International benchmarking in oesophageal and gastric cancer surgery

Proficiency in bariatric surgery may shorten the learning curve for minimally-invasive D2 gastrectomy

INTRODUCTION

Evidence from Asian studies suggests that minimally-invasive gastrectomy achieves equivalent oncological but improved perioperative outcomes compared to open surgery. Oncological gastric resections are less frequent in European countries. Index procedures may play a role for the learning curve of minimally-invasive gastrectomy. The aim of our study was to evaluate if skills acquired in bariatric surgery allow a safe and oncologically adequate implementation of minimally-invasive gastrectomy in a cohort of european patients.

METHODS

In this single-center retrospective study, all patients who received primary bariatric surgery between January 2015 and December 2018 and minimally-invasive surgery for gastric cancer treated from June 2019 to January 2023 were evaluated. Primary endpoints were operation time, lymph node yield and lymph node fractions. Secondary endpoints included postoperative complications and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Learning curves for two surgeons with 350 bariatric procedures and 44 minimally-invasive gastrectomies were analyzed. For bariatric surgery, the mean operation time decreased from initially 82 ± 27 to 45 ± 21 min and 118 ± 28 to 81 ± 36 min for sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), while the complication rate remained within the international benchmark. For laparoscopic gastrectomy (n = 30), operation times decreased but then remained stable over time. Operation times for the robotic platform were longer (302 ± 60 vs. 390 ± 48 min; p < 0.001) with the learning curve remaining incomplete after 14 procedures. R0 status was achieved in 95.5% of patients; the mean number of lymph nodes retrieved was 37 ± 14 with no differences between the groups. Complete mesogastric excision was more frequently achieved during the later laparoscopic cases whereas it occurred earlier for the robotic group (p = 0.004). Perioperative morbidity was comparable to the European benchmark. Textbook outcome was achieved in 54.4% of the cases.

CONCLUSION

In summary, we could demonstrate a successful skill transfer from bariatric surgery to minimally-invasive laparoscopic oncological gastric surgery enabling safe and oncologically adequate minimally-invasive D2 gastrectomy in a central European patient collective.

Outcomes after gastrectomy according to the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA)

BACKGROUND

In 2019, the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) published a standardized set of complications aiming toward uniform reporting of post-gastrectomy complications. This study aimed to report outcomes after gastrectomy in the Netherlands according to GCCG definitions and compare them to previously reported national results and the European database reported by the GCCG.

METHODS

This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer registered in the DUCA in 2020-2021. Postoperative morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality were analyzed according to the GCCG definitions. For all patients, baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared with the GCCG cohort consisting of 27 European expert centers (GASTRODATA; 2017-2018).

RESULTS

In 2020-2021, 782 patients underwent gastrectomy in the Netherlands. Variation was seen in baseline characteristics between the Dutch and the GCCG cohort (N = 1349), most notably in minimally invasive surgery (80.6% vs 19.6%, p < 0.001). In the Netherlands, 223 (28.5%) patients developed a total of 407 complications, the most frequent being non-surgical infections (28.5%) and anastomotic leakage (13.4%). The overall complication and 30-day mortality rates were similar between the Dutch and GCCG cohort (28.5% vs 29.8%, p = 0.563; 3.7% vs 3.6%, p = 0.953). Higher surgical and endoscopic/radiologic reintervention rates were observed in the Netherlands compared to the GCCG cohort (10.7% vs 7.8%, p = 0.025; 10.9% vs 2.9%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Reporting outcomes according to the standardized GCCG definitions allows for international benchmarking. Postoperative outcomes were comparable between Dutch and GCCG cohorts, but both exceed the international benchmark for expert gastrectomy care, highlighting targets for national and international quality improvement.

Comparison of Postoperative Complications After Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer with Antecolic Versus Retrocolic Reconstruction: A Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to examine the rates of 90-day anastomotic complications and other postoperative complications after total or partial gastrectomy with antecolic versus retrocolic reconstruction in a population-based setting.

METHODS

This population-based nationwide retrospective cohort study included all patients undergoing total or partial gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in Finland in 2005-2016, with follow-up until 31 December 2019. Logistic regression provided odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 90-day mortality. Results were adjusted for age, sex, year of the surgery, comorbidities, tumor locations, pathological stage, and neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 2063 patients having gastrectomy with antecolic (n = 814) or retrocolic (n = 1249) reconstruction were identified from the registries. The anastomotic complication rate was 3.8% with antecolic reconstruction and 5.0% with retrocolic reconstruction. Antecolic reconstruction was not associated with a higher risk of anastomotic complications compared with retrocolic reconstruction in the adjusted analysis (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.44-1.09) of the whole cohort or in the predefined subgroups. The reoperation rate was 8.2% with antecolic reconstruction and 7.7% with retrocolic reconstruction, without statistical significance. In subgroup analysis of total gastrectomy patients, the risk of major complications was lower with antecolic reconstruction compared with retrocolic reconstruction (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of anastomotic complications did not differ after antecolic versus retrocolic reconstruction after total or partial gastrectomy. In total gastrectomies, the risk of major complications was lower after antecolic compared with retrocolic reconstruction.

Postoperative delayed emptying after total, subtotal, or distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to examine the rate of delayed emptying and other 90-day postoperative complications after total, subtotal, and distal gastrectomies for gastric adenocarcinoma in a population-based setting.

METHODS

This study included all patients who underwent total, subtotal, or distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer in Finland in 2005-2016, with follow-up until December 31, 2019. Logistic regression provided the odds ratios with 95% CIs of 90-day mortality. The results were adjusted for age, sex, year of surgery, comorbidities, pathologic stage, and neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 2058 patients underwent total (n = 1227), subtotal (n = 450), or distal (n = 381) gastrectomy. In the total, subtotal, and distal gastrectomy groups, the rates of 90-day delayed emptying were 1.7%, 1.3%, and 2.1% in the whole cohort and 1.6%, 1.8%, and 3.5% in the subgroup analysis of R0 resections, respectively. The resection type was not associated with the risk of delayed emptying. Subtotal gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of major complications and reoperations, whereas distal gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of anastomotic complications.

CONCLUSION

The extent of resection did not affect delayed emptying, whereas fewer postoperative complications were observed after subtotal or distal gastrectomy than after total gastrectomy.

Impact of 18FFDG-PET/CT and Laparoscopy in Staging of Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Cost Analysis in the Prospective Multicenter PLASTIC-Study

BACKGROUND

Unnecessary D2-gastrectomy and associated costs can be prevented after detecting non-curable gastric cancer, but impact of staging on treatment costs is unclear. This study determined the cost impact of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (18FFDG-PET/CT) and staging laparoscopy (SL) in gastric cancer staging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this cost analysis, four staging strategies were modeled in a decision tree: (1) 18FFDG-PET/CT first, then SL, (2) SL only, (3) 18FFDG-PET/CT only, and (4) neither SL nor 18FFDG-PET/CT. Costs were assessed on the basis of the prospective PLASTIC-study, which evaluated adding 18FFDG-PET/CT and SL to staging advanced gastric cancer (cT3-4 and/or cN+) in 18 Dutch hospitals. The Dutch Healthcare Authority provided 18FFDG-PET/CT unit costs. SL unit costs were calculated bottom-up. Gastrectomy-associated costs were collected with hospital claim data until 30 days postoperatively. Uncertainty was assessed in a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (1000 iterations).

RESULTS

18FFDG-PET/CT costs were €1104 including biopsy/cytology. Bottom-up calculations totaled €1537 per SL. D2-gastrectomy costs were €19,308. Total costs per patient were €18,137 for strategy 1, €17,079 for strategy 2, and €19,805 for strategy 3. If all patients undergo gastrectomy, total costs were €18,959 per patient (strategy 4). Performing SL only reduced costs by €1880 per patient. Adding 18FFDG-PET/CT to SL increased costs by €1058 per patient; IQR €870-1253 in the sensitivity analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

For advanced gastric cancer, performing SL resulted in substantial cost savings by reducing unnecessary gastrectomies. In contrast, routine 18FFDG-PET/CT increased costs without substantially reducing unnecessary gastrectomies, and is not recommended due to limited impact with major costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03208621. This trial was registered prospectively on 30-06-2017.

How to Use Costs in Value-Based Healthcare: Learning from Real-life Examples

BACKGROUND

Healthcare organizations measure costs for business operations but do not routinely incorporate costs in decision-making on the value of care.

AIM

Provide guidance on how to use costs in value-based healthcare (VBHC) delivery at different levels of the healthcare system.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Integrated practice units (IPUs) for diabetes mellitus (DM) and for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) at the Leiden University Medical Center and a collaboration of seven breast cancer IPUs of the Santeon group, all in the Netherlands.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION AND EVALUATION

VBHC aims to optimize care delivery to the patient by understanding how costs relate to outcomes. At the level of shared decision-making between patient and clinician, yearly check-up consultations for DM type I were analyzed for patient-relevant costs. In benchmarking among providers, quantities of cost drivers for breast cancer care were assessed in scorecards. In continuous learning, cost-effectiveness analysis was compared with radar chart analysis to assess the value of telemonitoring in outpatient follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Costs vary among providers in healthcare, but also between provider and patient. The joint analysis of outcomes and costs using appropriate methods helps identify and optimize the aspects of care that drive desired outcomes and value.

Improved guideline compliance and textbook oncologic outcomes among patients undergoing multimodal treatment and minimally invasive surgery for locally advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Although receipt of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been identified to improve unfavorable survival outcomes among patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC), several randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated a difference in oncological outcomes/overall survival (OS) among patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery (MIS) versus open gastrectomy. This study aimed to investigate National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline adherence and textbook oncological outcome (TOO) among patients undergoing MIS versus open surgery for LAGC.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, patients with stage II/III LAGC (cT2-T4N0-3M0) who underwent curative-intent treatment between 2013 and 2019 were evaluated using the National Cancer Database. Multivariable analysis was performed to assess the association between surgical approach, NCCN guideline adherence, TOO, and OS. The study was registered on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry (registration number: ISRCTN53410429) and conducted according to the Strengthening The Reporting Of Cohort Studies in Surgery and Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines.

RESULTS

Among 13,885 patients, median age at diagnosis was 68 years (IQR, 59-76); most patients were male (n = 9887, 71.2%) and identified as White (n = 10,295, 74.1%). Patients who underwent MIS (n = 4692, 33.8%) had improved NCCN guideline adherence and TOO compared with patients who underwent open surgery (51.3% vs 43.5% and 36.7% vs 27.3%, respectively; both P < .001). Adherence to NCCN guidelines and likelihood to achieve TOO increased from 2013 to 2019 (35.6% vs 50.9% and 31.4% vs 46.4%, respectively; both P < .001). Moreover, improved median OS was observed among patients with NCCN guideline adherence and TOO undergoing MIS versus open surgery (57.3 vs 49.8 months [P = .041] and 68.4 vs 60.6 months [P = .025], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

An overall increase in guideline-adherent treatment and achievement of TOO among patients with LAGC undergoing multimodal and curative-intent treatment in the United States was observed. Adoption of minimally invasive gastrectomy may result in improved short- and long-term outcomes.

Effect of a prediction tool and communication skills training on communication of treatment outcomes: a multicenter stepped wedge clinical trial (the SOURCE trial)

Background

For cancer patients to effectively engage in decision making, they require comprehensive and understandable information regarding treatment options and their associated outcomes. We developed an online prediction tool and supporting communication skills training to assist healthcare providers (HCPs) in this complex task. This study aims to assess the impact of this combined intervention (prediction tool and training) on the communication practices of HCPs when discussing treatment options.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter intervention trial using a pragmatic stepped wedge design (NCT04232735). Standardized Patient Assessments (simulated consultations) using cases of esophageal and gastric cancer patients, were performed before and after the combined intervention (March 2020 to July 2022). Audio recordings were analyzed using an observational coding scale, rating all utterances of treatment outcome information on the primary outcome-precision of provided outcome information-and on secondary outcomes-such as: personalization, tailoring and use of visualizations. Pre vs. post measurements were compared in order to assess the effect of the intervention.

Findings

31 HCPs of 11 different centers in the Netherlands participated. The tool and training significantly affected the precision of the overall communicated treatment outcome information (p = 0.001, median difference 6.93, IQR (-0.32 to 12.44)). In the curative setting, survival information was significantly more precise after the intervention (p = 0.029). In the palliative setting, information about side effects was more precise (p < 0.001).

Interpretation

A prediction tool and communication skills training for HCPs improves the precision of treatment information on outcomes in simulated consultations. The next step is to examine the effect of such interventions on communication in clinical practice and on patient-reported outcomes.

Funding

Financial support for this study was provided entirely by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society (UVA 2014-7000).

Risk factor analysis for duodenal margin positivity following gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Duodenal margin positivity is a poor prognostic factor following gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer. Intraoperative frozen section (IFS) analysis allows radical resection to be achieved in a single operation but is time- and resource-consuming. Hence resection is usually performed based on surgeon's judgment and palpation.

AIM OF STUDY

To determine risk factors for duodenal resection margin (RM) positivity following gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed prospectively maintained data of 376 patients admitted with diagnosis of gastric cancer from August 2011 to January 2020 in JIPMER, a tertiary center in Puducherry, India. Of these, 146 patients underwent gastric resection with curative intent and were the subject of this study. RM status was assessed by definitive histopathology examination. The potential risk factors were compared between patients with positive margin on definitive histopathology examination and a control cohort of similar patients with negative margins.

RESULTS

Of the 146 patients, 16 patients (10.9%), 11 men and 5 women, had positive duodenal margin. The mean age of study group was 59 years. None of the patient characteristics like age, sex, comorbidities, or addictions were statistically significant with regard to duodenal margin positivity. Among tumor characteristics, locally advanced tumors and pyloroantral tumors were found more frequently in the margin-positive group. High-risk features for duodenal margin positivity were extensive nodal disease, oligometastatic disease, lymphovascular invasion, and perineural invasion. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and types of surgical access did not have significant impact on RM. Interestingly, both proximal and circumferential resection margin positivity had a linear association with distal margin positivity suggesting that tumor biology may have a significant role in margin positivity. However, none of these factors were statistically significant on multivariate analysis using logistic regression model. Among oligometastatic patients, survival was dependent on R0 resection and was not different from patients without metastases though our study was not powered for survival analysis (mean survival of 11.040 months) and expectedly, duodenal margin positive patients had lower overall survival compared to margin negative patients (mean survival of 5.188 vs. 11.763 months, p = 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Locally advanced tumors and pyloroantral tumors are associated with an increased risk of duodenal margin positivity after gastrectomy for carcinoma stomach and may benefit from intraoperative frozen section analysis as survival is negatively affected by positive RM. Patients with high-risk features like extensive nodal and oligometastatic disease have a greater propensity for positive duodenal margin. A prospective study with a large sample size is needed to further validate these results.

Distal Versus Total D2-Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Secondary Analysis of Surgical and Oncological Outcomes Including Quality of Life in the Multicenter Randomized LOGICA-Trial

BACKGROUND

Distal gastrectomy (DG) for gastric cancer can cause less morbidity than total gastrectomy (TG), but may compromise radicality. No prospective studies administered neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and few assessed quality of life (QoL).

METHODS

The multicenter LOGICA-trial randomized laparoscopic versus open D2-gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0) in 10 Dutch hospitals. This secondary LOGICA-analysis compared surgical and oncological outcomes after DG versus TG. DG was performed for non-proximal tumors if R0-resection was deemed achievable, TG for other tumors. Postoperative complications, mortality, hospitalization, radicality, nodal yield, 1-year survival, and EORTC-QoL-questionnaires were analyzed using Χ2-/Fisher's exact tests and regression analyses.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2018, 211 patients underwent DG (n = 122) or TG (n = 89), and 75% of patients underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. DG-patients were older, had more comorbidities, less diffuse type tumors, and lower cT-stage than TG-patients (p < 0.05). DG-patients experienced fewer overall complications (34% versus 57%; p < 0.001), also after correcting for baseline differences, lower anastomotic leakage (3% versus 19%), pneumonia (4% versus 22%), atrial fibrillation (3% versus 14%), and Clavien-Dindo grading compared to TG-patients (p < 0.05), and demonstrated shorter median hospital stay (6 versus 8 days; p < 0.001). QoL was better after DG (statistically significant and clinically relevant) in most 1-year postoperative time points. DG-patients showed 98% R0-resections, and similar 30-/90-day mortality, nodal yield (28 versus 30 nodes; p = 0.490), and 1-year survival after correcting for baseline differences (p = 0.084) compared to TG-patients.

CONCLUSIONS

If oncologically feasible, DG should be preferred over TG due to less complications, faster postoperative recovery, and better QoL while achieving equivalent oncological effectiveness. Distal D2-gastrectomy for gastric cancer resulted in less complications, shorter hospitalization, quicker recovery and better quality of life compared to total D2-gastrectomy, whereas radicality, nodal yield and survival were similar.

Weight Loss During Neoadjuvant Therapy Is Associated With Poor Response Among the Patients With Gastrointestinal Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of the current study was to identify the relationship between body composition changes during neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and the treatment efficiency of NAT in gastrointestinal cancer (GC) patients.

METHODS

From January 2015 to July 2020, 277 GC patients treated with NAT had included for retrospective analysis. The body mass index (BMI) and computed tomography (CT) imaging before and after NAT were recorded. The BMI change optimal cut-off value were calculated by ROC curve. Balancing essential characteristic variables using propensity score matching (PSM) method. Exploring the association between BMI changes and tumor response to NAT using logistic regression analysis. The survival outcome of matched patients between different BMI change groups was compared.

RESULTS

A cutoff point of BMI change >2% during NAT was defined as BMI loss. Among the 277 patients, 110 (39.7%) patients showed BMI change with a loss after NAT. In total, 71 pairs of patients were selected for further analysis. The median follow-up time was 22 months (range 3 to 63 months). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses in matched cohort showed that BMI change was a prognostic factor for tumor response after NAT in GC patients (odds ratio (OR), .471; 95% confidence interval (CI), .233-.953; P = .036). In addition, patients who experienced BMI loss after NAT showed worse overall survival than those who had BMI gain or stable.

CONCLUSION

BMI loss during NAT probably may has negative effects on NAT efficiency and survival for gastrointestinal cancer patients. It is necessary to monitor and maintain weight for patients during treatment.

Hospital Variation in Feeding Jejunostomy Policy for Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Nationwide Cohort Study

The purpose of this study was to investigate hospital variation in the placement, surgical techniques, and safety of feeding jejunostomies (FJ) during minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in the Netherlands. This nationwide cohort study analyzed patients registered in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) that underwent MIE for cancer. Hospital variation in FJ placement rates were investigated using case-mix corrected funnel plots. Short-term outcomes were compared between patients with and without FJ using multilevel multivariable logistic regression analysis. The incidence of FJ-related complications was described and compared between hospitals performing routine and non-routine placement (≥90%−<90% of patients). Between 2018−2020, an FJ was placed in 1481/1811 (81.8%) patients. Rates ranged from 11−100% among hospitals. More patients were discharged within 10 days (median hospital stay) without FJ compared to patients with FJ (64.5% vs. 50.4%; OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.42−0.90). FJ-related complications occurred in 45 (3%) patients, of whom 23 (1.6%) experienced severe complications (≥Clavien−Dindo IIIa). The FJ-related complication rate was 13.7% in hospitals not routinely placing FJs vs. 1.7% in hospitals performing routine FJ placement (p < 0.001). Significant hospital variation in the use of FJs after MIE exists in the Netherlands. No effect of FJs on complications was observed. FJs can be placed safely, with lower FJ-related complication rates, in centers performing routine placement.

Implementation of the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group definitions: the benefits of speaking the same language

In 2015 the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group (ECCG) reported consensus definitions for complications after esophagectomy. This aimed to reduce variation in complication reporting, attributed to heterogeneous definitions. This systematic review aimed to describe the implementation of this definition set, including the effect on complication frequency and variation. A systematic literature review was performed, identifying all observational and randomized studies reporting complication frequencies after esophagectomy since the ECCG publication. Recruitment periods before and subsequent to the index ECCG publication date were included. Coefficients of variance were calculated to assess outcome heterogeneity. Of 144 studies which met inclusion criteria, 70 (48.6%) used ECCG definitions. The median number of separately reported complication types was five per study; only one study reported all ECCG complications. The coefficients of variance of the reported frequencies of eight of the 10 most common complications were reduced in studies which used the ECCG definitions compared with those that did not (P = 0.036). Among ECCG studies, the frequencies of postoperative pneumothorax, reintubation, and pulmonary emboli were significantly reduced in 2020-2021, compared with 2015-2019 (P = 0.006, 0.034, and 0.037 respectively). The ECCG definition set has reduced variation in esophagectomy morbidity reporting. This adds greater confidence to the observed gradual improvement in outcomes with time, and its ongoing use and wider dissemination should be encouraged. However, only a handful of outcomes are widely reported, and only rarely is it used in its entirety.

Short-term postoperative outcomes of gastric adenocarcinoma patients treated with curative intent in low-volume centers

BACKGROUND

Quality standards in postoperative outcomes have not yet been defined for gastric cancer surgery. Also, the effect of centralization of gastric cancer surgery on the improvement of postoperative outcomes continues to be debated. Short-term postoperative outcomes in gastric carcinoma patients in centers with low-volume of annual gastrectomies were assessed. The effect of age on major postoperative morbidity and mortality was also analyzed.

METHODS

Patients with gastric or gastroesophageal junction Siewert III type carcinomas who underwent surgical treatment with curative intent between January 2013 and December 2016 were included. Data were obtained from the population-based surgical registry Esophagogastric Carcinoma Registry of the Comunitat Valenciana (RECEG-CV). The RECEG-CV gathers information on demographic characteristics and comorbidity, preoperative study and neoadjuvant treatment, surgical procedure, pathological study, postoperative outcomes, and follow-up. Seventeen hospitals belonging to the public network participated in this registry.

RESULTS

Data from 591 patients were analyzed. Postoperative major morbidity occurred in 154 (26.1%) patients. Overall 30-day or in-hospital mortality, and 90-day postoperative mortality rates were 8.6% and 10.1% respectively. Failure-to-rescue was 39% and it was significantly higher in patients aged 75 years or older in comparison with younger patients (55.3% vs 23.1% p < 0.001). In the multivariable analysis, age ≥ 75 years (p = 0.029), laparoscopic approach (p = 0.005), and total gastrectomy (p = 0.005) were associated with major postoperative morbidity. Age ≥ 75 years (p = 0.027), pulmonary complications (p = 0.001), cardiac complications (p = 0.001), leakage (p = 0.003), and hemorrhage (p = 0.013) were associated with postoperative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Centralization of gastric adenocarcinoma treatment in centers with higher annual caseload should be considered to improve the short-term postoperative outcomes in low-volume centers. Patients aged 75 or older had a significantly increased risk of major postoperative morbidity and mortality, and higher failure-to-rescue.

Implementation of Multimodality Therapy and Minimally Invasive Surgery: Short- and Long-term Outcomes of Gastric Cancer Surgery in Medium-Volume Center

BACKGROUND

Multimodal treatment of gastric cancer includes careful preoperative staging, perioperative oncological treatment, and selective minimally invasive approach. The aim was to evaluate whether this approach improves short- and long-term outcomes in operable gastric cancer.

METHODS

This study included 181 gastric cancer patients who underwent curative intent surgery in Central Finland Central Hospital between years 2005 and 2021 for gastric or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma. Those 65 patients in group 1 operated between years 2005-2010 had open surgery with possible adjuvant therapy. During the second period including 58 patients (2011-2015), perioperative chemotherapy and minimally invasive surgery were implemented. The period, when these treatments were standard practise, was years 2016-2021 including 58 patients (group 3). Outcomes were lymph node yield, major complications and 1- and 3-year survival rates.

RESULTS

Median lymph node yield increased from 17 in group 1 and 20 in group 2 to 23 in group 3 (p < 0.001). Major complication rates in groups 1-3 were 12.3%, 32.8%, and 15.5% (group 1 vs. group 2, p = 0.007; group 2 vs. group 3, p = 0.018), respectively. Overall 1-year survival rates between study groups 1-3 were 78.5% vs. 69.0% vs. 90.2% (p = 0.018) and 3-year rates 44.6% vs. 44.8% vs. 68.1% (p = 0.016), respectively. For overall 3-year mortality, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) was 1.02 (95%CI 0.63-1.66) in group 2 and HR 0.37 (95%CI 0.20-0.68) in group 3 compared to group 1.

CONCLUSIONS

In medium-volume center, modern multimodal therapy in operable gastric cancer combined with minimally invasive surgery increased lymph node yield and improved long-term survival without increasing postoperative morbidity.

Clinical Relevance of the Tumor Location-Modified Laurén Classification System for Gastric Cancer in a Western Population

Background

The Tumor Location-Modified Laurén Classification (MLC) system combines Laurén histologic subtype and anatomic tumor location. It divides gastric tumors into proximal non-diffuse (PND), distal non-diffuse (DND), and diffuse (D) types. The optimum classification of patients with Laurén mixed tumors in this system is not clear due to its grouping with both diffuse and non-diffuse types in previous studies. The clinical relevance of the MLC in a Western population has not been examined.

Methods

A cohort study investigated 404 patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma between 2005 and 2020. The classification of Laurén mixed tumors was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and comparison of clinicopathologic characteristics (chi-square). Survival analysis was performed using multivariable Cox regression.

Results

The ROC curve analysis demonstrated a slightly higher area under the curve value for predicting survival when Laurén mixed tumors were grouped with intestinal-type rather than diffuse-type tumors (0.58 vs 0.57). Survival, tumor recurrence, and resection margin positivity in mixed tumors also was more similar to intestinal type. Distal non-diffuse tumors had the best 5-year survival (DND 64.7 % vs PND 56.1 % vs diffuse 45.1 %; p = 0.006) and were least likely to have recurrence (DND 27.0 % vs PND 34.3 % vs diffuse 48.3 %; p = 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that MLC was an independent prognostic factor for survival (PND: hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.16–2.32 vs diffuse: HR, 2.20; 95 % CI, 1.56–3.09)

Conclusions

The MLC was an independent prognostic marker in this Western cohort of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. The patients with PND and D tumors had worse survival than those with DND tumors.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-11252-y.

How to Establish Benchmarks for Surgical Outcomes?: A Checklist Based on an International Expert Delphi Consensus

OBJECTIVE

To define a standardized methodology for establishing benchmarks for relevant outcomes in surgery.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Benchmarking is an established tool to improve quality in industry and economics, and is emerging in assessing outcome values in surgery. Despite a recent 10-step approach to identify such benchmark values, a standardized and more widely agreed-on approach is still lacking.

METHODS

A multinational web-based Delphi survey with a focus on methodological requirements for establishing benchmarks for surgical outcomes was performed. Participants were selected among internationally renowned specialists in abdominal, vascular, and thoracic surgery. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and results were used to develop a checklist to establish benchmarks in surgery.

RESULTS

Forty-one surgical opinion leaders from 19 countries and 5 continents were involved. Experts' response rates were 98% and 80% in rounds 1 and 2, respectively. Upon completion of the final Delphi round, consensus was successfully achieved for 26 of 36 items covering the following areas: center eligibility, validation of databases, patient cohort selection, procedure selection, duration of follow-up, statistical analysis, and publication requirements regarding center-specific outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for developing a standardized approach for establishing benchmarks for relevant outcome measures in surgery. The provided consensual checklist customizes the methodology of outcome reporting in surgery and thus improves reproducibility and comparability of data and should ultimately serve to improve quality of care.

Evaluation of data quality in the Spanish EURECCA Esophagogastric Cancer Registry

BACKGROUND

Although the number of nationwide clinical registries in upper gastrointestinal cancer is increasing, few of them perform regular clinical audits. The Spanish EURECCA Esophagogastric Cancer Registry (SEEGCR) was launched in 2013. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of the data in terms of completeness and accuracy.

METHODS

Patients who were registered (2014-2017) in the online SEEGCR and underwent esophagectomy or gastrectomy with curative intent were selected for auditing. Independent teams of surgeons visited each center between July 2018 and December 2019 and checked the reliability of data entered into the registry. Completeness was established by comparing the cases reported in the registry with those provided by the Medical Documentation Service of each center. Twenty percent of randomly selected cases per hospital were checked during on-site visits for testing the accuracy of data (27 items per patient file). Correlation between the quality of the data and the hospital volume was also assessed.

RESULTS

Some 1839 patients from 19 centers were included in the registry. The mean completeness rate in the whole series was 97.8% (range 82.8-100%). For the accuracy, 462 (25.1%) cases were checked. Out of 12,312 items, 10,905 were available for verification, resulting in a perfect agreement of 95% (87.1-98.7%). There were 509 (4.7%) incorrect and 35 (0.3%) missing entries. No correlation between hospital volume and the rate of completeness and accuracy was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the SEEGCR contains reliable data.

Surgical Therapy of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma-Current Standards and Future Perspectives

Transthoracic esophagectomy is currently the predominant curative treatment option for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma. The majority of carcinomas present as locally advanced tumors requiring multimodal strategies with either neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy alone. Minimally invasive, including robotic, techniques are increasingly applied with a broad spectrum of technical variations existing for the oncological resection as well as gastric reconstruction. At the present, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is the preferred technique of reconstruction (Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). With standardized surgical procedures, a complete resection of the primary tumor can be achieved in almost 95% of patients. Even in expert centers, postoperative morbidity remains high, with an overall complication rate of 50-60%, whereas 30- and 90-day mortality are reported to be <2% and <6%, respectively. Due to the complexity of transthoracic esophagetomy and its associated morbidity, esophageal surgery is recommended to be performed in specialized centers with an appropriate caseload yet to be defined. In order to reduce postoperative morbidity, the selection of patients, preoperative rehabilitation and postoperative fast-track concepts are feasible strategies of perioperative management. Future directives aim to further centralize esophageal services, to individualize surgical treatment for high-risk patients and to implement intraoperative imaging modalities modifying the oncological extent of resection and facilitating surgical reconstruction.

Presentation, Treatment, and Prognosis of Esophageal Carcinoma in a Nationwide Comparison of Sweden and the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

This population-based study aimed to compare presentation, treatment allocation and survival of potentially curable esophageal cancer patients between Sweden and the Netherlands.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Identification of inter-country differences in treatment allocation and survival may be used for targeted esophageal cancer care improvement.

METHODS

Nationwide datasets were acquired from a Swedish cohort study and the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients with potentially curable (cT1-T4a/Tx, cN0/+, cM0/x) esophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) diagnosed in 2011-2015 were included. Multivariable logistic regression provided odds ratios (OR) for treatment allocation, and multivariable Cox model provided hazard ratios (HR) for overall survival, all with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for age, sex, year, tumor sub-location and stage.

RESULTS

Among 1980 Swedish and 7829 Dutch esophageal cancer patients, Swedish patients were older (71 vs 69 years, P <0.001) and had higher cT-stage (cT3: 49% vs 46%, P <0.001). After adjustment for confounders, Swedish patients were less frequently allocated to curative treatment (adenocarcinoma: OR=0.31, 95%CI 0.26-0.36; SCC: OR=0.28, 95%CI 0.22-0.36). Overall survival was lower in Swedish patients (adenocarcinoma: HR=1.36, 95%CI 1.27-1.46; SCC: HR=1.38, 95%CI 1.24-1.53), also when allocated to curative treatment (adenocarcinoma: HR=1.12, 95%CI 1.01-1.24; SCC: HR=1.34, 95%CI 1.14-1.59).

CONCLUSION

Swedish patients with potentially curable esophageal cancer were less frequently allocated to curative treatment, and showed lower survival compared to Dutch patients. The less pronounced inter-country survival difference after curative treatment suggests that the overall survival difference could at least partly be due to relative undertreatment of Swedish patients. Shared curative treatment thresholds across Europe may help improve survival of esophageal cancer patients.

Outcomes of Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery During Eight Years of Surgical Auditing by the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate changes in treatment and outcomes of esophagogastric cancer surgery after introduction of the DUCA. In addition, the presence of risk-averse behavior was assessed.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Clinical auditing is seen as an important quality improvement tool; however, its long-term efficacy remains largely unknown. In addition, critics claim that enhancements result from risk-averse behavior rather than positive effects of auditing.

METHODS

DUCA data were used from registration start (1-1-2011) until 31-12-2018. Trends in patient, tumor, hospital and treatment characteristics were univariably assessed. Trends in short-term outcomes were investigated using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Presence of risk aversion was described by the corrected proportion of patients undergoing surgery, using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. To evaluate the impact of centralization on time trends identified, the association between hospital volume and outcomes was investigated.

RESULTS

This study included 6172 patients with esophageal and 3,690 with gastric cancer who underwent surgery. Pathological outcomes (lymph node yield, radicality) improved and futile surgery decreased over the years. In-hospital/30-day mortality decreased for esophagectomy (4.2% to 2.5%) and for gastrectomy (7.1% to 4.3%). Reinterventions, (minor) complications and readmissions increased. Risk aversion appeared absent. Between 2011-2018, annual median hospital volumes increased from 38 to 53 for esophagectomy and from 14 to 29 for gastrectomy. Higher hospital volumes were associated with several improved outcomes measures.

CONCLUSIONS

During 8 years of auditing, outcomes improved, with no signs of risk-averse behavior. These improvements occurred in parallel with centralization. Feedback on postoperative complications remains the focus of the DUCA.

Esophageal resection in Austria—preparing a national registry

Background

Esophageal resection is a technically challenging procedure. Despite improvements in perioperative management and outcome, it is still associated with considerably high morbidity and mortality rates even if performed in high-volume centers. This study aimed to shed light on the results of routine patient care in three representative referral centers concerning caseload and surgical and oncological outcomes.

Methods

This study is a retrospective, multicenter, national-wide analysis of a newly established database including perioperative and long-term outcome data from three referral centers in Austria.

Results

In a 6-year study period (2013–2018), 411 patients were eligible for analysis. The indication for esophageal resection was esophageal adenocarcinoma in 299 (72.7%) patients and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in 90 (21.9%) patients. The abdominothoracic approach (70.1%) was the most common operation, followed by transhiatal extended gastrectomy (14.8%) and a thoracic-abdominal-cervical approach (8.5%). Most patients (77.9%) underwent neoadjuvant therapy (chemotherapy 45.3%, radiochemotherapy in 32.6%). A minimally invasive approach was chosen in 25.3%. Major complications and mortality were seen in 21.7% and 2.9%, respectively. The 1‑year survival rate was 84%, 3‑year survival 60%, and 5‑year survival was 52%. The pooled overall median survival was 110 months (95% CI 33.97–186.03).

Conclusion

This first publication of the Austrian Society of Esophageal Surgery shows that the outcome of esophageal surgery for cancer in Austria compares well with that of renowned international centers. However, a more comprehensive approach including as many national centers as possible will improve outcome research, offer quality management, and improve patient safety. The study group invites all Austrian institutions performing esophagectomy to participate in the initiative.

Overall Volume Trends in Esophageal Cancer Surgery Results From the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit

OBJECTIVE

In the pursuit of quality improvement, this study aimed to investigate volume-outcome trends in oncologic esophagectomy in the Netherlands.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Concentration of Dutch esophageal cancer care was dictated by introducing an institutional minimum of 20 resections/yr.

METHODS

This nationwide cohort study included all esophagectomy patients registered in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit in 2016-2019 from hospitals currently still performing esophagectomies. Annual esophagectomy hospital volume was assigned to each patient and categorized into quartiles. Multivariable logistic regression investigated short-term surgical outcomes. Restricted cubic splines investigated if volume-outcome relationships eventually plateaued.

RESULTS

In 16 hospitals, 3135 esophagectomies were performed. First volume quartile hospitals performed 24-39 resections/yr; second, third, and fourth quartile hospitals performed 40-53, 54-69, and 70-101, respectively. Compared to quartile 1, in quartiles 2 to 4, overall/severe/technical complication, anastomotic leakage, and prolonged hospital/intensive care unit stay rates were significantly lower and textbook outcome and lymph node yield were higher. When raising the cut-off from the first to second quartile, higher-volume centers had less technical complications [Adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-0.96], less anastomotic leakage (aOR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.66-0.97), more textbook outcome (aOR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.07-1.46), shorter intensive care unit stay (aOR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69-0.93), and higher lymph node yield (aOR: 3.56, 95% CI: 2.68-4.77). For most outcomes the volume-outcome trend plateaued at 50-60 annual resections, but lymph node yield and anastomotic leakage continued to improve.

CONCLUSION

Although this study does not reflect on individual hospital quality, there appears to be a volume trend towards better outcomes in high-volume centers. Projects have been initiated to improve national quality of care by reducing hospital variation (irrespective of volume) in outcomes in The Netherlands.

Failure to Cure in Patients Undergoing Surgery for Gastric Cancer: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Background

This study aimed to describe the incidence of failure to cure (a composite outcome measure defined as surgery not meeting its initial aim), and the impact of hospital variation in the administration of neoadjuvant therapy on this outcome measure.

Methods

All patients in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit undergoing curatively intended gastric cancer surgery in 2011–2019 were included. Failure to cure was defined as (1) ‘open-close’ surgery; (2) irradical surgery (R1/R2); or (3) 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Case-mix-corrected funnel plots, based on multivariable logistic regression analyses, investigated hospital variation. The impact of a hospital’s tendency to administer neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the heterogeneity in failure to cure between hospitals was assessed based on median odds ratios and multilevel logistic regression analyses.

Results

Some 3862 patients from 28 hospitals were included. Failure to cure was noted in 22.3% (hospital variation: 14.5–34.8%). After case-mix correction, two hospitals had significantly higher-than-expected failure to cure rates, and one hospital had a lower-than-expected rate. The failure to cure rate was significantly higher in hospitals with a low tendency to administer neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Approximately 29% of hospital variation in failure to cure could be attributed to different hospital policies regarding neoadjuvant therapy.

Conclusions

Failure to cure has an incidence of 22% in patients undergoing gastric cancer surgery. Higher failure to cure rates were seen in centers administering less neoadjuvant chemotherapy, which confirms the Dutch guideline recommendation on the administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Failure to cure provides short loop feedback and can be used as a quality indicator in surgical audits.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-020-09510-6.

Improvements in esophageal and gastric cancer care in Sweden-population-based results 2007-2016 from a national quality register

The Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric cancer was launched in 2006 and contains data with adequate national coverage and of high internal validity on patients diagnosed with these tumors. The aim of this study was to describe the evolution of esophageal and gastric cancer care as reflected in a population-based clinical registry. The study population was 12,242 patients (6,926 with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers and 5,316 with gastric cancers) diagnosed between 2007 and 2016. Treatment strategies, short- and long-term mortality, gender aspects, and centralization were investigated. Neoadjuvant oncological treatment became increasingly prevalent during the study period. Resection rates for both esophageal/GEJ and gastric cancers decreased from 29.4% to 26.0% (P = 0.022) and from 38.8% to 33.3% (P = 0.002), respectively. A marked reduction in the number of hospitals performing esophageal and gastric cancer surgery was noted. In gastric cancer patients, an improvement in 30-day mortality from 4.2% to 1.6% (P = 0.005) was evident. Overall 5-year survival after esophageal resection was 38.9%, being higher among women compared to men (47.5 vs. 36.6%; P < 0.001), whereas no gender difference was seen in gastric cancer. During the recent decade, the analyses based on the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric cancer database demonstrated significant improvements in several important quality indicators of care for patients with esophagogastric cancers. The Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric cancer offers an instrument not only for the control and endorsement of quality of care but also a unique tool for population-based clinical research.

The Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry (UGICR): a clinical quality registry to monitor and improve care in upper gastrointestinal cancers

PURPOSE

The Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Registry (UGICR) was developed to monitor and improve the quality of care provided to patients with upper gastrointestinal cancers in Australia.

PARTICIPANTS

It supports four cancer modules: pancreatic, oesophagogastric, biliary and primary liver cancer. The pancreatic cancer (PC) module was the first module to be implemented, with others being established in a staged approach. Individuals are recruited to the registry if they are aged 18 years or older, have received care for their cancer at a participating public/private hospital or private clinic in Australia and do not opt out of participation.

FINDINGS TO DATE

The UGICR is governed by a multidisciplinary steering committee that provides clinical governance and oversees clinical working parties. The role of the working parties is to develop quality indicators based on best practice for each registry module, develop the minimum datasets and provide guidance in analysing and reporting of results. Data are captured from existing data sources (population-based cancer incidence registries, pathology databases and hospital-coded data) and manually from clinical records. Data collectors directly enter information into a secure web-based Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) data collection platform. The PC module began with a pilot phase, and subsequently, we used a formal modified Delphi consensus process to establish a core set of quality indicators for PC. The second module developed was the oesophagogastric cancer (OGC) module. Results of the 1 year pilot phases for PC and OGC modules are included in this cohort profile.

FUTURE PLANS

The UGICR will provide regular reports of risk-adjusted, benchmarked performance on a range of quality indicators that will highlight variations in care and clinical outcomes at a health service level. The registry has also been developed with the view to collect patient-reported outcomes (PROs), which will further add to our understanding of the care of patients with these cancers.

Population-Based Study on Risk Factors for Tumor-Positive Resection Margins in Patients with Gastric Cancer

Background

Radical gastrectomy is the cornerstone of the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer. This study was designed to evaluate factors associated with a tumor-positive resection margin after gastrectomy and to evaluate the influence of hospital volume.

Methods

In this Dutch cohort study, patients with junctional or gastric cancer who underwent curative gastrectomy between 2011 and 2017 were included. The primary outcome was incomplete tumor removal after the operation defined as the microscopic presence of tumor cells at the resection margin. The association of patient and disease characteristics with incomplete tumor removal was tested with multivariable regression analysis. The association of annual hospital volume with incomplete tumor removal was tested and adjusted for the patient- and disease characteristics.

Results

In total, 2799 patients were included. Incomplete tumor removal was seen in 265 (9.5%) patients. Factors associated with incomplete tumor removal were: tumor located in the entire stomach (odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.38 [1.91–5.96] reference: gastroesophageal junction), cT3, cT4, cTx (1.75 [1.20–2.56], 2.63 [1.47–4.70], 1.60 [1.03–2.48], reference: cT0-2), pN+ (2.73 [1.96–3.80], reference: pN−), and diffuse and unknown histological subtype (3.15 [2.14–4.46] and 2.05 [1.34–3.13], reference: intestinal). Unknown differentiation grade was associated with complete tumor removal (0.50 [0.30–0.83], reference: poor/undifferentiated). Compared with a hospital volume of < 20 resections/year, 20–39, and > 39 resections were associated with lower probability for incomplete tumor removal (OR 0.56 [0.42–0.76] and 0.34 [0.18–0.64]).

Conclusions

Tumor location, cT, pN, histological subtype, and tumor differentiation are associated with incomplete tumor removal. The association of incomplete tumor removal with an annual hospital volume of < 20 resections may underline the need for further centralization of gastric cancer care in the Netherlands.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-019-07381-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.