Regional and inter-hospital differences in the utilisation of liver surgery for patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases in the Netherlands

Comparison of Hospital Volume and Risk-Standardized Mortality Rate as a Proxy for Hospital Quality in Complex Oncologic Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery

BACKGROUND

Centralization of hepatopancreatobiliary procedures to more experienced centers has been recommended but remains controversial. Hospital volume and risk-stratified mortality rates (RSMR) are metrics for interhospital comparison. We compared facility operative volume with facility RSMR as a proxy for hospital quality.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery for liver (LC), biliary tract (BTC), and pancreatic (PDAC) cancer were identified in the National Cancer Database (2004-2018). Hierarchical logistic regression was used to create facility-specific models for RSMR. Volume (high versus low) was determined by quintile. Performance (high versus low) was determined by RSMR tercile. Primary outcomes included median facility RSMR and RSMR distributions. Volume- and RSMR-based redistribution was simulated and compared for reductions in 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 106,217 patients treated at 1282 facilities were included; 17,695 had LC, 23,075 had BTC, and 65,447 had PDAC. High-volume centers (HVC) had lower RSMR compared with medium-volume centers and low-volume centers for LC, BTC, and PDAC (all p < 0.001). High-performance centers (HPC) had lower RSMR compared with medium-performance centers and low-performance centers for LC, BTC, and PDAC (all p < 0.001). Volume-based redistribution required 16.0 patients for LC, 11.2 for BTC, and 14.9 for PDAC reassigned to 15, 22, and 20 centers, respectively, per life saved within each US census region. RSMR-based redistribution required 4.7 patients for LC, 4.2 for BTC, and 4.9 for PDAC reassigned to 316, 403, and 418 centers, respectively, per life saved within each US census region.

CONCLUSIONS

HVC and HPC have the lowest overall and risk-standardized 90-day mortality after oncologic hepatopancreatobiliary procedures, but RSMR may outperform volume as a measure of hospital quality.

Intersurgeon Variability in Local Treatment Planning for Patients with Initially Unresectable Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases: Analysis of the Liver Expert Panel of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group

BACKGROUND

Consensus on resectability criteria for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) is lacking, resulting in differences in therapeutic strategies. This study evaluated variability of resectability assessments and local treatment plans for patients with initially unresectable CRLM by the liver expert panel from the randomised phase III CAIRO5 study.

METHODS

The liver panel, comprising surgeons and radiologists, evaluated resectability by predefined criteria at baseline and 2-monthly thereafter. If surgeons judged CRLM as resectable, detailed local treatment plans were provided. The panel chair determined the conclusion of resectability status and local treatment advice, and forwarded it to local surgeons.

RESULTS

A total of 1149 panel evaluations of 496 patients were included. Intersurgeon disagreement was observed in 50% of evaluations and was lower at baseline than follow-up (36% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). Among surgeons in general, votes for resectable CRLM at baseline and follow-up ranged between 0-12% and 27-62%, and for permanently unresectable CRLM between 3-40% and 6-47%, respectively. Surgeons proposed different local treatment plans in 77% of patients. The most pronounced intersurgeon differences concerned the advice to proceed with hemihepatectomy versus parenchymal-preserving approaches. Eighty-four percent of patients judged by the panel as having resectable CRLM indeed received local treatment. Local surgeons followed the technical plan proposed by the panel in 40% of patients.

CONCLUSION

Considerable variability exists among expert liver surgeons in assessing resectability and local treatment planning of initially unresectable CRLM. This stresses the value of panel-based decisions, and the need for consensus guidelines on resectability criteria and technical approach to prevent unwarranted variability in clinical practice.

Perspectives of patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases on e-consultation in transmural care: a qualitative study : Is privacy really an issue?

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive cancer networks have been established to deliver high-quality care for patients with cancer. Logistic challenges are faced, when patients need to be referred for specialized treatments. Despite strengthened privacy legislations, digital platforms are increasingly used to consult specialists from dedicated liver centers or refer patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) for local treatment strategies. This qualitative study aimed to explore the perspectives of patients with CRLM regarding e-consultation of transmural specialists.

METHODS

A focus group study was conducted. Patients referred from regional hospitals to an academic liver center for treatment of CRLM were asked to participate. Focus group discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. A thematic content analysis of data was conducted, comprising open, axial, and selective coding of the transcripts. The consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) were used.

RESULTS

Two focus groups were held, involving 11 patients and 8 relatives. Three major themes were identified with regard to e-consultation in transmural care: 'data management', 'expertise', and 'information and coordination'. Confidence in the expertise of physicians appeared most important during the course of treatment, as patients experienced uncertainty after diagnosis of cancer. Despite the privacy risks, use of digital communication platforms to contact experts in the field were strongly endorsed to improve eligibility for potentially curative treatment. Moreover, e-consultation of specialists may reduce waiting times, due to effective coordination of care.

CONCLUSION

Initiatives to improve medical data transfer between care providers were encouraged to achieve effective coordination of oncological care. The potential hazard of privacy violation associated with digital data exchange is accepted by patients and their relatives, provided that use of digital data improves patient's own health care, research or education.

The Role of Preoperative Chemotherapy in the Management of Synchronous Resectable Colorectal Liver Metastases: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The indications of preoperative chemotherapy, for initially resectable synchronous colorectal liver metastases, remain controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of preoperative chemotherapy in such patients.

METHODS

Six retrospective studies were included in the meta-analysis with 1036 patients. Some 554 patients were allocated to the preoperative group, and 482 others were allocated to the surgery group.

RESULTS

Major hepatectomy was more common in the preoperative group than in the surgery group (43.1% vs. 28.8%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the percentage of patients with more than three liver metastases was higher in the preoperative group compared to the surgery group (12.6% vs. 5.4%, p < 0.002). Preoperative chemotherapy showed no statistically significant impact on overall survival. Combined disease free/relapse survival analysis of patients with high disease burden (liver metastases > 3, maximum diameter > 5 cm, clinical risk score ≥ 3) demonstrated that there is a 12% lower risk of recurrence in favor of preoperative chemotherapy. Combined analysis showed a statistically significant (77% higher probability) of postoperative morbidity in patients who received preoperative chemotherapy (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative chemotherapy should be suggested in patients with high disease burden. The number of cycles of preoperative chemotherapy should be low (3-4) to avoid increased postoperative morbidity. However more prospective studies are needed to clarify the exact role of preoperative chemotherapy in patients with synchronous resectable colorectal liver metastases.

Interregional practice variations in the use of local therapy for synchronous colorectal liver metastases in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the Dutch regional practice variation in treatment of synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) over time and assess their impact on patients survival.

METHODS

Two cohorts of patients with synchronous CRLM were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). All patients diagnosed between 2014 and 2018 were selected to analyze interregional practice variations in local therapy (LT) with multivariable logistic regression. Overall survival (OS) was assessed for patients diagnosed from 2008 to 2013 using Kaplan Meier method and Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients who underwent LT increased from 15.5% to 21.9%. Interregional use of LT varied from 19.1% to 25.0%. Multivariable logistic regression showed significant differences between regions in the use of LT (p = 0.001) in 2014-2018. There was no association between OS and region of diagnosis for patients who underwent LT after correction for confounders.The use of LT for CRLM increased from 15.5% in 2008-2013 to 21.9% in 2014-2018. Three-year OS increased from 16% to 19% respectively.

CONCLUSION

Interregional practice variations have decreased. The remaining differences are not associated with OS. The use of local therapy and 3-year overall survival have increased over time. Local practice should be monitored to prevent undesirable variation in outcomes.

Hospital factors and metastatic surgery in colorectal cancer patients, a population-based cohort study

Background

Only a limited proportion of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) receives metastatic surgery (including local ablative therapy). The aim was to investigate whether hospital volume and hospital level were associated with the chance of metastatic surgery.

Methods

This national cohort retrieved from the CRCBaSe linkage included all Swedish adult patients diagnosed with synchronous mCRC in 2009–2016. The association between annual hospital volume of incident mCRC patients and the chance of metastatic surgery, and survival, were assessed using logistic regression and Cox regression models, respectively. Hospital level (university/non-university) was evaluated as a secondary exposure in a similar manner. Both uni- and multivariable (adjusted for sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, year of diagnosis, cancer characteristics and socioeconomic factors) models were fitted.

Results

A total of 1,674 (17%) out of 9,968 mCRC patients had metastatic surgery. High hospital volume was not associated with increased odds of metastatic surgery after including hospital level in the model, whereas hospital level was (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)): 1.94 (1.68–2.24)). All-cause mortality was lower in university versus non-university hospitals (hazard ratio (95% CI): 0.83 (0.78–0.88)).

Conclusions

Patients with mCRC initially cared for by a university hospital experienced a greater chance to receive metastatic surgery and had superior overall survival. High hospital volume in itself was not associated with a greater chance to receive metastatic surgery nor a greater survival probability. Additional efforts should be imposed to provide more equal care for mCRC patients across Swedish hospitals.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-10005-8.

Treatment of metachronous colorectal cancer metastases in the Netherlands: A population-based study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to describe the treatment of metachronous colorectal cancer metastases in a recent population-based cohort.

METHOD

Patients with stage I-III colorectal cancer (CRC), diagnosed between January 1st and June 30th^, 2015 who were surgically treated with curative intent were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Follow-up was at least 3 years after diagnosis of the primary tumour. Treatment of metachronous metastases was categorized into local treatment, systemic treatment, and best supportive care. Overall survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Out of 5412 patients, 782 (14%) developed metachronous metastases, of whom 393 (50%) underwent local treatment (LT) with or without systemic therapy, 30% of patients underwent only systemic therapy (ST) and 19% only best supportive care (BSC). The most common metastatic site was the liver (51%) followed by lungs (33%) and peritoneum (22%). LT rates were 69%, 66%, and 44% for liver-only, lung-only and, peritoneal-only metastases respectively. Patients receiving LT and ST were significantly younger than patients receiving LT alone, while patients receiving BSC were significantly older than the other groups (p < 0.001). Patients with liver-only or lung-only metastases had a 3-year OS of 50.2% (43.3-56.7 95% CI) and 61.5% (50.7-70.6 95% CI) respectively. Patients with peritoneal-only disease had a lower 3-year OS, 18.1% (10.1-28.0 95% CI).

CONCLUSION

Patients with metastases confined to the liver and lung have the highest rates of local treatment for metachronous metastatic colorectal cancer. The number of patients who underwent local treatment is higher than reported in previous Dutch and international studies.

Nationwide oncological networks for resection of colorectal liver metastases in the Netherlands: Differences and postoperative outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Widespread differences in patient demographics and disease burden between hospitals for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have been described. In the Netherlands, networks consisting of at least one tertiary referral centre and several regional hospitals have been established to optimize treatment and outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess variation in case-mix, and outcomes between these networks.

METHODS

This was a population-based study including all patients who underwent CRLM resection in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2019. Variation in case-mix and outcomes between seven networks covering the whole country was evaluated. Differences in case-mix, expected 30-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3a) and 30-day mortality between networks were assessed.

RESULTS

In total 5383 patients were included. Thirty-day major morbidity was 5.7% and 30-day mortality was 1.5%. Significant differences between networks were observed for Charlson Comorbidity Index, ASA 3+, previous liver resection, liver disease, preoperative MRI, preoperative chemotherapy, ≥3 CRLM, diameter of largest CRLM ≥55 mm, major resection, combined resection and ablation, rectal primary tumour, bilobar and extrahepatic disease. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 3.3% and 13.1% for hospitals, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 4.5%. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 4.4% and 6.0% for networks, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 2.5%. No negative outliers were observed after case-mix correction.

CONCLUSION

Variation in case-mix and outcomes are considerably smaller on a network level as compared to a hospital level. Therefore, auditing is more meaningful at a network level and collaboration of hospitals within networks should be pursued.

The value of a dedicated multidisciplinary expert panel to assess treatment strategy in patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases

BACKGROUND

For patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM), local treatment is the only treatment with curative intent. The majority of patients with CRLM are however evaluated in multidisciplinary teams of colorectal cancer specialists often lacking expertise in local treatment of liver tumors. The aim of this study was therefore to assess the value of a dedicated multidisciplinary panel consisting of hepatobiliary surgeons and interventional radiologists for patients suffering from liver-only CRLM.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with liver-only CRLM in 2016 were identified in a tertiary referral hospital, and two of the referring hospitals in the Netherlands. Diagnostic imaging was independently reviewed by a panel of four hepatobiliary surgeons and two interventional radiologists to re-evaluate treatment strategy retrospectively. If two or more panelists assessed all lesions eligible for resection and/or ablation, patients were deemed eligible for local treatment with curative intent. Interrater reliability between hepatobiliary surgeons was assessed through intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and weighted Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

Diagnostic imaging of 61 patients with liver-only metastases were reviewed. Local treatment strategies appeared feasible in 40/61 (65.6%) patients. Five out of 25 patients (20.0%) initially assigned to systemic therapy were deemed eligible for upfront local treatment with curative intent (p = 0.015). In this subgroup, interrater reliability between hepatobiliary surgeons was substantial (ICC: 0.704, 95% CI: 0.536-0.838, n = 25).

CONCLUSION

Assessment of treatment strategy by a dedicated multidisciplinary panel including liver experts may result in an increased number of patients eligible for potentially curative treatment and reduce undertreatment of patients suffering from liver-only CRLM.

Optimization of transmural care by implementation of an online expert panel to assess treatment strategy in patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases: A prospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

Centralization of oncological care results in a growing demand for specialized consultations and referrals. Improved telemedicine solutions are needed to facilitate access to specialist care and select patients eligible for referral. The purpose of this quality improvement initiative was to optimize transmural care for patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases through implementation of an online expert panel.

METHODS

A digital communication platform was developed to share medical data, including high-quality diagnostic imaging of patients suffering from colorectal cancer liver metastases. Feasibility of local treatment strategies was assessed by a panel of liver specialists to select patients for referral. After implementation, an observational cohort study was conducted to evaluate quality improvement in transmural care using revised Standards for Quality Improvement Reporting Excellence guidelines.

RESULTS

From September 2016-September 2018, eight hospitals were connected to the platform, covering a population of 3 m. In total, 123 cases were assessed, of which 54 (43.9%) were prevented from needless physical referral. Assessment of treatment strategy by an online expert panel significantly reduced the average lead time during multidisciplinary team meetings from 3.73 min to 2.12 min per patient (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an online expert panel is an innovative, accessible and user-friendly way to provide cancer-specific expertise to regional hospitals. E-consultation of such panels may result in more efficient multidisciplinary team meetings and prevent fragile patients from needless referral. Sustainability of these panels however is subject to structural financial compensation, so a cost-effectiveness analysis is warranted.

Systematic failure to operate on colorectal cancer liver metastases in California

Background

Despite evidence that liver resection improves survival in patients with colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRCLM) and may be potentially curative, there are no population‐level data examining utilization and predictors of liver resection in the United States.

Methods

This is a population‐based cross‐sectional study. We abstracted data on patients with synchronous CRCLM using California Cancer Registry from 2000 to 2012 and linked the records to the Office of Statewide Health Planning Inpatient Database. Quantum Geographic Information System (QGIS) was used to map liver resection rates to California counties. Patient‐ and hospital‐level predictors were determined using mixed‐effects logistic regression.

Results

Of the 24 828 patients diagnosed with stage‐IV colorectal cancer, 16 382 (70%) had synchronous CRCLM. Overall liver resection rate for synchronous CRCLM was 10% (county resection rates ranging from 0% to 33%) with no improvement over time. There was no correlation between county incidence of synchronous CRCLM and rate of resection (R² = .0005). On multivariable analysis, sociodemographic and treatment‐initiating‐facility characteristics were independently associated with receipt of liver resection after controlling for patient disease‐ and comorbidity‐related factors. For instance, odds of liver resection decreased in patients with black race (OR 0.75 vs white) and Medicaid insurance (OR 0.62 vs private/PPO); but increased with initial treatment at NCI hospital (OR 1.69 vs Non‐NCI hospital), or a high volume (10 + cases/year) (OR 1.40 vs low volume) liver surgery hospital.

Conclusion

In this population‐based study, only 10% of patients with liver metastases underwent liver resection. Furthermore, the study identifies wide variations and significant population‐level disparities in the utilization of liver resection for CRCLM in California.

Radiofrequency ablation compared to surgical resection for curative treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases - a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hepatic resection and ablative treatments, such as RFA are available treatment options for liver tumors. Advantages and disadvantages of these treatment options in patients with colorectal liver metastases need further evaluation. The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the role of radiofrequency ablation (RFA) compared to surgery in the curative treatment of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM).

METHODS

A systematic search was performed from MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for studies directly comparing RFA with resection for CRLM, after which variables were evaluated.

RESULTS

RFA had significantly lower complication rates (OR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.26-0.75, P = 0.002) compared to resection. However, RFA showed a higher rate of any recurrence (OR = 1.66, 95% CI = 1.15-2.40, P = 0.007), local recurrence (OR = 9.56, 95% CI = 6.85-13.35, P = 0.001), intrahepatic recurrence (OR = 1.96, 95% CI = 1.34-2.87, P = 0.001) and extrahepatic recurrence (OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.90-1.63, P = 0.22). Also, 5-year disease-free survival (OR = 2.20, 95% CI = 1.28-3.79, P = 0.005) and overall survival (OR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.49-3.69, P = 0.001) were significantly lower in patients treated with RFA.

CONCLUSIONS

RFA showed a significantly lower rate of complications, but also a lower survival and a higher rate of recurrence as compared to surgical resection. All the included studies were subject to possible patient selection bias and therefore randomized clinical trials are needed to accurately evaluate these treatment modalities.