[Hospital volume effects in surgical treatment of gastric cancer : Results of a prospective multicenter observational study]

Association between hospital surgical case volume and postoperative mortality in patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative mortality is an important indicator for evaluating surgical safety. Postoperative mortality is influenced by hospital volume; however, this association is not fully understood. This study aimed to investigate the volume-outcome association between the hospital surgical case volume for gastrectomies per year (hospital volume) and the risk of postoperative mortality in patients undergoing a gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Studies assessing the association between hospital volume and the postoperative mortality in patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer were searched for eligibility. Odds ratios were pooled for the highest versus lowest categories of hospital volume using a random-effects model. The volume-outcome association between hospital volume and the risk of postoperative mortality was analyzed. The study protocol was registered with Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).

RESULTS

Thirty studies including 586 993 participants were included. The risk of postgastrectomy mortality in patients with gastric cancer was 35% lower in hospitals with higher surgical case volumes than in their lower-volume counterparts (odds ratio: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.56-0.76; P <0.001). This relationship was consistent and robust in most subgroup analyses. Volume-outcome analysis found that the postgastrectomy mortality rate remained stable or was reduced after the hospital volume reached a plateau of 100 gastrectomy cases per year.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings suggest that a higher-volume hospital can reduce the risk of postgastrectomy mortality in patients with gastric cancer, and that greater than or equal to 100 gastrectomies for gastric cancer per year may be defined as a high hospital surgical case volume.

Laparoscopic Compared with Open D2 Gastrectomy on Perioperative and Long-Term, Stage-Stratified Oncological Outcomes for Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of the IMIGASTRIC Database

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic approach in gastric cancer surgery is being increasingly adopted worldwide. However, studies focusing specifically on laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy are still lacking in the literature. This retrospective study aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

The protocol-based, international IMIGASTRIC (International study group on Minimally Invasive surgery for Gastric Cancer) registry was queried to retrieve data on patients undergoing laparoscopic or open gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy for gastric cancer with curative intent from January 2000 to December 2014. Eleven predefined, demographical, clinical, and pathological variables were used to conduct a 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) analysis to investigate intraoperative and recovery outcomes, complications, pathological findings, and survival data between the two groups. Predictive factors of long-term survival were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 3033 patients from 14 participating institutions were selected from the IMIGASTRIC database. After 1:1 PSM, a total of 1248 patients, 624 in the laparoscopic group and 624 in the open group, were matched and included in the final analysis. The total operative time (median 180 versus 240 min, p < 0.0001) and the length of the postoperative hospital stay (median 10 versus 14.8 days, p < 0.0001) were longer in the open group than in the laparoscopic group. The conversion to open rate was 1.9%. The proportion of patients with in-hospital complications was higher in the open group (21.3% versus 15.1%, p = 0.004). The median number of harvested lymph nodes was higher in the laparoscopic approach (median 32 versus 28, p < 0.0001), and the proportion of positive resection margins was higher (p = 0.021) in the open group (5.9%) than in the laparoscopic group (3.2%). There was no significant difference between the groups in five-year overall survival rates (77.4% laparoscopic versus 75.2% open, p = 0.229).

CONCLUSION

The adoption of the laparoscopic approach for gastric resection with D2 lymphadenectomy shortened the length of hospital stay and reduced postoperative complications with respect to the open approach. The five-year overall survival rate after laparoscopy was comparable to that for patients who underwent open D2 resection. The types of surgical approaches are not independent predictive factors for five-year overall survival.

[Enhanced recovery after surgery-Does the ERAS concept keep its promises]

INTRODUCTION

Perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concepts or fast-track are supposed to accelerate recovery after surgery, reduce postoperative complications and shorten the hospital stay when compared to traditional perioperative treatment.

METHODS

Electronic search of the PubMed database to identify systematic reviews with meta-analysis (SR) comparing ERAS and traditional treatment.

RESULTS

The presented SR investigated 70 randomized controlled studies (RCT) with 12,986 patients and 93 non-RCT (24,335 patients) concerning abdominal, thoracic and vascular as well as orthopedic surgery. The complication rates were decreased under ERAS following colorectal esophageal, liver and pulmonary resections as well as after implantation of hip endoprostheses. Pulmonary complications were reduced after ERAS esophageal, gastric and pulmonary resections. The first bowel movements occurred earlier after ERAS colorectal resections and delayed gastric emptying was less often observed after ERAS pancreatic resection. Following ERAS fast-track esophageal resection, anastomotic leakage was diagnosed less often as well as surgical complications after ERAS pulmonary resection. The ERAS in all studies concerning orthopedic surgery and trials investigating implantation of a hip endoprosthesis or knee endoprosthesis reduced the risk for postoperative blood transfusions. Regardless of the type of surgery, ERAS shortened hospital stay without increasing readmissions.

CONCLUSION

Numerous clinical trials have confirmed that ERAS reduces postoperative morbidity, shortens hospital stay and accelerates recovery without increasing readmission rates following most surgical operations.

Hospital characteristics associated with better 'quality of surgery' and survival following oesophagogastric cancer surgery in Queensland: a population-level study

BACKGROUND

The impact of hospital characteristics on the quality of surgery and survival following oesophagogastric cancer surgery has not been well established in Australia. We assessed the interaction between hospital volume, service capability and surgical outcomes, with the hypothesis that both the quality of surgery and survival are better following treatment in high-volume, high service capability hospitals.

METHODS

All patients undergoing oesophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer in Queensland, between 2001 and 2015, were included. Demographic, pathology and outcome data were collected. Hospitals were categorized into high (HV) (≥5 gastrectomies; ≥6 oesophagectomies) and low volume (LV). Hospital service capability was defined as high (HS) and low (LS), and then linked to hospital volume: HVHS, LVHS and LVLS. Higher quality surgery was defined using six perioperative parameters. Univariable comparisons of quality of surgery between hospital groups used chi-squared tests. The 5-year overall survival was compared using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

For both gastrectomy and oesophagectomy, higher quality surgery occurred more frequently in HVHS hospitals (gastrectomy: HVHS = 44.2%, LVHS = 23.1%, LVLS = 29.1% (P < 0.01); oesophagectomy: HVHS = 34.5%, LVHS = 24.4%, LVLS = 21.7% (P = 0.01)). Following oesophagectomy, the 3- and 5-year overall survival was better following treatment in HVHS (P < 0.01). There was no difference between the groups following gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

In Queensland, the quality of surgery was higher in HVHS hospitals performing gastrectomy and oesophagectomy; however, the impact on cancer survival was only seen following oesophagectomy.

[Importance of splenectomy in the operative treatment of gastric cancer]

BACKGROUND

The value of simultaneous splenectomy as part of an oncologically adequate resection for gastric cancer has been controversially discussed over the last decades.

METHODS

As part of a prospective multicenter observational study data were obtained from patients admitted to hospital with histologically diagnosed primary gastric cancer or adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). The profiles of care of patients who had undergone surgical treatment in 141 surgical departments from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2009 were collated. Overall, 2897 patients were enrolled in the study (tumor resection, n = 2545).

RESULTS

The overall splenectomy rate was 11.1% (n = 283) and the highest proportion was found in AEG tumor lesions (19.4%). In the whole group of patients as well as depending on the tumor site, there was a higher preoperative comorbidity in splenectomized patients. While the rate of general postoperative complications after splenectomy was significantly increased in all patients and also depending on various tumor sites, there were no differences in the rate of specific postoperative complications. A significantly higher hospital mortality comparing the splenectomy group of patients with those in whom the spleen could be preserved, was only observed in AEG-associated tumor lesions (15.2% vs. 5.0%). All splenectomized patients showed a shorter long-term survival (p < 0.001) compared to resections with a preserved spleen (18 months vs. 36 months).

CONCLUSION

In the surgical treatment of gastric cancer, splenectomy can be considered a negative predictor for a worse perioperative outcome and a worse long-term survival.

[Investigations on in-hospital mortality in pancreatic surgery : Results of a multicenter observational study]

BACKGROUND

The rate of hospital mortality (in-hospital mortality) after complex pancreatic resections cannot be used as a decision-making criterion with no further analysis and specification. Such analysis has to provide a risk-adjusted benchmarking including a continuous evaluation taking into account the frequency of a surgical procedure and its competent perioperative management.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

As part of the Prospective Evaluation study Elective Pancreatic surgery (PEEP), overall 2003 patients were enrolled over a 3-year time period from 01 January 2006 to 12 December 2008, who underwent elective pancreatic surgery in 27 surgical departments. Included in the study were only hospitals which perform pancreatic resections. In addition to the analysis of the current situation of the operative treatment of pancreatic diseases, the complex aspects of the in-hospital mortality as a main outcome parameter were investigated.

RESULTS

Out of all enrolled patients (n = 2003), 75 patients (3.7%) died during the hospital stay. In the group of 1045 patients with partial pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), 43 patients did not survive the hospital stay (4.1%). Similarly, such low in-hospital mortality rates were observed after total pancreatoduodenectomy (3.8%) and after left-sided resection of the pancreas (1.9%). With respect to a univariate risk stratification, advanced age and an American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score of 3 and 4 had a significant impact on in-hospital mortality. Multivariate regression analysis within the PD group revealed an increased need for blood transfusions and a delay in oral feeding as factors closely associated with specific complications with a significant impact on in-hospital mortality. Significant differences in the in-hospital mortality rates were found when comparing hospital volume groups, such as 10-20 vs. >20 cases/year for the 831 Kausch-Whipple procedures for adenocarcinoma and chronic pancreatitis.

DISCUSSION

An adequate in-hospital mortality rate in the continuous benchmarking represents an acceptable quality level of structural and therapeutic predictions in pancreatic resections. The participation of surgical departments with complex oncosurgical interventions in clinical multicenter observational studies as a contribution to research on surgical care appears reasonable and recommendable since the results of such studies can provide a contribution to decision-making processes in daily surgical practice.