Annual hospital volume of surgery for gastrointestinal cancer in relation to prognosis

Patient management after primary rectal cancer diagnosis. Special focus on surgical treatment for non-metastatic disease

Background: Rectal cancer is a public health priority. Primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality of care for non-metastatic rectal cancer using process and outcome indicators. Delay of management, length of stay and readmission rate, sphincter preservation, morbidity, number of examined lymph nodes, mortality, overall and disease-free survivals were evaluated. Secondary objectives were to estimate the relationship between possible predictive parameters for (1) anastomotic leakage (logistic regression), (2) overall or disease-free survivals (cox regression).Methods: We performed a retrospective study on 312 consecutive patients diagnosed with primary rectal cancer between 2016 and 2019. We focused on the 163 patients treated by surgery for non-metastatic cancer.Results: The treatment began within 33 days (range 0-264) after incidence, resection rate was 67%. Digestive continuity rate in lower, middle and upper rectum was 30%, 87% and 96%. Median of 14 lymph nodes (range 1-46) was analyzed. Length of stay and readmission rate were 11 days (range 3-56) and 4%, respectively. Within 90 postoperative days, clinical anastomotic leakage occurred in 9.2% of cases, major morbidity rate was 17%, mortality 1.2%. Multivariate analysis revealed that stoma decreased the risk of anastomotic leakage [hazard ratio: 0.16; 95% confidence intervals: 0.04-0.63; p = 0.008]. The 5-year overall survival after surgery was 85 ± 4%, disease-free survival 83 ± 4%. Patients with major complications, male gender and R1/R2 resection margin had a poorer prognosis.Conclusion: This work showed encouraging results in rectal cancer treatment in our institution, our results were in line with recommendations at the time.

Association of Minority-Serving Hospital Status with Post-Discharge Care Utilization and Expenditures in Gastrointestinal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Disparities in utilization of post-discharge care and overall expenditures may relate to site of care and race/ethnicity. We sought to define the impact of minority-serving hospitals (MSHs) on postoperative outcomes, discharge disposition, and overall expenditures associated with an episode of surgical care.

METHODS

Patients who underwent resection for esophageal, colon, rectal, pancreatic, and liver cancer were identified from Medicare Standard Analytic Files (2013-2017). A MSH was defined as the top decile of facilities treating minority patients (Black and/or Hispanic). The impact of MSH on outcomes of interest was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression and generalized linear regression models. Textbook outcome (TO) was defined as no postoperative complications, no prolonged length of stay, and no 90-day mortality or readmission.

RESULTS

Among 113,263 patients, only a small subset of patients underwent surgery at MSHs (n = 4404, 3.9%). While 52.3% of patients achieved TO, rates were lower at MSHs (MSH: 47.2% vs. non-MSH: 52.5%; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, receiving care at an MSH was associated with not achieving TO (odds ratio [OR] 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-0.87) and concomitantly higher odds of additional post-discharge care (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20). Patients treated at an MSH also had higher median post-discharge expenditures (MSH: $8400, interquartile range [IQR] $2300-$22,100 vs. non-MSH: $7000, IQR $2200-$17,900; p = 0.002). In fact, MSHs remained associated with a 11.05% (9.78-12.33%) increase in index expenditures and a 16.68% (11.44-22.17%) increase in post-discharge expenditures.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing surgery at a MSH were less likely to achieve a TO. Additionally, MSH status was associated with a higher likelihood of requiring post-discharge care and higher expenditures.

Hospital surgical volume and colorectal cancer survival in Norway: A nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Studies of hospital surgical volume and colorectal cancer survival are inconclusive. We investigated whether surgical volume was associated with survival of patients operated for colorectal cancer in Norway.

METHODS

Using Cancer Registry of Norway data, we compared excess mortality from colorectal cancer by hospital surgical volume among 26,989 colon and 9779 rectal cancer patients diagnosed 2009-2020 and followed-up to 31.12.2021. Hospitals were divided into terciles according to their three-year average annual surgical volume; colon: low (< 22), middle (22-73), high (> 73); rectal: low (< 17), middle (17-38), high (> 38). We estimated excess hazard ratios (EHR) with flexible parametric models adjusted for age, year, stage, surgical urgency and surgery location (within/outside patient's residential health trust).

RESULTS

Low-volume hospitals had the highest proportion of late-stage or acutely operated colon cancer patients. Colon cancer patients operated at low- versus high-volume hospitals had significantly increased crude excess mortality (EHR = 1.30; 95 % CI = 1.14-1.48) but no difference after adjustment for age, year, and stage (EHR = 0.97; 0.85-1.11). High-volume hospitals had the highest proportion of late-stage rectal cancer patients and patients operated outside their residential area. Rectal cancer patients operated at low- versus high-volume hospitals did not have significantly different excess mortality before (EHR = 0.84; 0.64-1.10) or after (EHR = 1.03; 0.79-1.35) adjustment for age, year, stage, surgical urgency and surgery location. After accounting for case-mix, hospital surgical volume was not associated with excess mortality from colon (P = 0.40) or rectal cancer (P = 0.22).

CONCLUSION

Low hospital surgical volume was not associated with poorer colorectal cancer survival.

Extent of Lymphadenectomy and Long-term Survival in Esophageal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

To examine the hypothesis that survival in esophageal cancer increases with more removed lymph nodes during esophagectomy up to a plateau, after which it levels out or even decreases with further lymphadenec-tomy.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

There is uncertainty regarding the ideal extent of lymphadenectomy during esophagectomy to optimize long-term survival in esophageal cancer.

METHODS

This population-based cohort study included almost every patient who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in Sweden or Finland in 2000-2016 with follow-up through 2019. Degree of lymphadenectomy, divided into deciles, was analyzed in relation to all-cause 5-year mortality. Multivariable Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) adjusted for all established prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Among 2306 patients, the second (4-8 nodes), seventh (21-24 nodes) and eighth decile (25-30 nodes) of lymphadenectomy showed the lowest all-cause 5-year mortality compared to the first decile [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.97, HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.99, and HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.93, respectively]. In stratified analyses, the survival benefit was greatest in decile 7 for patients with pathological T-stage T3/T4 (HR = 0.56, 95% CI0.40-0.78), although it was statistically improved in all deciles except decile 10. For patients without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, survival was greatest in decile 7 (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.86), although survival was also statistically significantly improved in deciles 2, 6, and 8.

CONCLUSION

Survival in esophageal cancer was not improved by extensive lymphadenectomy, but resection of a moderate number (20-30) of nodes was prognostically beneficial for patients with advanced T-stages (T3/T4) and those not receiving neoadjuvant therapy.

Patient volume and clinical outcome after pancreatic cancer resection: A contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer remains a highly fatal disease with a 5-year overall survival of less than 10%. In seeking to improve clinical outcomes, there is ongoing debate about the weight that should be given to patient volume in centralization models. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the relationship between patient volume and clinical outcome after pancreatic resection for cancer in the contemporary literature.

METHODS

The Google Scholar, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from February 2015 until June 2021 for articles reporting patient volume and outcomes after pancreatic cancer resection.

RESULTS

There were 46 eligible studies over a 6-year period comprising 526,344 patients. The median defined annual patient volume thresholds varied: low-volume 0 (range 0-9), medium-volume 9 (range 3-29), high-volume 19 (range 9-97), and very-high-volume 28 (range 17-60) patients. The latter 2 were associated with a significantly lower 30-day mortality (P < .001), 90-day mortality (P < .001), overall postoperative morbidity (P = .005), failure to rescue rate (P = .006), and R0 resection rate (P = .008) compared with very-low/low-volume hospitals. Centralization was associated with lower 30-day mortality in 3 out of 5 studies, while postoperative morbidity was similar in 4 out of 4 studies. Median survival was longer in patients traveling greater distance for pancreatic resection in 2 out of 3 studies. Median and 5-year survival did not differ between urban and rural settings.

CONCLUSION

The contemporary literature confirms a strong relationship between patient volume and clinical outcome for pancreatic cancer resection despite expected bias toward more complex surgery in high-volume centers. These outcomes include lower mortality, morbidity, failure-to-rescue, and positive resection margin rates.

Development and external validation of a prediction model for overall survival after resection of distal cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Various prognostic factors are associated with overall survival (OS) after resection of distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA). The objective of this study was to develop and validate a prediction model for 3-year OS after pancreatoduodenectomy for dCCA.

METHODS

The derivation cohort consisted of all patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for dCCA in the Netherlands (2009-2016). Clinically relevant variables were selected based on the Akaike information criterion using a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model, with model performance being assessed by concordance index (C-index) and calibration plots. External validation was performed using patients from the Belgium Cancer Registry (2008-2016), and patients from two university hospitals of Southampton (U.K.) and Verona (Italy).

RESULTS

Independent prognostic factors for OS in the derivation cohort of 454 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for dCCA were age (HR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01-1.03), pT (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.07-1.90) and pN category (pN1: HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.37-2.32; pN2: HR 2.21, 95% CI 1.63-3.01), resection margin status (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.39-2.29) and tumour differentiation (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.62-2.53). The prediction model was based on these prognostic factors. The optimism-adjusted C-indices were similar in the derivation cohort (0.69), and in the Belgian (0.66) and Southampton-Verona (0.68) validation cohorts. Calibration was accurate in the Belgian validation cohort (slope = 0.93, intercept = 0.12), but slightly less optimal in the Southampton-Verona validation cohort (slope = 0.88, intercept = 0.32). Based on this model, three risk groups with different prognoses were identified (3-year OS of 65.4%, 33.2% and 11.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

The prediction model for 3-year OS after resection of dCCA had reasonable performance in both the derivation and geographically external validation cohort. Calibration slightly differed between validation cohorts. The model is readily available via www. pancreascalculator.com to inform patients from Western European countries on their prognosis, and may be used to stratify patients for clinical trials.

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.

Complications After Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: Benefits and Costs Associated with Inter-hospital Transfer Among Medicare Beneficiaries

BACKGROUND

Inter-hospital transfer (IHT) may help reduce failure-to-rescue (FTR) by transferring patients to centers with a higher level of expertise than the index hospital. We sought to identify factors associated with an IHT and examine if IHT was associated with improved outcomes after complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Medicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files were utilized to identify patients with >1 postoperative complication following resection for esophageal, pancreatic, liver, or colorectal cancer between 2013 and 2017. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association of different factors with the chance of IHT, as well as the impact of IHT on failure-to-rescue (FTR) and expenditures.

RESULTS

Among 39,973 patients with >1 postoperative complications, 3090 (7.7%) patients were transferred to a secondary hospital. The median LOS at the index hospital prior to IHT was 10 days (IQR, 6-17 days). Patients who underwent IHT more often had experienced multiple complications at the index hospital compared with non-IHT patients (57.7% vs. 38.9%) (p<0.001). Transferred patients more commonly had undergone surgery at a low-volume index hospital (n=218, 60.2%) compared with non-IHT (n=10,351, 25.9%) patients (p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, hospital volume remained strongly associated with transfer to an acute care hospital (ACH) (OR 5.53; 95% CI 3.91-7.84; p<0.001), as did multiple complications (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.56-2.57). The incidence of FTR was much higher among IHT-ACH patients (20.2%) versus non-IHT patients (11.5%) (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.11-2.05) (p<0.001). Medicare expenditures were higher among patients who had IHT-ACH ($72.1k USD; IQR, $48.1k-$116.7k) versus non-IHT ($38.5k USD; IQR, $28.1k-$59.2k USD) (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Approximately 1 in 13 patients had an IHT after complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery. IHT was associated with high rates of FTR, which was more pronounced among patients who underwent surgery at an index low-volume hospital. IHT was associated with higher overall CMS expenditures.

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.

Cohort profile: gastric cancer in the population-based, Finnish National Esophago-Gastric Cancer Cohort (FINEGO) Study

PURPOSE

The Finnish National Esophago-Gastric Cancer Cohort (FINEGO) was established with the aim of identifying factors that could contribute to improved outcomes in oesophago-gastric cancer. The aim of this study is to describe the patients with gastric cancer included in FINEGO.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 10 457 patients with gastric cancer or tumour diagnosis in the Finnish Cancer Registry or the Finnish Patient Registry during 1987-2016 were included in the cohort, with follow-up from Causes of Death Registry until 31 December 2016. All of the participants were at least 18 years of age, and had undergone either resectional or endoscopic mucosal surgery with curative or palliative intent.

FINDINGS TO DATE

Of the 10 457 patients, 90.1% were identified to have cancer in both cancer and patient registries. In all, the median age was 70 at the time of surgery, 54.5% of the patients were men and 64.4% had no comorbidities. Education data were available for 31.1% of the patients, of whom the majority had had <12 years of formal education. Of the 7798 with cancer staging data available, 41.1% had a local cancer. Adenocarcinoma was the most common (94.2%) histological type. Almost all patients underwent open gastrectomy and 214% in hospitals with annual volume of more than 30 gastrectomies per year. A total of 8561 deaths occurred during the study period, of which 6474 were due to oesophago-gastric cancers. The 5-year survival was 34.6% and 5-year cancer-specific survival was 39.7%.

FUTURE PLANS

The data in FINEGO can be currently used for registry-based research but is being expanded by data extraction from patient records and scanning of histological samples from the Finnish biobanks. Initially, we are planning on studies on the national trends in treatment and mortality, and studies on the demographic factors and their influence on survival.

Reintervention or mortality within 90 days of bariatric surgery: population-based cohort study

Background

Bariatric surgery carries a risk of severe postoperative complications, sometimes leading to reinterventions or even death. The incidence and risk factors for reintervention and death within 90 days after bariatric surgery are unclear, and were examined in this study.

Methods

This population-based cohort study included all patients who underwent bariatric surgery in one of the five Nordic countries between 1980 and 2012. Data on surgical and endoscopic procedures, diagnoses and mortality were retrieved from national high-quality and complete registries. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs), adjusted for country, age, sex, co-morbidity, type of surgery and approach, year and hospital volume of bariatric surgery.

Results

Of 49 977 patients, 1111 (2·2 per cent) had a reintervention and 95 (0·2 per cent) died within 90 days of bariatric surgery. Risk factors for the composite outcome reintervention/mortality were older age (HR 1·65, 95 per cent c.i. 1·36 to 2·01, for age at least 50 years versus less than 30 years) and co-morbidity (HR 2·66, 1·53 to 4·62, for Charlson co-morbidity index score 2 or more versus 0). The risk of reintervention/mortality was decreased for vertical banded gastroplasty compared with gastric bypass (HR 0·37, 0·28 to 0·48) and more recent surgery (HR 0·51, 0·39 to 0·67, for procedures undertaken in 2010 or later versus before 2000). Sex, surgical approach (laparoscopic versus open) and hospital volume did not influence risk of reintervention/mortality, but laparoscopic surgery was associated with a lower risk of 90-day mortality (HR 0·29, 0·16 to 0·53).

Conclusion

Reintervention and death were uncommon events within 90 days of bariatric surgery even in this unselected nationwide cohort from five countries. Older patients with co-morbidities have an increased relative risk of these outcomes.

Positive circumferential resection margins following locally advanced colon cancer surgery: Risk factors and survival impact

BACKGROUND

While the prognostic implications of positive circumferential resection margins (CRM) have been established for rectal cancer, its significance in colon cancer has not been well defined. The aim of the current study was to determine national rates for positive CRM in locally advanced colon cancer, associated factors, and survival impact.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried to identify patients with stage II-III adenocarcinoma of the colon (2004-2015).

RESULTS

Positive CRM was identified in 9% of stage II and 12% of stage III patients. Factors associated with negative CRM included surgery in a high-volume facility, adequate lymph-node harvest, and negative distal/proximal margins. No difference in CRM rates was observed between surgical approaches, although having a positive CRM was significantly associated with higher conversion rates. Positive CRM was associated with significantly lower overall survival on both univariate and multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive CRM rates exceeded 10% nationally and have an adverse impact on survival. While several tumor characteristics were identified as independent risk factors, oncologic resections and surgery at high-volume centers were associated with lower rates of positive CRM. These findings emphasize the need for process improvement initiatives targeting modifiable factors, including adoption of appropriate oncologic techniques, standardized pathology reporting, and potential neoadjuvant strategies.