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

C-reactive Protein and Procalcitonin Levels to Predict Anastomotic Leak After Colorectal Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a feared complication after colorectal surgery. Prompt diagnosis and treatment are crucial. C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) have been proposed as early AL indicators. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the CRP and CPT predictive values for early AL diagnosis after colorectal surgery.

METHODS

Systematic literature search to identify studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of postoperative CRP and CPT for AL. A Bayesian meta-analysis was carried out using a random-effects model and pooled predictive parameters to determine postoperative CRP and PCT cut-off values at different postoperative days (POD).

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies (11,144 patients) were included. The pooled prevalence of AL was 8% (95 CI 7-9%), and the median time to diagnosis was 6.9 days (range 3-10). The derived POD3, POD4 and POD5 CRP cut-off were 15.9 mg/dl, 11.4 mg/dl and 10.9 mg/dl respectively. The diagnostic accuracy was comparable with a pooled area under the curve (AUC) of 0.80 (95% CIs 0.23-0.85), 0.84 (95% CIs 0.18-0.86) and 0.84 (95% CIs 0.18-0.89) respectively. Negative likelihood ratios (LR-) showed moderate evidence to rule out AL on POD 3 (LR- 0.29), POD4 (LR- 0.24) and POD5 (LR- 0.26). The derived POD3 and POD5 CPT cut-off were 0.75 ng/ml (AUC = 0.84) and 0.9 ng/ml (AUC = 0.92) respectively. The pooled POD5 negative LR (-0.18) showed moderate evidence to rule out AL.

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of colorectal surgery, CRP and CPT serum concentrations lower than the derived cut-offs on POD3-POD5, may be useful to rule out AL thus possibly identifying patients at low risk for AL development.

Racial Disparities in Surgical Outcomes Among Women with Endometrial Cancer

PURPOSE

Endometrial cancer (EC) is the most common gynecological cancer among women in the United States. Despite well-documented racial/ethnic disparities in EC incidence and mortality rates, limited data exist regarding disparities in hysterectomy surgical outcomes. We evaluated associations of race/ethnicity with postoperative complications, serious adverse events (SAEs), and length of hospital stay among women undergoing EC-related hysterectomy.

METHODS

Using National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) data, we identified women (≥18 years) undergoing hysterectomy to treat EC between 2014 and 2020. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations of race/ethnicity (white, black, and Latina) with postoperative complications and SAEs. We used Poisson regression with robust standard errors to calculate incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% CIs for the association of race/ethnicity with length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

Of 22,778 women undergoing EC-related hysterectomy, 3.1% developed postoperative complications. Black (adjusted OR: 1.62; 95% CI 1.05-2.48) and Latina women (adjusted OR: 1.79; 95% CI 1.04-3.09) had higher postoperative complication risks than white women. The overall SAE incidence was 5.0%. Black women (adjusted OR: 1.55, 95% CI 1.13-2.15) had higher SAE risks than white women. Length of hospital stay was significantly longer for black women than white women (IRR: 1.18; 95% CI 1.07-1.30).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed racial/ethnic disparities in EC-related hysterectomy surgical outcomes in a large, diverse sample of U.S. women between 2014 and 2020. Studies to elucidate the underlying mechanisms of these racial disparities, with a focus on social context remain necessary.

Trends in infectious complications after partial colectomy for colon cancer over a decade: A national cohort study

BACKGROUND

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program helps participating hospitals track and report surgical complications with the goal of improving patient care. We sought to determine whether postoperative infectious complications after elective colectomy for malignancy improved among participating centers over time.

METHODS

Patients with colon malignancies who underwent elective partial colectomy with primary anastomosis (categorized as low or non-low) were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2011-2019). Thirty-day postoperative infectious complications analyzed by year included superficial, deep, and organ space surgical site infections, urinary tract infection, pneumonia, and sepsis. Trends in patient and treatment characteristics were investigated using log-linear regression along with their association with infectious outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 78,827 patients identified, 51% were female, and the median age was 68. The majority (84%) underwent partial colectomy without a low anastomosis. There was a decrease in all infectious complications except for organ space infections which increased 35% overall from 2.0 to 2.7% (P = .037), driven by patients without a low anastomosis (1.9%-2.7%, P = .01). There was no change in most patient factors associated with organ space infections, except for a notable increase in American Society of Anesthesiologists class III and IV-V patients over time, both associated with organ space infections (P < .001; P = .002).

CONCLUSION

Infectious complications have decreased significantly overall after colectomy for colon cancer, whereas there has been an increase in organ space infection rates specifically. Although changing patient characteristics may contribute to this observed trend, further study is needed to better understand its etiology to help mitigate this complication.

Annual Case Volume and One-Year Mortality for Endovascular Treatment in Acute Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND

The association between endovascular treatment (EVT) case volume per hospital and clinical outcomes has been reported, but the exact volume threshold has not been determined. This study aimed to examine the case volume threshold in this context.

METHODS

National audit data on the quality of acute stroke care in patients admitted via emergency department, within 7 days of onset, in hospitals that treated ≥ 10 stroke cases during the audit period were analyzed. Ischemic stroke cases treated with EVT during the last three audits (2013, 2014, and 2016) were selected for the analysis. Annual EVT case volume per hospital was estimated and analyzed as a continuous and a categorical variable (in quartiles). The primary outcome measure was 1-year mortality as a surrogate of 3-month functional outcome. As post-hoc sensitivity analysis, replication of the study results was examined using the 2018 audit data.

RESULTS

We analyzed 1,746 ischemic stroke cases treated with EVT in 120 acute care hospitals. The median annual EVT case volume was 12.0 cases per hospital, and mortality rates at 1 month, 3 months, and 1 year were 12.7%, 16.6%, and 23.3%, respectively. Q3 and Q4 had 33% lower odds of 1-year mortality than Q1. Adjustments were made for predetermined confounders. Annual EVT case volume cut-off value for 1-year mortality was 15 cases per year (P < 0.02). The same cut-off value was replicated in the sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSION

Annual EVT case volume was associated with 1-year mortality. The volume threshold per hospital was 15 cases per year.

Current trends in nonoperative management for rectal adenocarcinoma: An unequal playing field?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Increasing evidence suggests patient-oriented benefits of nonoperative management (NOM) for rectal cancer. However, vigilant surveillance requires excellent access to care. We sought to examine patient, socioeconomic, and facility-level factors associated with NOM over time.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database (2006-2017), we examined patients with Stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma, who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and received NOM versus surgery. Factors associated with NOM were assessed using multivariable logistic regression with backward stepwise selection.

RESULTS

There were 59,196 surgical and 8520 NOM patients identified. NOM use increased from 12.9% to 15.9% between 2006 and 2017. Patients who were Black (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.26-1.47), treated at community cancer centers (aOR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.12-1.30), without insurance (aOR: 1.87, 95% CI: 1.68-2.09), and with less education (aOR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.42-1.65) exhibited higher odds of NOM. Patients treated at high-volume centers (aOR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.74-0.84) and those who traveled >25.6 miles for care (aOR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.55-0.64) had lower odds of NOM.

CONCLUSIONS

Vulnerable groups who traditionally have difficulty accessing comprehensive cancer care were more likely to receive NOM, suggesting that healthcare disparities may be driving utilization. More research is needed to understand NOM decision-making in rectal cancer treatment.

Relationships between multiple patient safety outcomes and healthcare and hospital-related risk factors in colorectal resection cases: cross-sectional evidence from a nationwide sample of 232 German hospitals

OBJECTIVES

Studies analysing colorectal resections usually focus on a specific outcome (eg, mortality) and/or specific risk factors at the individual (eg, comorbidities) or hospital (eg, volume) level. Comprehensive evidence across different patient safety outcomes, risk factors and patient groups is still scarce. Therefore the aim of this analysis was to investigate consistent relationships between multiple patient safety outcomes, healthcare and hospital risk factors in colorectal resection cases.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

German inpatient routine care data of colorectal resections between 2016 and 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

We analysed 54 168 colon resection and 20 395 rectum resection cases treated in German hospitals. The German Inpatient Quality Indicators were used to define colon resections and rectum resections transparently.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Additionally to in-hospital death, postoperative respiratory failure, renal failure and postoperative wound infections we included multiple patient safety outcomes as primary outcomes/dependent variables for our analysis. Healthcare (eg, weekend surgery), hospital (eg, volume) and case (eg, age) characteristics served as independent covariates in a multilevel logistic regression model. The estimated regression coefficients were transferred into ORs.

RESULTS

Weekend surgery, emergency admissions and transfers from other hospitals were significantly associated (ORs ranged from 1.1 to 2.6) with poor patient safety outcome (ie, death, renal failure, postoperative respiratory failure) in colon resections and rectum resections. Hospital characteristics showed heterogeneous effects. In colon resections hospital volume was associated with insignificant or adverse associations (postoperative wound infections: OR 1.168 (95% CI 1.030 to 1.325)) to multiple patient safety outcomes. In rectum resections hospital volume was protectively associated with death, renal failure and postoperative respiratory failure (ORs ranged from 0.7 to 0.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Transfer from other hospital and emergency admission are constantly associated with poor patient safety outcome. Hospital variables like volume, ownership or localisation did not show consistent relationships to patient safety outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10188560.

Qualitative Study of Medical Doctors on Their Experiences and Opinions of the Characteristics of Exceptionally Good Doctors

Background

It is generally accepted that there is a therapist effect in psychotherapy, with master therapists being studied using qualitative methods. There are surgeons with exceptionally positive patients' physical health outcomes, and qualitative research on what makes good doctors. However, characteristics of exceptionally good doctors are less studied and understood.

Objective

To qualitatively study the opinions of physicians on exceptionally good doctors.

Methods

Thirteen semi-structured interviews of English-speaking medical doctors of any specialty were conducted. Recruitment was achieved through the authors' network; contacting authors of relevant research papers; and Bond University's General Practitioner recruitment program. Their opinion was sought on what makes an exceptionally good doctor, whether they have met such a person, what was their experience of that person, and whether they consider themselves as exceptionally good doctors.

Analysis

A six-phase thematic analysis in an experiential framework, as per Braun and Clarke, was implemented to identify themes and their details in an inductive approach with a realist epistemological position, ie, assuming truthful knowledge on what makes exceptionally good doctors can be obtained.

Results

Each interviewee had met and been inspired by exceptionally good doctors. Descriptions covered six themes: character traits; other characteristics; patient relationships; peer and health care system relations; education; and treatment examples. Exceptionally good doctors were found to have up-to-date extensive medical knowledge and skills, relate well with patients, and have excellent diagnostic abilities. They tend to be humble, approachable, inspiring, and are long-remembered role models. However, they may not always be appreciated by their peers and their health care system because of their exceptional abilities.

Discussion and Conclusion

Exceptional doctors are beneficial for their peers, their patients, and their health care system. Identifying, acknowledging, and making such doctors more accessible to medical students and junior doctors could have a positive impact on medical practice.

Referrals and Decision-Making Considerations Involved in Selecting a Surgeon for Rectal Cancer Treatment in the Midwestern United States

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of superior outcomes for rectal cancer at high-volume, multidisciplinary cancer centers, many patients undergo surgery in low-volume hospitals.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine considerations of former patients with rectal cancer when selecting their surgeon and to evaluate which considerations were associated with surgery at high-volume hospitals.

DESIGN

In this retrospective cohort study, patients were surveyed about what they considered when selecting a cancer surgeon.

SETTINGS

Study data were obtained via survey and the statewide Iowa Cancer Registry.

PATIENTS

All eligible individuals diagnosed with invasive stages II/III rectal cancer from 2013 to 2017 identified through the registry were invited to participate.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were the characteristics of the hospital where they received surgery (ie, National Cancer Institute designation, Commission on Cancer accreditation, and rectal cancer surgery volume).

RESULTS

Among respondents, 318 of 417 (76%) completed surveys. Sixty-nine percent of patients selected their surgeon based on their physician's referral/recommendation, 20% based on surgeon/hospital reputation, and 11% based on personal connections to the surgeon. Participants who chose their surgeon based on reputation had significantly higher odds of surgery at National Cancer Institute-designated (OR 7.5; 95% CI, 3.8-15.0) or high-volume (OR 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.7) hospitals than those who relied on referral.

LIMITATIONS

This study took place in a Midwestern state with a predominantly white population, which limited our ability to evaluate racial/ethnic associations.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with rectal cancer relied on referrals in selecting their surgeon, and those who did were less likely to receive surgery at a National Cancer Institute-designated or high-volume hospitals compared to those who considered reputation. Future research is needed to determine the impact of these decision factors on clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. In addition, patients should be aware that relying on physician referral may not result in treatment from the most experienced or comprehensive care setting in their area. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897.REMISIONES Y CONSIDERACIONES PARA LA TOMA DE DECISIONES RELACIONADAS CON LA SELECCIÓN DE UN CIRUJANO PARA EL TRATAMIENTO DEL CÁNCER DE RECTO EN EL MEDIO OESTE DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOSANTECEDENTES:A pesar de la evidencia de resultados superiores para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto en centros oncológicos de gran volumen y multidisciplinarios, muchos pacientes se someten a cirugía en hospitales de bajo volumen.OBJETIVOS:Examinar las consideraciones de los antiguos pacientes con cáncer de recto al momento de seleccionar a su cirujano y evaluar qué consideraciones se asociaron con la cirugía en hospitales de gran volumen.DISEÑO:Encuestamos a los pacientes sobre qué aspectos consideraron al elegir un cirujano oncológico para completar este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Los datos del estudio se obtuvieron mediante una encuesta y el Registro de Cáncer del estado de Iowa.PACIENTES:Se invitó a participar a todas las personas elegibles diagnosticadas con cáncer de recto invasivo en estadios II/III entre 2013 y 2017 identificadas a través del registro.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados principales fueron las características del hospital donde fue realizada la cirugía (es decir, designación del Instituto Nacional del Cáncer, acreditación de la Comisión de Cáncer y volumen de cirugía del cáncer de recto).RESULTADOS:Hubo 318 de 417 (76%) encuestas completadas. El sesenta y nueve por ciento seleccionó a su cirujano en función de la referencia / recomendación de su médico, el 20% por la reputación del cirujano/hospital, y el 11% por sus conexiones personales con el cirujano. Los participantes que eligieron a su cirujano en función a la reputación tuvieron probabilidades significativamente más altas de cirugía en el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer designado (OR = 7,5, IC del 95%: 3,8-15,0) o en hospitales de alto volumen (OR = 2,6, IC del 95%: 1,2-5,7) que aquellos que dependían de la derivación.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un estado del medio oeste con una población predominantemente blanca, lo que limitó nuestra capacidad para evaluar las asociaciones raciales/étnicas.CONCLUSIONES:La mayoría de los pacientes con cáncer de recto dependían de las derivaciones para seleccionar a su cirujano, y los que lo hacían tenían menos probabilidades de recibir cirugía en un hospital designado por el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer o en hospitales de gran volumen en comparación con los que consideraban la reputación. Se necesitan investigaciones a futuro para determinar el impacto de estos factores de decisión en los resultados clínicos, la satisfacción del paciente y la calidad de vida. Además, los pacientes deben ser conscientes de que depender de la remisión de un médico puede no resultar en el tratamiento más experimentado o integral en su área. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897. (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto).

Laparoscopic vs. open resection for colon cancer‑quality of oncologic resection evaluation in a medium volume center

Despite concerns regarding oncologic safety, laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer has been proven in several trials in the lasts decades to be superior to open surgery. In addition, the benefits of laparoscopic surgery can be offered to other patients with malignant disease. The aim of the present study was to compare the quality of oncologic resection for non-metastatic, resectable colon cancer between laparoscopic and open surgery in terms of specimen margins and retrieved lymph nodes in a medium volume center in Romania. A total of 219 patients underwent surgery for non-metastatic colon cancer between January 2017 and December 2020. Of these, 52 underwent laparoscopic resection, while 167 had open surgery. None of the patients in the laparoscopic group had positive circumferential margins (P=0.035) while 12 (7.19%) patients in the open group (OG) had positive margins. A total of three patients in the laparoscopic group (5.77%) and seven patients (4.19%) in the OG had invaded axial margins. While the number of retrieved lymph nodes was not correlated with the type of procedure [laparoscopic group 16.12 (14±6.56), OG 17.31 (15±8.42), P=0.448], the lymph node ratio was significantly higher in the OG (P=0.003). Given the results of the present study, it is safe to conclude that laparoscopic surgery is not inferior to open surgery for non-metastatic colon cancer in a medium volume center.

Race-based disparities in access to surgical palliation for hypoplastic left heart syndrome

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in outcomes have been shown to persist in many operative specialties, including the management of congenital heart disease. Using a demographic-adjusted methodology, we examined whether patient race influenced access to high-performing centers for the operative management of hypoplastic left heart syndrome.

METHODS

The 2005-2017 National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify all pediatric (≤5 years) hospitalizations with an operation for hypoplastic left heart syndrome. A racial disparity index was generated for each hospital and defined as the proportion of White patients receiving operative management for hypoplastic left heart syndrome divided by the proportion of White patients admitted for respiratory failure. This methodology quantified hospital-level racial variation while adjusting for the local racial makeup of each center.

RESULTS

Of the 17,275 patients who met inclusion criteria, 64.1% were managed at high-volume centers. Patients at high-volume centers had a similar distribution of operative type, age, and burden of comorbidities. The mean racial disparity index steadily grew from 1.06 at the lowest volume decile of operative volume to 1.51 at the highest, indicating an increasing proportion of White patients as volume increased. Using risk-adjusted analysis, each decile increase in hospital volume was associated with a 14% relative reduction in odds of mortality and a 0.06 increase in predicted racial disparity index. Increasing volume was further associated with reduced odds of non-home discharge but did not alter resource utilization.

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate that high-volume centers disproportionally serve White patients and have superior clinical outcomes compared to low-volume centers. This study highlights the critical importance of equitable access to expert care for high-risk conditions such as hypoplastic left heart syndrome.

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.

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.