperative screening for malnutrition (57% in top 10), a protocol for recognition of anastomotic leakage and rapid reintervention (54% and 49% in top 10).

CONCLUSION

Procedural hospital volume, specialisation of surgeons, screening for malnutrition, early recognition of complications followed by rapid action were perceived as most important factors to achieve good outcomes by gastrointestinal surgeons.

Decentralization and Regionalization of Surgical Care: A Review of Evidence for the Optimal Distribution of Surgical Services in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Background: While recommendations for the optimal distribution of surgical services in high-income countries (HICs) exist, it is unclear how these translate to resource-limited settings. Given the significant shortage and maldistribution of surgical workforce and infrastructure in many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the optimal role of decentralization versus regionalization (centralization) of surgical care is unknown. The aim of this study is to review evidence around interventions aimed at redistributing surgical services in LMICs, to guide recommendations for the ideal organization of surgical services.

Methods: A narrative-based literature review was conducted to answer this question. Studies published in English between 1997 and 2017 in PubMed, describing interventions to decentralize or regionalize a surgical procedure in a LMIC, were included. Procedures were selected using the Disease Control Priorities’ (DCP3) Essential Surgery Package list. Intervention themes and outcomes were analyzed using a narrative, thematic synthesis approach. Primary outcomes included mortality, complications, and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included input measures: workforce and infrastructure, and process measures: facility-based care, surgical volume, and referral rates.

Results: Thirty-five studies were included. Nine (33%) of the 27 studies describing decentralization showed an improvement in primary outcomes. The procedures associated with improved outcomes after decentralization included most obstetric, gynecological, and family planning services as well as some minor general surgery procedures. Out of 8 studies on regionalization (centralization), improved outcomes were shown for trauma care in one study and cataract extraction in one study.

Conclusion: Interventions aimed at decentralizing obstetric care to the district hospital and health center levels have resulted in mortality benefits in several countries. However, more evidence is needed to link service distribution to patient outcomes in order to provide recommendations for the optimal organization of other surgical procedures in LMICs. Considerations for the optimal distribution of surgical procedures should include the acuity of the condition for which the procedure is indicated, anticipated case volume, and required level of technical skills, resources, and infrastructure. These attributes should be considered within the context of each country.

The future of general surgery training: A Canadian resident nationwide Delphi consensus statement

BACKGROUND

Several models have been introduced to improve and restructure surgical training, but continued barriers exist. Residents are uniquely positioned to offer perspective on practical challenges and needs of reformatting surgical education. This study aimed to establish a nationwide, Delphi consensus statement on the perceptions of Canadian residents regarding the future of general surgery training.

METHODS

Canadian general surgery residents participated in a moderated focus group using the Nominal Group Technique to discuss early subspecialization, competency-based medical education, and transition to practice. Qualitative verbal data were transcribed, categorized into themes, and synthesized into recommendation statements. During an iterative Delphi survey, resident leaders ranked each statement on a 5-point Likert scale of agreement. The survey was terminated once consensus was achieved (≥2 survey rounds and Cronbach's α ≥ 0.80).

RESULTS

A total of 66 statements were synthesized by 16 members of the Canadian Association of General Surgeons Resident Committee. A total of 49 residents participated in the Delphi consensus, which was achieved after 2 voting rounds (Cronbach's α = 0.93). Participants agreed that (1) residency should focus on achieving standardized competencies and milestones based on resident ability to meet specific measurable metrics, (2) early streaming should be offered after "core" milestones and competencies have been achieved, and (3) an explicit period should allow transition-to-independent practice with tailored rotations, greater autonomy, and resident-run clinics. We identified 10 barriers to competency-based medical education implementation.

CONCLUSION

A nationwide consensus regarding the future of surgical training was established among current residents. These findings can inform and help implement guidelines and national curricula that meet the needs of the trainee and address the many challenges they face during their training.

The adequacy of lymph node clearance in colon cancer surgery performed in a non-specialist centre; implications for practice

BACKGROUND

Despite recent medical advances, surgery remains the mainstay treatment in colon cancer. It is well established that better patient outcomes are achieved when complex surgery including pancreatic, oesophageal and rectal surgeries are carried out in high-volume centres. However, it is unclear as to whether or not colon cancer patients receive the same benefit. Lymph node adequacy is a key performance indicator of successful oncological colonic resection which impacts on patient outcome.

AIM

To assess the adequacy of lymph node clearance during colonic resection performed with curative intent in a non-specialist centre post introduction of the National Cancer Strategy.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed of a prospectively maintained database examining the lymph node clearance of all oncological resections for colon cancer over a 7-year period (Nov 2010-Dec 2017) at a satellite unit with links to a regional specialist centre. Primary outcome measured was the number of lymph nodes retrieved. Secondary outcomes included resection margins, 30-day complication rate and survival at 1 year. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS Statistics for Windows, version 24.0 (IBM Corp, Armonk, N.Y., USA).

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-seven patients were included. Mean age was 71.0 ± 11.6 years. Majority were male (n = 90, 53.6%). The majority of resections was right sided (n = 112.66.7%) with 78.6% of all resections being undertaken electively. All margins were free of tumour. The average lymph node count was 19.93 ± 8.63 (4.62) with only 17 (10.2%) of specimens containing < 12 nodes. The anastomotic leak rate was 3.3%. There was no association between surgeon or pathologist volume, nor emergent status and achieving oncological lymph node count (p = 0.14, 0.29, 0.97). 90.5% of patients were alive at 1 year.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that colonic cancer surgery can be safely performed in a non- specialist centre with technical outcomes comparable to nationally reported figures.

Examining the transferability of colon and rectal operative experience on outcomes following laparoscopic rectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic rectal surgery is technically challenging and often low volume. Alternatively, colon resections utilize similar advanced laparoscopic skills and are more common but it is unknown whether this experience affects laparoscopic rectal surgery outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to determine the volume-outcome relationship between several colorectal procedures and laparoscopic rectal surgery outcomes.

METHODS

This was a population-based retrospective cohort of all colorectal surgeries with primary anastomoses performed across Canada (excluding Quebec) between April 2008 and March 2015. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, procedures, and discharge details were collected from the Canadian Institute for Health Information. Volumes for common colorectal procedures were calculated for individual surgeons. All-cause morbidity, defined as complications arising during the index admission and contributing to an increased length of stay by more than 24 h, was the primary outcome examined.

RESULTS

A total of 5323 laparoscopic rectal surgery cases and 108,034 colorectal cases, between 180 hospitals and 620 surgeons, were identified. Data analysis demonstrated that high-volume laparoscopic rectal surgeons (OR 0.77, CI 0.61-0.96, p = 0.020) and high-volume open rectal surgeons (OR 0.76, CI 0.61-0.93, p = 0.009) significantly reduced all-cause morbidity. Conversely, surgeon volumes for laparoscopic and open colon cases had no effect on laparoscopic rectal outcomes.

CONCLUSION

High-volume surgeon status in laparoscopic and open rectal surgery are important predictors of all-cause morbidity after laparoscopic rectal surgery, while laparoscopic colon surgery volumes did not impact outcomes. This may reflect more dissimilarity between colon and rectal cases and less transferability of advanced laparoscopic skills than previously thought.

Prognostic Impact of pT Stage and Peritoneal Invasion in Locally Advanced Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

TNM stage has been identified as an independent variable for local recurrence and survival after colon cancer resection. It is still unclear whether peritoneal invasion (pT4a) is a risk factor for adverse oncologic outcome or whether these patients have better results compared with contiguous organs infiltration (pT4b), independent from nodal status (pN).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyze whether peritoneal invasion is an independent risk factor for worse oncologic outcome after curative colon cancer resection.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective analysis with multivariate regression of a prospective database, according to Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Statement.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in a specialized colorectal unit of a tertiary hospital.

PATIENTS

A consecutive series of pT3-pT4a-pT4b patients with colon cancer who underwent curative surgery (1993-2010) were included, and patients with metastasis were excluded.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

A multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to assess independent risk factors for 5-year local recurrence, peritoneal carcinomatosis-like recurrence, disease-free survival, and cancer-specific survival.

RESULTS

A total of 1010 patients were analyzed (79.3% pT3, 9.9% pT4a, and 10.8% pT4b). At diagnosis, 22.0% had obstructive symptoms, and 10.5% had bowel perforation. A total of 72.2% of the surgeries were elective, and in 15.6% en bloc resection of contiguous organs was performed. Median follow-up was 62 months (38-100 mo). For the whole group, 5-year actuarial rates were 8.8% for local recurrence, 2.5% for peritoneal carcinomatosis, 75.5% for disease-free survival, and 81.8% for cancer-specific survival. At multivariate analysis, pT4a stage was an independent risk factor for local recurrence (p = 0.002; HR = 3.1), peritoneal carcinomatosis (p = 0.02; HR = 4.9), worse disease-free survival (p = 0.002; HR = 1.9), and cancer-specific survival (p = 0.001; HR = 2.2). When considering only the 566 patients with ≥12 nodes identified, T stage was still associated with higher local recurrence (p = 0.04) and carcinomatosis rate (p = 0.04), as well as worse disease-free (p = 0.009) and cancer-specific survival (p = 0.014).

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective, single-center study.

CONCLUSIONS

pT4a stage is an independent risk factor for worse oncologic outcome after curative colon cancer resection compared with pT3 and pT4b stages. The current pT4a-pT4b classification should be reconsidered. Of note, even in pT4a patients, 5-year carcinomatosis rate does not exceed 6%. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A926.