1
|
Achterberg FB, Bijlstra OD, Slooter MD, Sibinga Mulder BG, Boonstra MC, Bouwense SA, Bosscha K, Coolsen MME, Derksen WJM, Gerhards MF, Gobardhan PD, Hagendoorn J, Lips D, Marsman HA, Zonderhuis BM, Wullaert L, Putter H, Burggraaf J, Mieog JSD, Vahrmeijer AL, Swijnenburg RJ. ICG-Fluorescence Imaging for Margin Assessment During Minimally Invasive Colorectal Liver Metastasis Resection. JAMA Netw Open 2024; 7:e246548. [PMID: 38639939 PMCID: PMC11031680 DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.6548] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/09/2023] [Accepted: 01/31/2024] [Indexed: 04/20/2024] Open
Abstract
Importance Unintended tumor-positive resection margins occur frequently during minimally invasive surgery for colorectal liver metastases and potentially negatively influence oncologic outcomes. Objective To assess whether indocyanine green (ICG)-fluorescence-guided surgery is associated with achieving a higher radical resection rate in minimally invasive colorectal liver metastasis surgery and to assess the accuracy of ICG fluorescence for predicting the resection margin status. Design, Setting, and Participants The MIMIC (Minimally Invasive, Indocyanine-Guided Metastasectomy in Patients With Colorectal Liver Metastases) trial was designed as a prospective single-arm multicenter cohort study in 8 Dutch liver surgery centers. Patients were scheduled to undergo minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) resections of colorectal liver metastases between September 1, 2018, and June 30, 2021. Exposures All patients received a single intravenous bolus of 10 mg of ICG 24 hours prior to surgery. During surgery, ICG-fluorescence imaging was used as an adjunct to ultrasonography and regular laparoscopy to guide and assess the resection margin in real time. The ICG-fluorescence imaging was performed during and after liver parenchymal transection to enable real-time assessment of the tumor margin. Absence of ICG fluorescence was favorable both during transection and in the tumor bed directly after resection. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome measure was the radical (R0) resection rate, defined by the percentage of colorectal liver metastases resected with at least a 1 mm distance between the tumor and resection plane. Secondary outcomes were the accuracy of ICG fluorescence in detecting margin-positive (R1; <1 mm margin) resections and the change in surgical management. Results In total, 225 patients were enrolled, of whom 201 (116 [57.7%] male; median age, 65 [IQR, 57-72] years) with 316 histologically proven colorectal liver metastases were included in the final analysis. The overall R0 resection rate was 92.4%. Re-resection of ICG-fluorescent tissue in the resection cavity was associated with a 5.0% increase in the R0 percentage (from 87.4% to 92.4%; P < .001). The sensitivity and specificity for real-time resection margin assessment were 60% and 90%, respectively (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.751; 95% CI, 0.668-0.833), with a positive predictive value of 54% and a negative predictive value of 92%. After training and proctoring of the first procedures, participating centers that were new to the technique had a comparable false-positive rate for predicting R1 resections during the first 10 procedures (odds ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.44-4.24). The ICG-fluorescence imaging was associated with changes in intraoperative surgical management in 56 (27.9%) of the patients. Conclusions and Relevance In this multicenter prospective cohort study, ICG-fluorescence imaging was associated with an increased rate of tumor margin-negative resection and changes in surgical management in more than one-quarter of the patients. The absence of ICG fluorescence during liver parenchymal transection predicted an R0 resection with 92% accuracy. These results suggest that use of ICG fluorescence may provide real-time feedback of the tumor margin and a higher rate of complete oncologic resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Friso B. Achterberg
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Okker D. Bijlstra
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maxime D. Slooter
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Mark C. Boonstra
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Stefan A. Bouwense
- NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Mariëlle M. E. Coolsen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter J. M. Derksen
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein/Regionaal Academisch Kankercentrum Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Michael F. Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht/Regionaal Academisch Kankercentrum Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Daan Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Hendrik A. Marsman
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Babs M. Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Lissa Wullaert
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Ziekenhuis, Breda, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Hein Putter
- Department of Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Jacobus Burggraaf
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
- Centre for Human Drug Research, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - J. Sven D. Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
de Graaff MR, Klaase JM, den Dulk M, Te Riele WW, Hagendoorn J, van Heek NT, Vermaas M, Belt EJT, Bosscha K, Slooter GD, Leclercq WKG, Liem MSL, Mieog JSD, Swijnenburg RJ, van Dam RM, Verhoef C, Kuhlmann K, van Duijvendijk P, Gerhards MF, Gobardhan P, van den Boezem P, Manusama ER, Grünhagen DJ, Kok NFM. Hospital variation and outcomes after repeat hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases: a nationwide cohort study. HPB (Oxford) 2024:S1365-182X(24)00051-0. [PMID: 38461070 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2024.02.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Revised: 12/27/2023] [Accepted: 02/25/2024] [Indexed: 03/11/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Approximately 70% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) experiences intrahepatic recurrence after initial liver resection. This study assessed outcomes and hospital variation in repeat liver resections (R-LR). METHODS This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2022 in the Netherlands. Overall survival (OS) was collected for patients operated on between 2014 and 2018 by linkage to the insurance database. RESULTS Data of 7479 liver resections (1391 (18.6%) repeat and 6088 (81.4%) primary) were analysed. Major morbidity and mortality were not different. Factors associated with major morbidity included ASA 3+, major liver resection, extrahepatic disease, and open surgery. Five-year OS after repeat versus primary liver resection was 42.3% versus 44.8%, P = 0.37. Factors associated with worse OS included largest CRLM >5 cm (aHR 1.58, 95% CI: 1.07-2.34, P = 0.023), >3 CRLM (aHR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.00-1.75, P = 0.046), extrahepatic disease (aHR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.25-2.04, P = 0.001), positive tumour margins (aHR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.09-1.85, P = 0.009). Significant hospital variation in performance of R-LR was observed, median 18.9% (8.2% to 33.3%). CONCLUSION Significant hospital variation was observed in performance of R-LR in the Netherlands reflecting different treatment decisions upon recurrence. On a population-based level R-LR leads to satisfactory survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle R de Graaff
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands; NUTRIM-School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - M Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, Ijsselland Hospital, Capelle aan de Ijssel, the Netherlands
| | - Eric J Th Belt
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Gerrit D Slooter
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands; NUTRIM-School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Cees Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Koert Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek - Dutch Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Peter van Duijvendijk
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Gelre Ziekenhuizen, Apeldoorn en Zutphen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Paul Gobardhan
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Medical Centre, Breda, the Netherlands
| | | | - Eric R Manusama
- Department of Surgery, Medical Centre Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands
| | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek - Dutch Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Wesdorp NJ, Zeeuw JM, Postma SCJ, Roor J, van Waesberghe JHTM, van den Bergh JE, Nota IM, Moos S, Kemna R, Vadakkumpadan F, Ambrozic C, van Dieren S, van Amerongen MJ, Chapelle T, Engelbrecht MRW, Gerhards MF, Grunhagen D, van Gulik TM, Hermans JJ, de Jong KP, Klaase JM, Liem MSL, van Lienden KP, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Ruers TM, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, Marquering HA, Stoker J, Swijnenburg RJ, Punt CJA, Huiskens J, Kazemier G. Deep learning models for automatic tumor segmentation and total tumor volume assessment in patients with colorectal liver metastases. Eur Radiol Exp 2023; 7:75. [PMID: 38038829 PMCID: PMC10692044 DOI: 10.1186/s41747-023-00383-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2023] [Accepted: 09/08/2023] [Indexed: 12/02/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND We developed models for tumor segmentation to automate the assessment of total tumor volume (TTV) in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS In this prospective cohort study, pre- and post-systemic treatment computed tomography (CT) scans of 259 patients with initially unresectable CRLM of the CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) were included. In total, 595 CT scans comprising 8,959 CRLM were divided into training (73%), validation (6.5%), and test sets (21%). Deep learning models were trained with ground truth segmentations of the liver and CRLM. TTV was calculated based on the CRLM segmentations. An external validation cohort was included, comprising 72 preoperative CT scans of patients with 112 resectable CRLM. Image segmentation evaluation metrics and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated. RESULTS In the test set (122 CT scans), the autosegmentation models showed a global Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of 0.96 (liver) and 0.86 (CRLM). The corresponding median per-case DSC was 0.96 (interquartile range [IQR] 0.95-0.96) and 0.80 (IQR 0.67-0.87). For tumor segmentation, the intersection-over-union, precision, and recall were 0.75, 0.89, and 0.84, respectively. An excellent agreement was observed between the reference and automatically computed TTV for the test set (ICC 0.98) and external validation cohort (ICC 0.98). In the external validation, the global DSC was 0.82 and the median per-case DSC was 0.60 (IQR 0.29-0.76) for tumor segmentation. CONCLUSIONS Deep learning autosegmentation models were able to segment the liver and CRLM automatically and accurately in patients with initially unresectable CRLM, enabling automatic TTV assessment in such patients. RELEVANCE STATEMENT Automatic segmentation enables the assessment of total tumor volume in patients with colorectal liver metastases, with a high potential of decreasing radiologist's workload and increasing accuracy and consistency. KEY POINTS • Tumor response evaluation is time-consuming, manually performed, and ignores total tumor volume. • Automatic models can accurately segment tumors in patients with colorectal liver metastases. • Total tumor volume can be accurately calculated based on automatic segmentations.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nina J Wesdorp
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - J Michiel Zeeuw
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Sam C J Postma
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joran Roor
- Department of Health, SAS Institute B.V, Huizen, the Netherlands
| | - Jan Hein T M van Waesberghe
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Janneke E van den Bergh
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Irene M Nota
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Shira Moos
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ruby Kemna
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Fijoy Vadakkumpadan
- Department of Computer Vision and Machine Learning, SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, USA
| | - Courtney Ambrozic
- Department of Computer Vision and Machine Learning, SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC, USA
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Thiery Chapelle
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Transplantation, and Endocrine Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Marc R W Engelbrecht
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Dirk Grunhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thomas M van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - John J Hermans
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Koert P de Jong
- Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Interventional Radiology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - Arjen M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - Theo M Ruers
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Henk A Marquering
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Biomedical Engineering and Physics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jaap Stoker
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Huiskens
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bond MJG, Kuiper BI, Bolhuis K, Komurcu A, van Amerongen MJ, Chapelle T, Dejong CHC, Engelbrecht MRW, Gerhards MF, Grünhagen DJ, van Gulik T, Hermans JJ, de Jong KP, Klaase JM, Kok NFM, Leclercq WKG, Liem MSL, van Lienden KP, Molenaar IQ, Neumann UP, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Ruers TM, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, Kazemier G, May AM, Punt CJA, Swijnenburg RJ. 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. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:5376-5385. [PMID: 37118612 PMCID: PMC10409679 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13510-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2022] [Accepted: 03/06/2023] [Indexed: 04/30/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marinde J G Bond
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Babette I Kuiper
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Karen Bolhuis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Aysun Komurcu
- The Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Thiery Chapelle
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Transplantation, and Endocrine Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Cornelis H C Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Marc R W Engelbrecht
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - John J Hermans
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Koert P de Jong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Radiology, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ulf P Neumann
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Arjen M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Theo M Ruers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Anne M May
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Bond MJG, Kuiper BI, Bolhuis K, Komurcu A, van Amerongen MJ, Chapelle T, Dejong CHC, Engelbrecht MRW, Gerhards MF, Grünhagen DJ, van Gulik T, Hermans JJ, de Jong KP, Klaase JM, Kok NFM, Leclercq WKG, Liem MSL, van Lienden KP, Quintus Molenaar I, Neumann UP, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Ruers TM, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, Kazemier G, May AM, Punt CJA, Swijnenburg RJ. ASO Visual Abstract: 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. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30:5388-5389. [PMID: 37253940 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13595-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/01/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Marinde J G Bond
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Babette I Kuiper
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Karen Bolhuis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Aysun Komurcu
- The Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Thiery Chapelle
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Transplantation, and Endocrine Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Cornelis H C Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Marc R W Engelbrecht
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - John J Hermans
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Koert P de Jong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Radiology, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ulf P Neumann
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Arjen M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Theo M Ruers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Anne M May
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Medical Oncology, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Bond MJG, Bolhuis K, Loosveld OJL, de Groot JWB, Droogendijk H, Helgason HH, Hendriks MP, Klaase JM, Kazemier G, Liem MSL, Rijken AM, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, de Jong KP, Gerhards MF, van Amerongen MJ, Engelbrecht MRW, van Lienden KP, Molenaar IQ, de Valk B, Haberkorn BCM, Kerver ED, Erdkamp F, van Alphen RJ, Mathijssen-van Stein D, Komurcu A, Lopez-Yurda M, Swijnenburg RJ, Punt CJA. First-line systemic treatment strategies in patients with initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CAIRO5): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, controlled, phase 3 study from the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group. Lancet Oncol 2023; 24:757-771. [PMID: 37329889 DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(23)00219-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2023] [Revised: 05/01/2023] [Accepted: 05/02/2023] [Indexed: 06/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients with initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases might qualify for local treatment with curative intent after reducing the tumour size by induction systemic treatment. We aimed to compare the currently most active induction regimens. METHODS In this open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 study (CAIRO5), patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed colorectal cancer, known RAS/BRAFV600E mutation status, WHO performance status of 0-1, and initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases were enrolled at 46 Dutch and one Belgian secondary and tertiary centres. Resectability or unresectability of colorectal cancer liver metastases was assessed centrally by an expert panel of liver surgeons and radiologists, at baseline and every 2 months thereafter by predefined criteria. Randomisation was done centrally with the minimisation technique via a masked web-based allocation procedure. Patients with right-sided primary tumour site or RAS or BRAFV600E mutated tumours were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive FOLFOX or FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (group A) or FOLFOXIRI plus bevacizumab (group B). Patients with left-sided and RAS and BRAFV600E wild-type tumours were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive FOLFOX or FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (group C) or FOLFOX or FOLFIRI plus panitumumab (group D), every 14 days for up to 12 cycles. Patients were stratified by resectability of colorectal cancer liver metastases, serum lactate dehydrogenase concentration, choice of irinotecan versus oxaliplatin, and BRAFV600E mutation status (for groups A and B). Bevacizumab was administered intravenously at 5 mg/kg. Panitumumab was administered intravenously at 6 mg/kg. FOLFIRI consisted of intravenous infusion of irinotecan at 180 mg/m2 with folinic acid at 400 mg/m2, followed by bolus fluorouracil at 400 mg/m2 intravenously, followed by continuous infusion of fluorouracil at 2400 mg/m2. FOLFOX consisted of oxaliplatin at 85 mg/m2 intravenously together with the same schedule of folinic acid and fluorouracil as in FOLFIRI. FOLFOXIRI consisted of irinotecan at 165 mg/m2 intravenously, followed by intravenous infusion of oxaliplatin at 85 mg/m2 with folinic acid at 400 mg/m2, followed by continuous infusion of fluorouracil at 3200 mg/m2. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was progression-free survival, analysed on a modified intention-to-treat basis, excluding patients who withdrew consent before starting study treatment or violated major entry criteria (no metastatic colorectal cancer, or previous liver surgery for colorectal cancer liver metastases). The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02162563, and accrual is complete. FINDINGS Between Nov 13, 2014, and Jan 31, 2022, 530 patients (327 [62%] male and 203 [38%] female; median age 62 years [IQR 54-69]) were randomly assigned: 148 (28%) patients to group A, 146 (28%) patients to group B, 118 (22%) patients to group C, and 118 (22%) patients to group D. Groups C and D were prematurely closed for futility. 521 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (147 in group A, 144 in group B, 114 in group C, and 116 in group D). The median follow-up at the time of this analysis was 51·1 months (95% CI 47·7-53·1) in groups A and B and 49·9 months (44·5-52·5) in in groups C and D. Median progression-free survival was 9·0 months (95% CI 7·7-10·5) in group A versus 10·6 months (9·9-12·1) in group B (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0·76 [95% CI 0·60-0·98]; p=0·032), and 10·8 months (95% CI 9·9-12·6) in group C versus 10·4 months (9·8-13·0) in group D (stratified HR 1·11 [95% CI 0·84-1·48]; p=0·46). The most frequent grade 3-4 events in groups A and B were neutropenia (19 [13%] patients in group A vs 57 [40%] in group B; p<0·0001), hypertension (21 [14%] vs 20 [14%]; p=1·00), and diarrhoea (five [3%] vs 28 [19%]; p<0·0001), and in groups C and D were neutropenia (29 [25%] vs 24 [21%]; p=0·44), skin toxicity (one [1%] vs 29 [25%]; p<0·0001), hypertension (20 [18%] vs eight [7%]; p=0·016), and diarrhoea (five [4%] vs 18 [16%]; p=0·0072). Serious adverse events occurred in 46 (31%) patients in group A, 75 (52%) patients in group B, 41 (36%) patients in group C, and 49 (42%) patients in group D. Seven treatment-related deaths were reported in group B (two due to multiorgan failure, and one each due to sepsis, pneumonia, portal vein thrombosis, septic shock and liver failure, and sudden death), one in group C (multiorgan failure), and three in group D (cardiac arrest, pulmonary embolism, and abdominal sepsis). INTERPRETATION In patients with initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases, FOLFOXIRI-bevacizumab was the preferred treatment in patients with a right-sided or RAS or BRAFV600E mutated primary tumour. In patients with a left-sided and RAS and BRAFV600E wild-type tumour, the addition of panitumumab to FOLFOX or FOLFIRI showed no clinical benefit over bevacizumab, but was associated with more toxicity. FUNDING Roche and Amgen.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marinde J G Bond
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Karen Bolhuis
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | - Helga Droogendijk
- Department of Internal Medicine, Bravis Hospital, Roosendaal, Netherlands
| | - Helgi H Helgason
- Department of Medical Oncology, Haaglanden Medical Centre, The Hague, Netherlands
| | | | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Arjen M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Koert P de Jong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marc R W Engelbrecht
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Bart de Valk
- Department of Medical Oncology, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp, Netherlands
| | | | - Emile D Kerver
- Department of Medical Oncology, OLVG Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Frans Erdkamp
- Department of Medical Oncology, Zuyderland Medical Centre, Heerlen, Netherlands
| | - Robbert J van Alphen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, Netherlands
| | | | - Aysun Komurcu
- The Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Marta Lopez-Yurda
- Biometrics Department, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands; Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Görgec B, Zwart M, Nota CL, Bijlstra OD, Bosscha K, de Boer MT, de Wilde RF, Draaisma WA, Gerhards MF, Liem MS, Lips DJ, Marsman HA, Mieog JSD, Molenaar QI, Nijkamp M, Te Riele WW, Terkivatan T, Vahrmeijer AL, Besselink MG, Swijnenburg RJ, Hagendoorn J. Implementation and Outcome of Robotic Liver Surgery in the Netherlands: A Nationwide Analysis. Ann Surg 2023; 277:e1269-e1277. [PMID: 35848742 PMCID: PMC10174096 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the nationwide implementation and surgical outcome of minor and major robotic liver surgery (RLS) and assess the first phase of implementation of RLS during the learning curve. BACKGROUND RLS may be a valuable alternative to laparoscopic liver surgery. Nationwide population-based studies with data on implementation and outcome of RLS are lacking. METHODS Multicenter retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients who underwent RLS for all indications in 9 Dutch centers (August 2014-March 2021). Data on all liver resections were obtained from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit (DHBA) including data from all 27 centers for liver surgery in the Netherlands. Outcomes were stratified for minor, technically major, and anatomically major RLS. Learning curve effect was assessed using cumulative sum analysis for blood loss. RESULTS Of 9437 liver resections, 400 were RLS (4.2%) procedures including 207 minor (52.2%), 141 technically major (35.3%), and 52 anatomically major (13%). The nationwide use of RLS increased from 0.2% in 2014 to 11.9% in 2020. The proportion of RLS among all minimally invasive liver resections increased from 2% to 28%. Median blood loss was 150 mL (interquartile range 50-350 mL] and the conversion rate 6.3% (n=25). The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications was 7.0% (n=27), median length of hospital stay 4 days (interquartile range 2-5) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality 0.8% (n=3). The R0 resection rate was 83.2% (n=263). Cumulative sum analysis for blood loss found a learning curve of at least 33 major RLS procedures. CONCLUSIONS The nationwide use of RLS in the Netherlands has increased rapidly with currently one-tenth of all liver resections and one-fourth of all minimally invasive liver resections being performed robotically. Although surgical outcomes of RLS in selected patient seem favorable, future prospective studies should determine its added value.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Burak Görgec
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maurice Zwart
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Carolijn L. Nota
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Okker D. Bijlstra
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Marieke T. de Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Roeland F. de Wilde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Werner A. Draaisma
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S. Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J. Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - J. Sven D. Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Quintus I. Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten Nijkamp
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W. Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Türkan Terkivatan
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marc G. Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Bolhuis K, Bond MJG, Van Amerongen MJ, Komurcu A, Chapelle T, Dejong CHC, Engelbrecht MRW, Gerhards MF, Grünhagen DJ, van Gulik TM, Hermans JJ, De Jong KP, Kazemier G, Klaase JM, Kok NFM, Leclercq WKG, Liem MSL, van Lienden KP, Molenaar IQ, Neumann UP, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Ruers TM, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, May AM, Punt CJA, Swijnenburg RJ. The role of tumour biological factors in technical anatomical resectability assessment of colorectal liver metastases following induction systemic treatment: An analysis of the Dutch CAIRO5 trial. Eur J Cancer 2023; 183:49-59. [PMID: 36801606 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2023.01.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2022] [Revised: 01/11/2023] [Accepted: 01/14/2023] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Large inter-surgeon variability exists in technical anatomical resectability assessment of colorectal cancer liver-only metastases (CRLM) following induction systemic therapy. We evaluated the role of tumour biological factors in predicting resectability and (early) recurrence after surgery for initially unresectable CRLM. METHODS 482 patients with initially unresectable CRLM from the phase 3 CAIRO5 trial were selected, with two-monthly resectability assessments by a liver expert panel. If no consensus existed among panel surgeons (i.e. same vote for (un)resectability of CRLM), conclusion was based on majority. The association of tumour biological (sidedness, synchronous CRLM, carcinoembryonic antigen and RAS/BRAFV600E mutation status) and technical anatomical factors with consensus among panel surgeons, secondary resectability and early recurrence (<6 months) without curative-intent repeat local treatment was analysed by uni- and pre-specified multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS After systemic treatment, 240 (50%) patients received complete local treatment of CRLM of which 75 (31%) patients experienced early recurrence without repeat local treatment. Higher number of CRLM (odds ratio 1.09 [95% confidence interval 1.03-1.15]) and age (odds ratio 1.03 [95% confidence interval 1.00-1.07]) were independently associated with early recurrence without repeat local treatment. In 138 (52%) patients, no consensus among panel surgeons was present prior to local treatment. Postoperative outcomes in patients with and without consensus were comparable. CONCLUSIONS Almost a third of patients selected by an expert panel for secondary CRLM surgery following induction systemic treatment experience an early recurrence only amenable to palliative treatment. Number of CRLM and age, but no tumour biological factors are predictive, suggesting that until there are better biomarkers; resectability assessment remains primarily a technical anatomical decision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen Bolhuis
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marinde J G Bond
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
| | | | - Aysun Komurcu
- The Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Thiery Chapelle
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Transplantation, and Endocrine Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Cornelis H C Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Marc R W Engelbrecht
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thomas M van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - John J Hermans
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Koert P De Jong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Radiology, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Ulf P Neumann
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - Arjen M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - Theo M Ruers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Anne M May
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J A Punt
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht University, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Talboom K, Borstlap WAA, Roodbeen SX, Bruns ERJ, Buskens CJ, Hompes R, Tytgat KMAJ, Tuynman JB, Consten ECJ, Heuff G, Kuiper T, van Geloven AAW, Veldhuis GJ, van der Hoeven JAB, Gerhards MF, Sietses C, Spinelli A, van de Ven AWH, van der Zaag ES, Westerterp M, van Westreenen HL, Dijkgraaf ML, Juffermans NP, Bemelman WA, Hess D, Swank HA, Scholten L, van der Bilt JDW, Jansen MA, van Duijvendijk P, Bezuur D, Carvello M, Foppa C, de Vos tot Nederveen Cappel WH, Geitenbeek RTJ, van Woensel L, De Castro SMM, Wientjes C, van Oostendorp S. Ferric carboxymaltose infusion versus oral iron supplementation for preoperative iron deficiency anaemia in patients with colorectal cancer (FIT): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Haematol 2023; 10:e250-e260. [PMID: 36863386 DOI: 10.1016/s2352-3026(22)00402-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/01/2022] [Revised: 11/17/2022] [Accepted: 12/08/2022] [Indexed: 03/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A third of patients with colorectal cancer who are eligible for surgery in high-income countries have concomitant anaemia associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to compare the efficacy of preoperative intravenous and oral iron supplementation in patients with colorectal cancer and iron deficiency anaemia. METHODS In the FIT multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled trial, adult patients (aged 18 years or older) with M0 stage colorectal cancer scheduled for elective curative resection and iron deficiency anaemia (defined as haemoglobin level of less than 7·5 mmol/L (12 g/dL) for women and less than 8 mmol/L (13 g/dL) for men, and a transferrin saturation of less than 20%) were randomly assigned to either 1-2 g of ferric carboxymaltose intravenously or three tablets of 200 mg of oral ferrous fumarate daily. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with normalised haemoglobin levels before surgery (≥12 g/dL for women and ≥13 g/dL for men). An intention-to-treat analysis was done for the primary analysis. Safety was analysed in all patients who received treatment. The trial was registered at ClincalTrials.gov, NCT02243735, and has completed recruitment. FINDINGS Between Oct 31, 2014, and Feb 23, 2021, 202 patients were included and assigned to intravenous (n=96) or oral (n=106) iron treatment. Treatment began a median of 14 days (IQR 11-22) before surgery for intravenous iron and 19 days (IQR 13-27) for oral iron. Normalisation of haemoglobin at day of admission was reached in 14 (17%) of 84 patients treated intravenously and 15 (16%) of 97 patients treated orally (relative risk [RR] 1·08 [95% CI 0·55-2·10]; p=0·83), but the proportion of patients with normalised haemoglobin significantly increased for the intravenous treatment group at later timepoints (49 [60%] of 82 vs 18 [21%] of 88 at 30 days; RR 2·92 [95% CI 1·87-4·58]; p<0·0001). The most prevalent treatment-related adverse event was discoloured faeces (grade 1) after oral iron treatment (14 [13%] of 105), and no treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths were observed in either group. No differences in other safety outcomes were seen, and the most common serious adverse events were anastomotic leakage (11 [5%] of 202), aspiration pneumonia (5 [2%] of 202), and intra-abdominal abscess (5 [2%] 202). INTERPRETATION Normalisation of haemoglobin before surgery was infrequent with both treatment regimens, but significantly improved at all other timepoints following intravenous iron treatment. Restoration of iron stores was feasible only with intravenous iron. In selected patients, surgery might be delayed to augment the effect of intravenous iron on haemoglobin normalisation. FUNDING Vifor Pharma.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin Talboom
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Sapho X Roodbeen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Emma R J Bruns
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Roel Hompes
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Esther C J Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, Netherlands; Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Gijsbert Heuff
- Department of Surgery, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp, Netherlands
| | - Teaco Kuiper
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amstelland Hospital, Amstelveen, Netherlands
| | | | - Gerrit J Veldhuis
- Department of Internal Medicine, Antonius Hospital, Sneek, Netherlands
| | | | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Colin Sietses
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Gelderse Vallei, Ede, Netherlands
| | - Antonino Spinelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy; Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | - Marcel L Dijkgraaf
- Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Amsterdam Public Health Methodology, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Nicole P Juffermans
- Department of Internal Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Wilhelmus A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location AMC, Amsterdam, Netherlands; IBD Unit, Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, IRCCS Ospedale San Raffaele and University Vita Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Meima-van Praag EM, van Rijn KL, Wasmann KATGM, Snijder HJ, Stoker J, D'Haens GR, Gecse KB, Gerhards MF, Jansen JM, Dijkgraaf MGW, van der Bilt JDW, Mundt MW, Spinelli A, Danese S, Bemelman WA, Buskens CJ. Short-term anti-TNF therapy with surgical closure versus anti-TNF therapy in the treatment of perianal fistulas in Crohn's disease (PISA-II): a patient preference randomised trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 7:617-626. [PMID: 35427495 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(22)00088-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2022] [Revised: 03/07/2022] [Accepted: 03/08/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Guidelines on Crohn's perianal fistulas recommend anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) treatment and suggest considering surgical closure for patients with surgically amenable disease. However, long-term outcomes following these two strategies have not been directly compared. The aim of this study was to assess radiological healing in patients who received short-term anti-TNF treatment and surgical closure compared with those who received anti-TNF treatment alone. METHODS The PISA-II trial was a multicentre, patient preference study done in nine hospitals in the Netherlands and one hospital in Italy. Adult patients with Crohn's disease and an active high perianal fistula with a single internal opening were eligible for inclusion. After counselling, patients with no treatment preference were randomly assigned (1:1) using random block randomisation (block sizes of six without statification), to 4-month anti-TNF therapy and surgical closure or anti-TNF therapy for 1 year, after seton insertion. Patients with a treatment preference received their preferred therapy. The primary outcome was radiological healing assessed by MRI at 18 months, defined as a complete fibrotic tract or a MAGNIFI-CD (Magnetic Resonance Index for Fistula Imaging in Crohn's Disease) score of 0, assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes included clinical closure, number of patients undergoing surgical reintervention and number of reinterventions, recurrences, and impact on quality of life measured by the Perianal Disease Activity Index (PDAI). Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis and additionally an as-treated analysis for radiological healing and clinical closure. This study was registered at the Dutch Trial Registry, NL7625, and with EudraCT, 2018-002064-15, and is closed to accrual due to completion. FINDINGS Between Sept 14, 2013, and Dec 7, 2019, 94 patients were enrolled onto the trial, of whom 32 (34%) were randomly assigned and 62 (66%) chose a specific treatment. 38 (40%) patients were assigned to the surgical closure group and 56 (60%) patients to the anti-TNF group. At 18 months, radiological healing was significantly more common in the surgical closure group (12 [32%] patients) than in the anti-TNF group (five [9%] patients; p=0·005). By contrast, clinical closure was not significantly different between the two treatment groups (26 [68%] patients in the surgical closure group vs 29 [52%] patients in the anti-TNF group; p=0·076). Significantly fewer patients required a reintervention in the surgical closure group than in the anti-TNF therapy group (five [13%] patients in the surgical closure group, median one reintervention [IQR one to three] vs 24 [43%] patients in the anti-TNF group, median two reinterventions [one to two]; p=0·005). Among patients who reached clinical closure during follow-up, four (14%) of 29 in the surgical closure group and five (16%) of 31 in the anti-TNF therapy group had a recurrence, which occurred only in patients without radiological healing. PDAI was significantly lower in the surgical closure group than in the anti-TNF group after 18 months (p=0·031). Adverse events and serious adverse events were similar in both treatment groups and mostly entailed reinterventions. Ten (11%) patients had side-effects associated with anti-TNF treatment. Two serious adverse events unrelated to study treatment occurred (appendicitis and myocardial infarction). One patient died from a tongue base carcinoma, unrelated to study treatment. INTERPRETATION Short-term anti-TNF treatment combined with surgical closure induces long-term MRI healing more frequently than anti-TNF therapy in patients with Crohn's perianal fistulas. These data suggest that patients with Crohn's perianal fistula amenable for surgical closure should be counselled for this therapeutic approach. FUNDING Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development and Broad Medical Research Program.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Elise M Meima-van Praag
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Kyra L van Rijn
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Karin A T G M Wasmann
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Harmanna J Snijder
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Jaap Stoker
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Geert R D'Haens
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Krisztina B Gecse
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Jeroen M Jansen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Epidemiology and Data Science, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Marco W Mundt
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, Netherlands
| | - Antonino Spinelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Silvio Danese
- Department of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ospedale San Raffaele and University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Ospedale San Raffaele and University Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
| | - Christianne J Buskens
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Hoek VT, Edomskis PP, Stark PW, Lambrichts DPV, Draaisma WA, Consten ECJ, Lange JF, Bemelman WA, Hop WC, Opmeer BC, Reitsma JB, Scholte RA, Waltmann EWH, Legemate A, Bartelsman JF, Meijer DW, de Brouwer M, van Dalen J, Durbridge M, Geerdink M, Ilbrink GJ, Mehmedovic S, Middelhoek P, Boom MJ, Consten ECJ, van der Bilt JDW, van Olden GDJ, Stam MAW, Verweij MS, Vennix S, Musters GD, Swank HA, Boermeester MA, Busch ORC, Buskens CJ, El-Massoudi Y, Kluit AB, van Rossem CC, Schijven MP, Tanis PJ, Unlu C, van Dieren S, Gerhards MF, Karsten TM, de Nes LC, Rijna H, van Wagensveld BA, Koff eman GI, Steller EP, Tuynman JB, Bruin SC, van der Peet DL, Blanken-Peeters CFJM, Cense HA, Jutte E, Crolla RMPH, van der Schelling GP, van Zeeland M, de Graaf EJR, Groenendijk RPR, Karsten TM, Vermaas M, Schouten O, de Vries MR, Prins HA, Lips DJ, Bosker RJI, van der Hoeven JAB, Diks J, Plaisier PW, Kruyt PM, Sietses C, Stommel MWJ, Nienhuijs SW, de Hingh IHJT, Luyer MDP, van Montfort G, Ponten EH, Smulders JF, van Duyn EB, Klaase JM, Swank DJ, Ottow RT, Stockmann HBAC, Vermeulen J, Vuylsteke RJCLM, Belgers HJ, Fransen S, von Meijenfeldt EM, Sosef MN, van Geloven AAW, Hendriks ER, ter Horst B, Leeuwenburgh MMN, van Ruler O, Vogten JM, Vriens EJC, Westerterp M, Eijsbouts QAJ, Bentohami A, Bijlsma TS, de Korte N, Nio D, Govaert MJPM, Joosten JJA, Tollenaar RAEM, Stassen LPS, Wiezer MJ, Hazebroek EJ, Smits AB, van Westreenen HL, Lange JF, Brandt A, Nijboer WN, Mulder IM, Toorenvliet BR, Weidema WF, Coene PPLO, Mannaerts GHH, den Hartog D, de Vos RJ, Zengerink JF, Hoofwijk AGM, Hulsewé KWE, Melenhorst J, Stoot JHMB, Steup WH, Huijstee PJ, Merkus JWS, Wever JJ, Maring JK, Heisterkamp J, van Grevenstein WMU, Vriens MR, Besselink MGH, Borel Rinkes IHM, Witkamp AJ, Slooter GD, Konsten JLM, Engel AF, Pierik EGJM, Frakking TG, van Geldere D, Patijn GA, D’Hoore BAJL, de Buck AVO, Miserez M, Terrasson I, Wolthuis A, di Saverio S, de Blasiis MG. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage versus sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: three-year follow-up of the randomised LOLA trial. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:7764-7774. [PMID: 35606544 PMCID: PMC9485102 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09326-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2021] [Accepted: 05/01/2022] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study aimed to compare laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy as treatment for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis during a 36 month follow-up of the LOLA trial.
Methods
Within the LOLA arm of the international, multicentre LADIES trial, patients with perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis were randomised between laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy. Outcomes were collected up to 36 months. The primary outcome of the present study was cumulative morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included reoperations (including stoma reversals), stoma rates, and sigmoidectomy rates in the lavage group.
Results
Long-term follow-up was recorded in 77 of the 88 originally included patients, 39 were randomised to sigmoidectomy (51%) and 38 to laparoscopic lavage (49%). After 36 months, overall cumulative morbidity (sigmoidectomy 28/39 (72%) versus lavage 32/38 (84%), p = 0·272) and mortality (sigmoidectomy 7/39 (18%) versus lavage 6/38 (16%), p = 1·000) did not differ. The number of patients who underwent a reoperation was significantly lower for lavage compared to sigmoidectomy (sigmoidectomy 27/39 (69%) versus lavage 17/38 (45%), p = 0·039). After 36 months, patients alive with stoma in situ was lower in the lavage group (proportion calculated from the Kaplan–Meier life table, sigmoidectomy 17% vs lavage 11%, log-rank p = 0·0268). Eventually, 17 of 38 (45%) patients allocated to lavage underwent sigmoidectomy.
Conclusion
Long-term outcomes showed that laparoscopic lavage was associated with less patients who underwent reoperations and lower stoma rates in patients alive after 36 months compared to sigmoidectomy. No differences were found in terms of cumulative morbidity or mortality. Patient selection should be improved to reduce risk for short-term complications after which lavage could still be a valuable treatment option.
Graphical abstract
Collapse
|
12
|
Wesdorp NJ, Kemna R, Bolhuis K, van Waesberghe JHTM, Nota IMGC, Struik F, Oulad Abdennabi I, Phoa SSKS, van Dieren S, van Amerongen MJ, Chapelle T, Dejong CHC, Engelbrecht MRW, Gerhards MF, Grünhagen D, van Gulik TM, Hermans JJ, de Jong KP, Klaase JM, Liem MSL, van Lienden KP, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Ruers TM, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, Swijnenburg RJ, Punt CJA, Huiskens J, Stoker J, Kazemier G. Interobserver Variability in CT-based Morphologic Tumor Response Assessment of Colorectal Liver Metastases. Radiol Imaging Cancer 2022; 4:e210105. [PMID: 35522139 PMCID: PMC9152692 DOI: 10.1148/rycan.210105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/09/2021] [Revised: 01/26/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 05/24/2023]
Abstract
Purpose To evaluate interobserver variability in the morphologic tumor response assessment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) managed with systemic therapy and to assess the relation of morphologic response with gene mutation status, targeted therapy, and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 measurements. Materials and Methods Participants with initially unresectable CRLM receiving different systemic therapy regimens from the randomized, controlled CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) were included in this prospective imaging study. Three radiologists independently assessed morphologic tumor response on baseline and first follow-up CT scans according to previously published criteria. Two additional radiologists evaluated disagreement cases. Interobserver agreement was calculated by using Fleiss κ. On the basis of the majority of individual radiologic assessments, the final morphologic tumor response was determined. Finally, the relation of morphologic tumor response and clinical prognostic parameters was assessed. Results In total, 153 participants (median age, 63 years [IQR, 56-71]; 101 men) with 306 CT scans comprising 2192 CRLM were included. Morphologic assessment performed by the three radiologists yielded 86 (56%) agreement cases and 67 (44%) disagreement cases (including four major disagreement cases). Overall interobserver agreement between the panel radiologists on morphology groups and morphologic response categories was moderate (κ = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.48, 0.58 and κ = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.47, 0.60). Optimal morphologic response was particularly observed in patients treated with bevacizumab (P = .001) and in patients with RAS/BRAF mutation (P = .04). No evidence of a relationship between RECIST 1.1 and morphologic response was found (P = .61). Conclusion Morphologic tumor response assessment following systemic therapy in participants with CRLM demonstrated considerable interobserver variability. Keywords: Tumor Response, Observer Performance, CT, Liver, Metastases, Oncology, Abdomen/Gastrointestinal Clinical trial registration no. NCT02162563 Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2022.
Collapse
|
13
|
Krul MF, Elfrink AKE, Buis CI, Swijnenburg RJ, Te Riele WW, Verhoef C, Gobardhan PD, Dulk MD, Liem MSL, Tanis PJ, Mieog JSD, van den Boezem PB, Leclercq WKG, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Gerhards MF, Klaase JM, Grünhagen DJ, Kok NFM, Kuhlmann KFD. Hospital variation and outcomes of simultaneous resection of primary colorectal tumour and liver metastases: a population-based study. HPB (Oxford) 2022; 24:255-266. [PMID: 34305003 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.06.422] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2021] [Revised: 06/01/2021] [Accepted: 06/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal treatment sequence for patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains uncertain. This study aimed to assess factors associated with the use of simultaneous resections and impact on hospital variation. METHOD This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver surgery for synchronous colorectal liver metastases between 2014 and 2019 in the Netherlands. Factors associated with simultaneous resection were identified. Short-term surgical outcomes of simultaneous resections and factors associated with 30-day major morbidity were evaluated. RESULTS Of 2146 patients included, 589 (27%) underwent simultaneous resection in 28 hospitals. Simultaneous resection was associated with age, sex, BMI, number, size and bilobar distribution of CRLM, and administration of preoperative chemotherapy. More minimally invasive and minor resections were performed in the simultaneous group. Hospital variation was present (range 2.4%-83.3%) with several hospitals performing simultaneous procedures more and less frequently than expected. Simultaneous resection resulted in 13% 30-day major morbidity, and 1% mortality. ASA classification ≥3 was independently associated with higher 30-day major morbidity after simultaneous resection (aOR 1.97, CI 1.10-3.42, p = 0.018). CONCLUSION Distinctive patient and tumour characteristics influence the choice for simultaneous resection. Remarkable hospital variation is present in the Netherlands.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Myrtle F Krul
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Arthur K E Elfrink
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Carlijn I Buis
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Wouter K G Leclercq
- Department of Surgery, Maxima Medical Centre, Eindhoven, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Koert F D Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Wesdorp NJ, Bolhuis K, Roor J, van Waesberghe JHTM, van Dieren S, van Amerongen MJ, Chapelle T, Dejong CHC, Engelbrecht MRW, Gerhards MF, Grunhagen D, van Gulik TM, Hermans JJ, de Jong KP, Klaase JM, Liem MSL, van Lienden KP, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Ruers TM, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, Swijnenburg RJ, Punt CJA, Huiskens J, Kazemier G. The Prognostic Value of Total Tumor Volume Response Compared With RECIST1.1 in Patients With Initially Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases Undergoing Systemic Treatment. Ann Surg Open 2021; 2:e103. [PMID: 37637880 PMCID: PMC10455281 DOI: 10.1097/as9.0000000000000103] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2021] [Accepted: 09/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Objectives Compare total tumor volume (TTV) response after systemic treatment to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST1.1) and assess the prognostic value of TTV change and RECIST1.1 for recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with colorectal liver-only metastases (CRLM). Background RECIST1.1 provides unidimensional criteria to evaluate tumor response to systemic therapy. Those criteria are accepted worldwide but are limited by interobserver variability and ignore potentially valuable information about TTV. Methods Patients with initially unresectable CRLM receiving systemic treatment from the randomized, controlled CAIRO5 trial (NCT02162563) were included. TTV response was assessed using software specifically developed together with SAS analytics. Baseline and follow-up computed tomography (CT) scans were used to calculate RECIST1.1 and TTV response to systemic therapy. Different thresholds (10%, 20%, 40%) were used to define response of TTV as no standard currently exists. RFS was assessed in a subgroup of patients with secondarily resectable CRLM after induction treatment. Results A total of 420 CT scans comprising 7820 CRLM in 210 patients were evaluated. In 30% to 50% (depending on chosen TTV threshold) of patients, discordance was observed between RECIST1.1 and TTV change. A TTV decrease of >40% was observed in 47 (22%) patients who had stable disease according to RECIST1.1. In 118 patients with secondarily resectable CRLM, RFS was shorter for patients with less than 10% TTV decrease compared with patients with more than 10% TTV decrease (P = 0.015), while RECIST1.1 was not prognostic (P = 0.821). Conclusions TTV response assessment shows prognostic potential in the evaluation of systemic therapy response in patients with CRLM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nina J. Wesdorp
- From the Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Karen Bolhuis
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joran Roor
- Department of Health, SAS Institute B.V., Huizen, The Netherlands
| | - Jan-Hein T. M. van Waesberghe
- Department of Radiology and Molecular Imaging, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Martin J. van Amerongen
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Thiery Chapelle
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Transplantation, and Endocrine Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Cornelis H. C. Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - Marc R. W. Engelbrecht
- Department of Radiology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F. Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Dirk Grunhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas M. van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - John J. Hermans
- Department of Medical Imaging, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Koert P. de Jong
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Joost M. Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Mike S. L. Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - Krijn P. van Lienden
- Department of Interventional Radiology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - I. Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht and St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs A. Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Arjen M. Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Theo M. Ruers
- Department of Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology and Gastrointestinal Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes H. W. de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J. A. Punt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Huiskens
- Department of Health, SAS Institute B.V., Huizen, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- From the Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Bolhuis K, Grosheide L, Wesdorp NJ, Komurcu A, Chapelle T, Dejong CHC, Gerhards MF, Grünhagen DJ, van Gulik TM, Huiskens J, De Jong KP, Kazemier G, Klaase JM, Liem MSL, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Ruers TM, Verhoef C, de Wilt JHW, Punt CJA, Swijnenburg RJ. Short-Term Outcomes of Secondary Liver Surgery for Initially Unresectable Colorectal Liver Metastases Following Modern Induction Systemic Therapy in the Dutch CAIRO5 Trial. Ann Surg Open 2021; 2:e081. [PMID: 37635815 PMCID: PMC10455233 DOI: 10.1097/as9.0000000000000081] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2021] [Accepted: 06/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Objective To present short-term outcomes of liver surgery in patients with initially unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) downsized by chemotherapy plus targeted agents. Background The increase of complex hepatic resections of CRLM, technical innovations pushing boundaries of respectability, and use of intensified induction systemic regimens warrant for safety data in a homogeneous multicenter prospective cohort. Methods Patients with initially unresectable CRLM, who underwent complete resection after induction systemic regimens with doublet or triplet chemotherapy, both plus targeted therapy, were selected from the ongoing phase III CAIRO5 study (NCT02162563). Short-term outcomes and risk factors for severe postoperative morbidity (Clavien Dindo grade ≥ 3) were analyzed using logistic regression analysis. Results A total of 173 patients underwent resection of CRLM after induction systemic therapy. The median number of metastases was 9 and 161 (93%) patients had bilobar disease. Thirty-six (20.8%) 2-stage resections and 88 (51%) major resections (>3 liver segments) were performed. Severe postoperative morbidity and 90-day mortality was 15.6% and 2.9%, respectively. After multivariable analysis, blood transfusion (odds ratio [OR] 2.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1-6.4], P = 0.03), major resection (OR 2.9 [95% CI 1.1-7.5], P = 0.03), and triplet chemotherapy (OR 2.6 [95% CI 1.1-7.5], P = 0.03) were independently correlated with severe postoperative complications. No association was found between number of cycles of systemic therapy and severe complications (r = -0.038, P = 0.31). Conclusion In patients with initially unresectable CRLM undergoing modern induction systemic therapy and extensive liver surgery, severe postoperative morbidity and 90-day mortality were 15.6% and 2.7%, respectively. Triplet chemotherapy, blood transfusion, and major resections were associated with severe postoperative morbidity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen Bolhuis
- From the Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lodi Grosheide
- From the Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nina J. Wesdorp
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Aysun Komurcu
- The Netherlands Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Thiery Chapelle
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Transplantation, and Endocrine Surgery, University of Antwerp, Belgium
| | - Cornelis H. C. Dejong
- Maastricht University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Maastricht, The Netherlands and Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | | | - Dirk J. Grünhagen
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Surgery, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas M. van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Koert P. De Jong
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost M. Klaase
- Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen
| | - Mike S. L. Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - I. Quintus Molenaar
- Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | | - Arjen M. Rijken
- Amphia hospital, Department of Surgery, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Theo M. Ruers
- Amphia hospital, Department of Surgery, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Department of Surgery, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Cornelis J. A. Punt
- From the Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center, Utrecht University, Department of Epidemiology, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Görgec B, Fichtinger RS, Ratti F, Aghayan D, Van der Poel MJ, Al-Jarrah R, Armstrong T, Cipriani F, Fretland ÅA, Suhool A, Bemelmans M, Bosscha K, Braat AE, De Boer MT, Dejong CHC, Doornebosch PG, Draaisma WA, Gerhards MF, Gobardhan PD, Hagendoorn J, Kazemier G, Klaase J, Leclercq WKG, Liem MS, Lips DJ, Marsman HA, Mieog JSD, Molenaar QI, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Nota CL, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Slooter GD, Stommel MWJ, Swijnenburg RJ, Tanis PJ, Te Riele WW, Terkivatan T, Van den Tol PMP, Van den Boezem PB, Van der Hoeven JA, Vermaas M, Edwin B, Aldrighetti LA, Van Dam RM, Abu Hilal M, Besselink MG. Comparing practice and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection between high-volume expert centres and nationwide low-to-medium volume centres. Br J Surg 2021; 108:983-990. [PMID: 34195799 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab096] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2020] [Revised: 08/28/2020] [Accepted: 02/18/2021] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Based on excellent outcomes from high-volume centres, laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly being adopted into nationwide practice which typically includes low-medium volume centres. It is unknown how the use and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection compare between high-volume centres and low-medium volume centres. This study aimed to compare use and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection in three leading European high-volume centres and nationwide practice in the Netherlands. METHOD An international, retrospective multicentre cohort study including data from three European high-volume centres (Oslo, Southampton and Milan) and all 20 centres in the Netherlands performing laparoscopic liver resection (low-medium volume practice) from January 2011 to December 2016. A high-volume centre is defined as a centre performing >50 laparoscopic liver resections per year. Patients were retrospectively stratified into low, moderate- and high-risk Southampton difficulty score groups. RESULTS A total of 2425 patients were included (1540 high-volume; 885 low-medium volume). The median annual proportion of laparoscopic liver resection was 42.9 per cent in high-volume centres and 7.2 per cent in low-medium volume centres. Patients in the high-volume centres had a lower conversion rate (7.4 versus 13.1 per cent; P < 0.001) with less intraoperative incidents (9.3 versus 14.6 per cent; P = 0.002) as compared to low-medium volume centres. Whereas postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were similar in the two groups, a lower reintervention rate (5.1 versus 7.2 per cent; P = 0.034) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (3 versus 5 days; P < 0.001) were observed in the high-volume centres as compared to the low-medium volume centres. In each Southampton difficulty score group, the conversion rate was lower and hospital stay shorter in high-volume centres. The rate of intraoperative incidents did not differ in the low-risk group, whilst in the moderate-risk and high-risk groups this rate was lower in high-volume centres (absolute difference 6.7 and 14.2 per cent; all P < 0.004). CONCLUSION High-volume expert centres had a sixfold higher use of laparoscopic liver resection, less conversions, and shorter hospital stay, as compared to a nationwide low-medium volume practice. Stratification into Southampton difficulty score risk groups identified some differences but largely outcomes appeared better for high-volume centres in each risk group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- B Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza - Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - R S Fichtinger
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands and RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - F Ratti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - D Aghayan
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.,Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Norway
| | - M J Van der Poel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R Al-Jarrah
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - T Armstrong
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - F Cipriani
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Å A Fretland
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
| | - A Suhool
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - M Bemelmans
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands and RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - K Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - A E Braat
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - M T De Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - C H C Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands and RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - P G Doornebosch
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - W A Draaisma
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, the Netherlands
| | - M F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - P D Gobardhan
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - J Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - G Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - W K G Leclercq
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M S Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - D J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - H A Marsman
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Q I Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - C L Nota
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - G A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - A M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - G D Slooter
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - R J Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - P J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - W W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - T Terkivatan
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - P M P Van den Tol
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - P B Van den Boezem
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - J A Van der Hoeven
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
| | - M Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - B Edwin
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.,The Intervention Centre, Oslo University Hospital - Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway.,Institute of Clinical Medicine, Medical Faculty, University of Oslo, Norway
| | - L A Aldrighetti
- Hepatobiliary Surgery Division, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - R M Van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, the Netherlands and RWTH Aachen, Germany.,GROW - School for Oncology & Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Department of General and Visceral Surgery, University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza - Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Steen MW, van Rijssen LB, Festen S, Busch OR, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Geest LG, de Hingh IH, van Santvoort HC, Besselink MG, Gerhards MF. Impact of time interval between multidisciplinary team meeting and intended pancreatoduodenectomy on oncological outcomes. BJS Open 2020; 4:884-892. [PMID: 32841533 PMCID: PMC7528524 DOI: 10.1002/bjs5.50319] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2019] [Accepted: 05/29/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Dutch guidelines indicate that treatment of pancreatic head and periampullary malignancies should be started within 3 weeks of the multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting. This study aimed to assess the impact of time to surgery on oncological outcomes. METHODS This was a retrospective population-based cohort study of patients with pancreatic head and periampullary malignancies included in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients scheduled for pancreatoduodenectomy and who were discussed in an MDT meeting from May 2012 to December 2016 were eligible. Time to surgery was defined as days between the final preoperative MDT meeting and surgery, categorized in tertiles (short interval, 18 days or less; intermediate, 19-32 days; long, 33 days or more). Oncological outcomes included overall survival, resection rate and R0 resection rate. RESULTS A total of 2027 patients were included, of whom 677, 665 and 685 had a short, intermediate and long time interval to surgery respectively. Median time to surgery was 25 (i.q.r. 14-36) days. Longer time to surgery was not associated with overall survival (hazard ratio 0·99, 95 per cent c.i. 0·87 to 1·13; P = 0·929), resection rate (relative risk (RR) 0·96, 95 per cent c.i. 0·91 to 1·01; P = 0·091) or R0 resection rate (RR 1·01, 0·94 to 1·09; P = 0·733). Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and a long time interval had a lower resection rate (RR 0·92, 0·85 to 0·99; P = 0·029). DISCUSSION A longer time interval between the last MDT meeting and pancreatoduodenectomy did not decrease overall survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M W Steen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis (OLVG), Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - L B van Rijssen
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis (OLVG), Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - B Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - L G van der Geest
- Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organization (IKNL), Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre, Utrecht Cancer Centre Utrecht, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis (OLVG), Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Sharabiany S, Blok RD, Lapid O, Hompes R, Bemelman WA, Alberts VP, Lamme B, Wijsman JH, Tuynman JB, Aalbers AGJ, Beets GL, Fabry HFJ, Cherepanin IM, Polat F, Burger JWA, Rutten HJT, Bosker RJI, Talsma K, Rothbarth J, Verhoef C, van de Ven AWH, van der Bilt JDW, de Graaf EJR, Doornebosch PG, Leijtens JWA, Heemskerk J, Singh B, Chaudhri S, Gerhards MF, Karsten TM, de Wilt JHW, Bremers AJA, Vuylsteke RJCLM, Heuff G, van Geloven AAW, Tanis PJ, Musters GD. Perineal wound closure using gluteal turnover flap or primary closure after abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer: study protocol of a randomised controlled multicentre trial (BIOPEX-2 study). BMC Surg 2020; 20:164. [PMID: 32703182 PMCID: PMC7376711 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-020-00823-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/24/2019] [Accepted: 07/13/2020] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Abdominoperineal resection (APR) for rectal cancer is associated with high morbidity of the perineal wound, and controversy exists about the optimal closure technique. Primary perineal wound closure is still the standard of care in the Netherlands. Biological mesh closure did not improve wound healing in our previous randomised controlled trial (BIOPEX-study). It is suggested, based on meta-analysis of cohort studies, that filling of the perineal defect with well-vascularised tissue improves perineal wound healing. A gluteal turnover flap seems to be a promising method for this purpose, and with the advantage of not having a donor site scar. The aim of this study is to investigate whether a gluteal turnover flap improves the uncomplicated perineal wound healing after APR for rectal cancer. Methods Patients with primary or recurrent rectal cancer who are planned for APR will be considered eligible in this multicentre randomised controlled trial. Exclusion criteria are total exenteration, sacral resection above S4/S5, intersphincteric APR, biological mesh closure of the pelvic floor, collagen disorders, and severe systemic diseases. A total of 160 patients will be randomised between gluteal turnover flap (experimental arm) and primary closure (control arm). The total follow-up duration is 12 months, and outcome assessors and patients will be blinded for type of perineal wound closure. The primary outcome is the percentage of uncomplicated perineal wound healing on day 30, defined as a Southampton wound score of less than two. Secondary outcomes include time to perineal wound closure, incidence of perineal hernia, the number, duration and nature of the complications, re-interventions, quality of life and urogenital function. Discussion The uncomplicated perineal wound healing rate is expected to increase from 65 to 85% by using the gluteal turnover flap. With proven effectiveness, a quick implementation of this relatively simple surgical technique is expected to take place. Trial registration The trial was retrospectively registered at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04004650 on July 2, 2019.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Sharabiany
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Robin D Blok
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.,LEXOR, Centre for Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Oncode Institute, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Oren Lapid
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Roel Hompes
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wilhelmus A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Victor P Alberts
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bas Lamme
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Free University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Arend G J Aalbers
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital-Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geerard L Beets
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital-Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Hans F J Fabry
- Department of Surgery, Bravis Hospital, Roosendaal, The Netherlands
| | | | - Fatih Polat
- Department of Surgery, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Harm J T Rutten
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.,GROW School of Oncology and Developmental Biology, University of Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Koen Talsma
- Department of Surgery, Deventer Hospital, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Rothbarth
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cees Verhoef
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Eelco J R de Graaf
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den Ijssel, The Netherlands
| | - Pascal G Doornebosch
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den Ijssel, The Netherlands
| | | | - Jeroen Heemskerk
- Department of Surgery, Laurentius Hospital, Roermond, The Netherlands
| | - Baljit Singh
- Department of Surgery, Leicester Hospital, Leicester, UK
| | | | | | - Tom M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, OLVG Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johannes H W de Wilt
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Andre J A Bremers
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Gijsbert Heuff
- Department of Surgery, Spaarne Gasthuis, Haarlem, The Netherlands
| | | | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gijsbert D Musters
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Mackay TM, Smits FJ, Roos D, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Busch OR, Creemers GJ, van Dam RM, van Eijck CHJ, Gerhards MF, de Groot JWB, Groot Koerkamp B, Haj Mohammad N, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Homs MYV, Kazemier G, Liem MSL, de Meijer VE, Molenaar IQ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, van Santvoort HC, van der Schelling GP, Stommel MWJ, Ten Tije AJ, de Vos-Geelen J, Wit F, Wilmink JW, van Laarhoven HWM, Besselink MG. The risk of not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a nationwide analysis. HPB (Oxford) 2020; 22:233-240. [PMID: 31439478 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.06.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2019] [Revised: 06/24/2019] [Accepted: 06/28/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The relation between type of postoperative complication and not receiving chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is unclear. The aim was to investigate which patient factors and postoperative complications were associated with not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS Patients who underwent resection (2014-2017) for PDAC were identified from the nationwide mandatory Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. The association between patient-, tumor-, center-, treatment characteristics, and the risk of not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy was analyzed with multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS Overall, of 1306 patients, 24% (n = 312) developed postoperative Clavien Dindo ≥3 complications. In-hospital mortality was 3.5% (n = 46). Some 433 patients (33%) did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Independent predictors (all p < 0.050) for not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy were older age (odds ratio (OR) 0.96), higher ECOG performance status (OR 0.57), postoperative complications (OR 0.32), especially grade B/C pancreatic fistula (OR 0.51) and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (OR 0.36), poor tumor differentiation grade (OR 0.62), and annual center volume of <40 pancreatoduodenectomies (OR 0.51). CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrated that a third of patients do not receive chemotherapy after resection of PDAC. Next to higher age, worse performance status and lower annual surgical volume, this is mostly related to surgical complications, especially postoperative pancreatic fistula and post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tara M Mackay
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F Jasmijn Smits
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Geert-Jan Creemers
- Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Nadia Haj Mohammad
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marjolein Y V Homs
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Judith de Vos-Geelen
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Fennie Wit
- Department of Surgery, Tjongerschans, Heerenveen, the Netherlands
| | - Johanna W Wilmink
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Hanneke W M van Laarhoven
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
20
|
Wasmann KA, de Groof EJ, Stellingwerf ME, D’Haens GR, Ponsioen CY, Gecse KB, Dijkgraaf MGW, Gerhards MF, Jansen JM, Pronk A, van Tuyl SAC, Zimmerman DDE, Bruin KF, Spinelli A, Danese S, van der Bilt JDW, Mundt MW, Bemelman WA, Buskens CJ. Treatment of Perianal Fistulas in Crohn's Disease, Seton Versus Anti-TNF Versus Surgical Closure Following Anti-TNF [PISA]: A Randomised Controlled Trial. J Crohns Colitis 2020; 14:1049-1056. [PMID: 31919501 PMCID: PMC7476637 DOI: 10.1093/ecco-jcc/jjaa004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Most patients with perianal Crohn's fistula receive medical treatment with anti-tumour necrosis factor [TNF], but the results of anti-TNF treatment have not been directly compared with chronic seton drainage or surgical closure. The aim of this study was to assess if chronic seton drainage for patients with perianal Crohn's disease fistulas would result in less re-interventions, compared with anti-TNF and compared with surgical closure. METHODS This randomised trial was performed in 19 European centres. Patients with high perianal Crohn's fistulas with a single internal opening were randomly assigned to: i] chronic seton drainage for 1 year; ii] anti-TNF therapy for 1 year; and iii] surgical closure after 2 months under a short course anti-TNF. The primary outcome was the cumulative number of patients with fistula-related re-intervention[s] at 1.5 years. Patients declining randomisation due to a specific treatment preference were included in a parallel prospective PISA registry cohort. RESULTS Between September 14, 2013 and November 20, 2017, 44 of the 126 planned patients were randomised. The study was stopped by the data safety monitoring board because of futility. Seton treatment was associated with the highest re-intervention rate [10/15, versus 6/15 anti-TNF and 3/14 surgical closure patients, p = 0.02]. No substantial differences in perianal disease activity and quality of life between the three treatment groups were observed. Interestingly, in the PISA prospective registry, inferiority of chronic seton treatment was not observed for any outcome measure. CONCLUSIONS The results imply that chronic seton treatment should not be recommended as the sole treatment for perianal Crohn's fistulas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karin A Wasmann
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,Corresponding author: Dr Christianne J. Buskens, MD PhD, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | - Geert R D’Haens
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cyriel Y Ponsioen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Krisztina B Gecse
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen M Jansen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Apollo Pronk
- Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | - David D E Zimmerman
- Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Karlien F Bruin
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - Antonino Spinelli
- Department of Surgery, Humanitas Research Hospital and Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
| | - Silvio Danese
- Department of Gastroenterology, Humanitas Research Hospital and Humanitas University, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Marco W Mundt
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Flevoziekenhuis, Almere, The Netherlands
| | | | - Christianne J Buskens
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands,Corresponding author: Dr Christianne J. Buskens, MD PhD, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
van der Poel MJ, Fichtinger RS, Bemelmans M, Bosscha K, Braat AE, de Boer MT, Dejong CHC, Doornebosch PG, Draaisma WA, Gerhards MF, Gobardhan PD, Gorgec B, Hagendoorn J, Kazemier G, Klaase J, Leclercq WKG, Liem MS, Lips DJ, Marsman HA, Mieog JSD, Molenaar QI, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Nota CL, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Slooter GD, Stommel MWJ, Swijnenburg RJ, Tanis PJ, Te Riele WW, Terkivatan T, van den Tol PM, van den Boezem PB, van der Hoeven JA, Vermaas M, Abu Hilal M, van Dam RM, Besselink MG. Implementation and outcome of minor and major minimally invasive liver surgery in the Netherlands. HPB (Oxford) 2019; 21:1734-1743. [PMID: 31235430 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2019] [Revised: 04/25/2019] [Accepted: 05/07/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While most of the evidence on minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is derived from expert centers, nationwide outcomes remain underreported. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation and outcome of MILS on a nationwide scale. METHODS Electronic patient files were reviewed in all Dutch liver surgery centers and all patients undergoing MILS between 2011 and 2016 were selected. Operative outcomes were stratified based on extent of the resection and annual MILS volume. RESULTS Overall, 6951 liver resections were included, with a median annual volume of 50 resections per center. The overall use of MILS was 13% (n = 916), which varied from 3% to 36% (P < 0.001) between centers. The nationwide use of MILS increased from 6% in 2011 to 23% in 2016 (P < 0.001). Outcomes of minor MILS were comparable with international studies (conversion 0-13%, mortality <1%). In centers which performed ≥20 MILS annually, major MILS was associated with less conversions (14 (11%) versus 41 (30%), P < 0.001), shorter operating time (184 (117-239) versus 200 (139-308) minutes, P = 0.010), and less overall complications (37 (30%) versus 58 (42%), P = 0.040). CONCLUSION The nationwide use of MILS is increasing, although large variation remains between centers. Outcomes of major MILS are better in centers with higher volumes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcel J van der Poel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Robert S Fichtinger
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - Marc Bemelmans
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Andries E Braat
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Marieke T de Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis H C Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - Pascal G Doornebosch
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - Werner A Draaisma
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Burak Gorgec
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Quintus I Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Carolijn L Nota
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - Arjen M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - Gerrit D Slooter
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Center, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Türkan Terkivatan
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Petrousjka M van den Tol
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Maarten Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - Moh'd Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
van Hilst J, Brinkman DJ, de Rooij T, van Dieren S, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Luyer MD, Marsman HA, Karsten TM, Busch OR, Festen S, Heger M, Besselink MG. The inflammatory response after laparoscopic and open pancreatoduodenectomy and the association with complications in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. HPB (Oxford) 2019; 21:1453-1461. [PMID: 30975599 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.03.353] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/13/2019] [Revised: 03/02/2019] [Accepted: 03/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The systemic inflammatory response seen after surgery seems to be related to postoperative complications. A reduction of the inflammatory response through minimally invasive surgery might therefore be the mechanism via which postoperative outcome could be improved. The aim of this study was to investigate if postoperative inflammatory markers differed between laparoscopic (LPD) and open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) and if there was a relationship between inflammatory markers and the occurrence of postoperative complications. METHODS A side study of the multicenter randomized controlled LEOPARD-2 trial comparing LPD to OPD was performed. Area under the curve (AUC) for plasma inflammatory markers, including interleukin (IL-) 6, IL-8 and C reactive protein (CRP) levels, were determined during the first 96 postoperative hours and compared between LPD and OPD, Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications, and postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade B/C. RESULTS Overall, 38 patients were included (18 LPD and 20 OPD). The median AUC of IL-6 was 627 (195-1378) after LPD vs. 338 (175-694)pg/mL after OPD, (p = 0.114). The AUC of IL-8 and CRP were comparable. IL-6 levels were higher in patients with a Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complication (634[309-1489] vs. 297 [171-680], p = 0.034) and POPF grade B/C (994 [534-3265] vs. 334 [173-704], p = 0.003). In patients with a POPF grade B/C, IL-6 levels tended to be higher after LPD, as compared to OPD (3533[IQR 1133-3533] vs. 715[IQR 39-1658], p = 0.053). CONCLUSION LPD, as compared to OPD, did not reduce the postoperative inflammatory response. IL-6 levels were associated with postoperative complications and pancreatic fistula.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - David J Brinkman
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Tytgat Institute for Liver and Intestinal Research, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Clinical Epidemiologist, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Tom M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Michal Heger
- Department of Experimental Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Steen MW, van Vliet C, Festen S, Besselink MG, Gerhards MF, Busch OR. Regional oncology network between pancreatic centers safeguards waiting times for pancreatoduodenectomy. Updates Surg 2019; 71:645-651. [PMID: 31506895 PMCID: PMC6892758 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-019-00677-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2019] [Accepted: 08/30/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is increasingly performed in high-volume centers, which may compromise waiting times. The aim of this study was to evaluate patient flow and outcome of PD within a regional oncology network of two high-volume centers. A post hoc analysis of a partially retrospective and prospective database was performed of all patients who underwent PD for pancreatic or periampullary neoplasms in both centers of the Gastrointestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam, a collaboration between an academic center and affiliated general teaching hospital, from 2010 to 2014. Outcomes included waiting time to surgery and postoperative morbidity and mortality. A total of 525 PDs were performed, 329 in the academic center (annual volume 66) and 196 in the teaching hospital (annual volume 39). Neoadjuvant treatment was more often used in the academic center, other baseline characteristics were similar. Overall time to surgery was 26 days, which was significantly less in the teaching hospital. The major postoperative morbidity rate was 38.3% (n = 201), and the 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.3% and 3.6%. A regional oncology network between an academic center and a general teaching hospital for PD can be an attractive option to safeguard waiting times in selected patients, without compromising outcome.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Willemijn Steen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Claire van Vliet
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Lambrichts DPV, Bolkenstein HE, van der Does DCHE, Dieleman D, Crolla RMPH, Dekker JWT, van Duijvendijk P, Gerhards MF, Nienhuijs SW, Menon AG, de Graaf EJR, Consten ECJ, Draaisma WA, Broeders IAMJ, Bemelman WA, Lange JF. Multicentre study of non-surgical management of diverticulitis with abscess formation. Br J Surg 2019; 106:458-466. [PMID: 30811050 PMCID: PMC6593757 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2018] [Revised: 10/13/2018] [Accepted: 01/10/2019] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Abstract
This multicentre retrospective cohort study included 447 patients with Hinchey Ib and II diverticular abscesses, who were treated with antibiotics, with or without percutaneous drainage. Abscesses of 3 and 5 cm in size were at higher risk of short‐term treatment failure and emergency surgery respectively. Initial non‐surgical treatment of Hinchey Ib and II diverticular abscesses was comparable between patients treated with antibiotics only and those who underwent percutaneous drainage in combination with antibiotics, with regard to short‐ and long‐term outcomes.
![]() Most do not need drainage
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D P V Lambrichts
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H E Bolkenstein
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, the Netherlands
| | | | - D Dieleman
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R M P H Crolla
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - J W T Dekker
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, the Netherlands
| | | | - M F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - A G Menon
- Department of Surgery, Havenziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E J R de Graaf
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E C J Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, the Netherlands
| | - W A Draaisma
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - I A M J Broeders
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, the Netherlands
| | - W A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J F Lange
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Havenziekenhuis, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
van Hilst J, de Rooij T, van den Boezem PB, Bosscha K, Busch OR, van Duijvendijk P, Festen S, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, Kazemier G, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Patijn GA, Stommel MW, Zonderhuis BM, Daams F, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with open or laparoscopic reconstruction during the learning curve: a multicenter propensity score matched study. HPB (Oxford) 2019; 21:857-864. [PMID: 30528277 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2018.11.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2018] [Revised: 10/08/2018] [Accepted: 11/01/2018] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with open reconstruction (LPD-OR) has been suggested to lower the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula reported after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy with laparoscopic reconstruction (LPD). Propensity score matched studies are, lacking. METHODS This is a multicenter prospective cohort study including patients from 7 Dutch centers between 2014-2018. Patients undergoing LPD-OR were matched LPD patients in a 1:1 ratio based on propensity scores. Main outcomes were postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) grade B/C and Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications. RESULTS A total of 172 patients were included, involving the first procedure for all centers. All 56 patients after LPD-OR could be matched to a patient undergoing LPD. With LPD-OR, the unplanned conversion rate was 21% vs. 9% with LPD (P < 0.001). Median blood loss (300 vs. 400 mL, P = 0.85), operative time (401 vs. 378 min, P = 0.62) and hospital stay (10 vs. 12 days, P = 0.31) were comparable for LPD-OR vs. LPD, as were Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3 complications (38% vs. 52%, P = 0.13), POPF grade B/C (23% vs. 21%, P = 0.82), and 90-day mortality (4% vs. 4%, P > 0.99). CONCLUSION In this propensity matched cohort performed early in the learning curve, no benefit was found for LPD-OR, as compared to LPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Tom M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Daniel J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | | | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn W Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Babs M Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Bolhuis K, Huiskens J, Dejong CH, Engelbrecht MR, Gerhards MF, Grunhagen DJ, de Jong KP, Kazemier G, Klaase JM, Liem MS, van Lienden KP, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Ruers TM, Swijnenburg RJ, Verhoef C, de Wilt JH, Punt CJA, van Gulik TM. Feasibility of a national expert panel to determine resectability in patients with initially unresectable colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM). J Clin Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2019.37.15_suppl.3562] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
3562 Background: Decision on optimal treatment strategy for CRLM remains complex because uniform (un)resectability criteria are lacking. We hypothesize that the use of an expert panel can improve the identification of patients with potentially resectable CRLM. The Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (DCCG) Expert Panel was established in conjunction with the CAIRO5 study (Huiskens J et al. BMC Cancer 2015), a multicenter, randomized, phase-3 trial, investigating optimal systemic induction treatment in patients with initially unresectable CRLM. Here, we present the feasibility of this panel. Methods: The DCCG Expert Panel consists of 13 liver surgeons and 4 radiologists. Consensus was reached on predefined (un)resectability criteria at baseline. An online platform allowed resectability-assessment by 3 surgeons in case of inter-surgeon agreement, and 5 surgeons if they disagreed. CRLM were assessed as 1) resectable 2) potentially resectable, or 3) permanently unresectable. Patients with initially unresectable CRLM were evaluated at baseline and subsequently every 2 months as long as CRLM were considered potentially resectable. Results: Overall, 397 panel evaluations in 183 patients were analyzed. Median time to panel conclusion was 7 days (IQR 5-11 days) and 204 (51%) evaluations showed inter-surgeon disagreement, with major disagreement (resectable versus permanently unresectable) in 24 (14%) and 12 (29%) evaluations after 2 and 4 months of systemic treatment. Ultimately, 84 (79%) patients with resectable CRLM underwent resection and 23 (27%) resections included portal vein embolization or 2-stage procedures. In resectable CRLM with inter-surgeon agreement versus disagreement, R0 resection was achieved in 39 (75%) versus 28 (52%) patients, p = 0.013. Median time to recurrence was similar between resections with panel agreement versus disagreement, 8 versus 6 months, p = 0.447. Conclusions: This study shows the feasibility of a national Liver Expert Panel for prospective resectability assessment of patients with initially unresectable CRLM. High inter-surgeon disagreement supports the use of a panel. We aim to further validate the panel with outcome parameters. Clinical trial information: NCT02162563.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karen Bolhuis
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Joost Huiskens
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Marc R.W. Engelbrecht
- Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Dirk J. Grunhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Gijs A. Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, Netherlands
| | | | - Theo M. Ruers
- Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Bosscha K, Brinkman DJ, van Dieren S, Dijkgraaf MG, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, Busch OR, Festen S, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours (LEOPARD-2): a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 4:199-207. [PMID: 30685489 DOI: 10.1016/s2468-1253(19)30004-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 334] [Impact Index Per Article: 66.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2018] [Revised: 12/23/2018] [Accepted: 12/24/2018] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy may improve postoperative recovery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy. However, there are concerns that the extensive learning curve of this complex procedure could increase the risk of complications. We aimed to assess whether laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy could reduce time to functional recovery compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS This multicentre, patient-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial was performed in four centres in the Netherlands that each do 20 or more pancreatoduodenectomies annually; surgeons had to have completed a dedicated training programme for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and have done 20 or more laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomies before trial participation. Patients with a benign, premalignant, or malignant indication for pancreatoduodenectomy, without signs of vascular involvement, were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either laparoscopic or open pancreatoduodenectomy using a central web-based system. Randomisation was stratified for annual case volume and preoperative estimated risk of pancreatic fistula. Patients were blinded to treatment allocation. Analysis was done according to the intention-to-treat principle. The main objective of the phase 2 part of the trial was to assess the safety of laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (complications and mortality), and the primary outcome of phase 3 was time to functional recovery in days, defined as all of the following: adequate pain control with only oral analgesia; independent mobility; ability to maintain more than 50% of the daily required caloric intake; no need for intravenous fluid administration; and no signs of infection (temperature <38·5°C). This trial is registered with Trialregister.nl, number NTR5689. FINDINGS Between May 13 and Dec 20, 2016, 42 patients were randomised in the phase 2 part of the trial. Two patients did not receive surgery and were excluded from analyses in accordance with the study protocol. Three (15%) of 20 patients died within 90 days after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy, compared with none of 20 patients after open pancreatoduodenectomy. Based on safety data from the phase 2 part of the trial, the data and safety monitoring board and protocol committee agreed to proceed with phase 3. Between Jan 31 and Nov 14, 2017, 63 additional patients were randomised in phase 3 of the trial. Four patients did not receive surgery and were excluded from analyses in accordance with the study protocol. After randomisation of 105 patients (combining patients from both phase 2 and phase 3), of whom 99 underwent surgery, the trial was prematurely terminated by the data and safety monitoring board because of a difference in 90-day complication-related mortality (five [10%] of 50 patients in the laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy group vs one [2%] of 49 in the open pancreatoduodenectomy group; risk ratio [RR] 4·90 [95% CI 0·59-40·44]; p=0·20). Median time to functional recovery was 10 days (95% CI 5-15) after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy versus 8 days (95% CI 7-9) after open pancreatoduodenectomy (log-rank p=0·80). Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher complications (25 [50%] of 50 patients after laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy vs 19 [39%] of 49 after open pancreatoduodenectomy; RR 1·29 [95% CI 0·82-2·02]; p=0·26) and grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistulas (14 [28%] vs 12 [24%]; RR 1·14 [95% CI 0·59-2·22]; p=0·69) were comparable between groups. INTERPRETATION Although not statistically significant, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with more complication-related deaths than was open pancreatoduodenectomy, and there was no difference between groups in time to functional recovery. These safety concerns were unexpected and worrisome, especially in the setting of trained surgeons working in centres performing 20 or more pancreatoduodenectomies annually. Experience, learning curve, and annual volume might have influenced the outcomes; future research should focus on these issues. FUNDING Grant for investigator-initiated studies by Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands
| | - David J Brinkman
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marcel G Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, Netherlands; Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | - Daniel J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
van Rijssen LB, Zwart MJ, van Dieren S, de Rooij T, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, van Eijck CH, Gerhards MF, Gerritsen JJ, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, de Jong KP, Kazemier G, Klaase J, van der Kolk BM, van Laarhoven CJ, Luyer MD, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Rupert CG, Scheepers JJ, van der Schelling GP, Vahrmeijer AL, Busch ORC, van Santvoort HC, Groot Koerkamp B, Besselink MG, Festen S, Karsten TM, Coene PP. Variation in hospital mortality after pancreatoduodenectomy is related to failure to rescue rather than major complications: a nationwide audit. HPB (Oxford) 2018; 20:759-767. [PMID: 29571615 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2018.02.640] [Citation(s) in RCA: 74] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2017] [Revised: 01/22/2018] [Accepted: 02/15/2018] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In the mandatory nationwide Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, rates of major complications and Failure to Rescue (FTR) after pancreatoduodenectomy between low- and high-mortality hospitals are compared, and independent predictors for FTR investigated. METHODS Patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy in 2014 and 2015 in The Netherlands were included. Hospitals were divided into quartiles based on mortality rates. The rate of major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) and death after a major complication (FTR) were compared between these quartiles. Independent predictors for FTR were identified by multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS Out of 1.342 patients, 391 (29%) developed a major complication and in-hospital mortality was 4.2%. FTR occurred in 56 (14.3%) patients. Mortality was 0.9% in the first hospital quartile (4 hospitals, 327 patients) and 8.1% in the fourth quartile (5 hospitals, 310 patients). The rate of major complications increased by 40% (25.7% vs 35.2%) between the first and fourth hospital quartile, whereas the FTR rate increased by 560% (3.6% vs 22.9%). Independent predictors of FTR were male sex (OR = 2.1, 95%CI 1.2-3.9), age >75 years (OR = 4.3, 1.8-10.2), BMI ≥30 (OR = 2.9, 1.3-6.6), histopathological diagnosis of periampullary cancer (OR = 2.0, 1.1-3.7), and hospital volume <30 (OR = 3.9, 1.6-9.6). CONCLUSIONS Variations in mortality between hospitals after pancreatoduodenectomy were explained mainly by differences in FTR, rather than the incidence of major complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lennart B van Rijssen
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maurice J Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Koert P de Jong
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Klaase
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Isaac Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Coen G Rupert
- Department of Surgery, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, The Netherlands
| | - Joris J Scheepers
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Olivier R C Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
De Pastena M, van Hilst J, de Rooij T, Busch OR, Gerhards MF, Festen S, Besselink MG. Laparoscopic Pancreatoduodenectomy With Modified Blumgart Pancreaticojejunostomy. J Vis Exp 2018. [PMID: 29985364 PMCID: PMC6101760 DOI: 10.3791/56819] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Minimally invasive pancreatic resections are technically demanding but rapidly increasing in popularity. In contrast to laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy, laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (LPD) has not yet obtained wide acceptance, probably due to technical challenges, especially regarding the pancreatic anastomosis. The study describes and demonstrates all steps of LPD, including the modified Blumgart pancreaticojejunostomy. Indications for LPD are all pancreatic and peri-ampullary tumors without vascular involvement. Relative contra-indications are body mass index >35 kg/m2, chronic pancreatitis, mid-cholangiocarcinomas and large duodenal cancers. The patient is in French position, 6 trocars are placed, and dissection is performed using an (articulating) sealing device. A modified Blumgart end-to-side pancreaticojejunostomy is performed with 4 large needles (3/0) barbed trans-pancreatic sutures and 4 to 6 duct-to-mucosa sutures using 5/0 absorbable multifilament combined with a 12 cm, 6 or 8 Fr internal stent using 3D laparoscopy. Two surgical drains are placed alongside the pancreaticojejunostomy. The described technique for LPD including a modified Blumgart pancreatico-jejunostomy is well standardized, and its merits are currently studied in the randomized controlled multicenter trial. This complex operation should be performed at high-volume centers where surgeons have extensive experience in both open pancreatic surgery and advanced laparoscopic gastro-intestinal surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matteo De Pastena
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center; General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center
| | | | | | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center;
| |
Collapse
|
30
|
Steen MW, van Duijvenbode DC, Dijk F, Busch OR, Besselink MG, Gerhards MF, Festen S. Tumor manipulation during pancreatic resection for pancreatic cancer induces dissemination of tumor cells into the peritoneal cavity: a systematic review. HPB (Oxford) 2018; 20:289-296. [PMID: 29366814 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.08.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2017] [Revised: 08/11/2017] [Accepted: 08/15/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Intraoperative tumor manipulation may induce the dissemination of occult peritoneal tumor cells (OPTC) into the peritoneal cavity. METHODS A systematic review was performed in the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases from inception to March 15, 2017. Eligible were studies that analyzed the presence of OPTC in peritoneal fluid, by any method, both before and after resection in adults who underwent intentionally curative pancreatic resection for histopathologically confirmed pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in absence of macroscopic peritoneal metastases. RESULTS Four studies with 138 patients met the inclusion criteria. The pooled rate of OPTC prior to tumor manipulation was 8% (95% CI 2%-24%). The pooled detection rate of OPTC in patients in whom OPTC became detectable only after tumor manipulation was 33% (95% CI 15-58%). Only one study (28 patients) reported on survival, which was worse in patients with OPTC (median 11.1 months versus 30.3 months; p = 0.030). CONCLUSION This systematic review suggests that tumor manipulation induces OPTC in one third of patients with pancreatic cancer. Since data on survival are lacking, future studies should determine the prognostic consequences of tumor manipulation, including the potential therapeutic effect of 'no-touch' and minimally invasive resection strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Willemijn Steen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; GastroIntestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam (GIOCA), The Netherlands
| | | | - Frederike Dijk
- Department of Pathology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Oliver R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; GastroIntestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam (GIOCA), The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; GastroIntestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam (GIOCA), The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; GastroIntestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam (GIOCA), The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; GastroIntestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam (GIOCA), The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
31
|
de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Bosscha K, Dijkgraaf MG, Gerhards MF, Groot Koerkamp B, Hagendoorn J, de Hingh IH, Karsten TM, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC, Tran TCK, Busch OR, Festen S, Besselink MG. Minimally invasive versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (LEOPARD-2): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2018; 19:1. [PMID: 29298706 PMCID: PMC5753506 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-2423-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/06/2017] [Accepted: 12/18/2017] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Data from observational studies suggest that minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is superior to open pancreatoduodenectomy regarding intraoperative blood loss, postoperative morbidity, and length of hospital stay, without increasing total costs. However, several case-matched studies failed to demonstrate superiority of MIPD, and large registry studies from the USA even suggested increased mortality for MIPDs performed in low-volume (<10 MIPDs annually) centers. Randomized controlled multicenter trials are lacking but clearly required. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIPD compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy, even in an enhanced recovery setting. Methods/design LEOPARD-2 is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, phase 2/3, superiority trial in centers that completed the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group LAELAPS-2 training program for laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy or LAELAPS-3 training program for robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy and have performed ≥ 20 MIPDs. A total of 136 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant, or malignant disease will be randomly assigned to undergo minimally invasive or open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. After the first 40 patients (phase 2), the data safety monitoring board will assess safety outcomes (not blinded for treatment allocation) and decide on continuation to phase 3. Patients from phase 2 will then be included in phase 3. The primary outcome measure is time (days) to functional recovery. All patients will be blinded for the surgical approach, at least until postoperative day 5, but preferably until functional recovery has been attained. Secondary outcome measures are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life, and costs. Discussion The LEOPARD-2 trial is designed to assess whether MIPD reduces time to functional recovery, as compared with open pancreatoduodenectomy in an enhanced recovery setting. Trial registration Netherlands Trial Register, NTR5689. Registered on 2 March 2016. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-2423-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, PO Box 90153, 5200 ME, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel G Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, PO Box 95500, 1090 HM, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85 500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Tom M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, PO Box 95500, 1090 HM, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, PO Box 90153, 5200 ME, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, 5602 ZA, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85 500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - T C Khé Tran
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, PO Box 95500, 1090 HM, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
32
|
van Rijssen LB, Koerkamp BG, Zwart MJ, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, van Eijck CH, Gerhards MF, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, de Jong KP, Kazemier G, Klaase J, van Laarhoven CJ, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Rupert CG, van Santvoort HC, Scheepers JJ, van der Schelling GP, Busch OR, Besselink MG, Bruno MJ, van Tienhoven GJ, Norduyn A, Berry DP, Tingstedt B, Tseng JF, Wolfgang CL. Nationwide prospective audit of pancreatic surgery: design, accuracy, and outcomes of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. HPB (Oxford) 2017; 19:919-926. [PMID: 28754367 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.06.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2017] [Revised: 05/19/2017] [Accepted: 06/22/2017] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Auditing is an important tool to identify practice variation and 'best practices'. The Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit is mandatory in all 18 Dutch centers for pancreatic surgery. METHODS Performance indicators and case-mix factors were identified by a PubMed search for randomized controlled trials (RCT's) and large series in pancreatic surgery. In addition, data dictionaries of two national audits, three institutional databases, and the Dutch national cancer registry were evaluated. Morbidity, mortality, and length of stay were analyzed of all pancreatic resections registered during the first two audit years. Case ascertainment was cross-checked with the Dutch healthcare inspectorate and key-variables validated in all centers. RESULTS Sixteen RCT's and three large series were found. Sixteen indicators and 20 case-mix factors were included in the audit. During 2014-2015, 1785 pancreatic resections were registered including 1345 pancreatoduodenectomies. Overall in-hospital mortality was 3.6%. Following pancreatoduodenectomy, mortality was 4.1%, Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III morbidity was 29.9%, median (IQR) length of stay 12 (9-18) days, and readmission rate 16.0%. In total 97.2% of >40,000 variables validated were consistent with the medical charts. CONCLUSIONS The Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, with high quality data, reports good outcomes of pancreatic surgery on a national level.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L Bengt van Rijssen
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bas G Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Maurice J Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Koert P de Jong
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Klaase
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | | | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Coen G Rupert
- Department of Surgery, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Joris J Scheepers
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, The Netherlands
| | | | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Vogel JA, van Santvoort HC, de Boer MT, Boerma D, van den Boezem PB, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Coene PP, Daams F, van Dam RM, Dijkgraaf MG, van Eijck CH, Festen S, Gerhards MF, Groot Koerkamp B, Hagendoorn J, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Dejong CH, Kazemier G, Klaase J, de Kleine RH, van Laarhoven CJ, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, Molenaar IQ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Patijn GA, Roos D, Scheepers JJ, van der Schelling GP, Steenvoorde P, Swijnenburg RJ, Wijsman JH, Abu Hilal M, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2017; 18:166. [PMID: 28388963 PMCID: PMC5385082 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-017-1892-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2016] [Accepted: 03/08/2017] [Indexed: 12/29/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Observational cohort studies have suggested that minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) is associated with better short-term outcomes compared with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP), such as less intraoperative blood loss, lower morbidity, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced total costs. Confounding by indication has probably influenced these findings, given that case-matched studies failed to confirm the superiority of MIDP. This accentuates the need for multicenter randomized controlled trials, which are currently lacking. We hypothesize that time to functional recovery is shorter after MIDP compared with ODP even in an enhanced recovery setting. METHODS LEOPARD is a randomized controlled, parallel-group, patient-blinded, multicenter, superiority trial in all 17 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. A total of 102 patients with symptomatic benign, premalignant or malignant disease will be randomly allocated to undergo MIDP or ODP in an enhanced recovery setting. The primary outcome is time (days) to functional recovery, defined as all of the following: independently mobile at the preoperative level, sufficient pain control with oral medication alone, ability to maintain sufficient (i.e. >50%) daily required caloric intake, no intravenous fluid administration and no signs of infection. Secondary outcomes are operative and postoperative outcomes, including clinically relevant complications, mortality, quality of life and costs. DISCUSSION The LEOPARD trial is designed to investigate whether MIDP reduces the time to functional recovery compared with ODP in an enhanced recovery setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION Dutch Trial Register, NTR5188 . Registered on 9 April 2015.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, Amsterdam, AZ 1105, The Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, Amsterdam, AZ 1105, The Netherlands
| | - Jantien A Vogel
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, Amsterdam, AZ 1105, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, Nieuwegein, EM 3430, The Netherlands
| | - Marieke T de Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30 001, Groningen, RB 9700, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, PO Box 2500, Nieuwegein, EM 3430, The Netherlands
| | - Peter B van den Boezem
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, PO Box 9101, Nijmegen, HB 6500, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, PO Box 9600, Leiden, ZA 2333, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, PO Box 90153, Den Bosch, ME 5200, The Netherlands
| | - Peter-Paul Coene
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, PO Box 9100, Rotterdam, AC 3007, The Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, Amsterdam, HV 1081, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, PO Box 5800, Maastricht, AZ 6202, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel G Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, Amsterdam, DD 1100, The Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, Rotterdam, CA 3000, The Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, PO Box 95500, Amsterdam, HM 1090, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, PO Box 95500, Amsterdam, HM 1090, The Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, PO Box 2040, Rotterdam, CA 3000, The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85 500, Utrecht, GA 3508, The Netherlands
| | - Erwin van der Harst
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, PO Box 9100, Rotterdam, AC 3007, The Netherlands
| | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, Eindhoven, ZA 5602, The Netherlands
| | - Cees H Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, PO Box 5800, Maastricht, AZ 6202, The Netherlands.,NUTRIM School for Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, PO Box 5800, Maastricht, AZ 6202, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, PO Box 7057, Amsterdam, HV 1081, The Netherlands
| | - Joost Klaase
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, PO Box 50 000, Enschede, KA 7500, The Netherlands
| | - Ruben H de Kleine
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, PO Box 30 001, Groningen, RB 9700, The Netherlands
| | - Cornelis J van Laarhoven
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, PO Box 9101, Nijmegen, HB 6500, The Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, PO Box 90153, Den Bosch, ME 5200, The Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, PO Box 1350, Eindhoven, ZA 5602, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85 500, Utrecht, GA 3508, The Netherlands
| | | | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, PO Box 10 400, Zwolle, AB 8025, The Netherlands
| | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graag Gasthuis, PO Box 5011, Delft, GA 2600, The Netherlands
| | - Joris J Scheepers
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graag Gasthuis, PO Box 5011, Delft, GA 2600, The Netherlands
| | | | - Pascal Steenvoorde
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, PO Box 50 000, Enschede, KA 7500, The Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, PO Box 9600, Leiden, ZA 2333, The Netherlands
| | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, PO Box 90 158, Breda, RK 4800, The Netherlands
| | - Moh'd Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, SO166YD, UK
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, Amsterdam, DD 1100, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, Amsterdam, DD 1100, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
Borstlap WAA, Tanis PJ, Koedam TWA, Marijnen CAM, Cunningham C, Dekker E, van Leerdam ME, Meijer G, van Grieken N, Nagtegaal ID, Punt CJA, Dijkgraaf MGW, De Wilt JH, Beets G, de Graaf EJ, van Geloven AAW, Gerhards MF, van Westreenen HL, van de Ven AWH, van Duijvendijk P, de Hingh IHJT, Leijtens JWA, Sietses C, Spillenaar-Bilgen EJ, Vuylsteke RJCLM, Hoff C, Burger JWA, van Grevenstein WMU, Pronk A, Bosker RJI, Prins H, Smits AB, Bruin S, Zimmerman DD, Stassen LPS, Dunker MS, Westerterp M, Coene PP, Stoot J, Bemelman WA, Tuynman JB. A multi-centred randomised trial of radical surgery versus adjuvant chemoradiotherapy after local excision for early rectal cancer. BMC Cancer 2016; 16:513. [PMID: 27439975 PMCID: PMC4955121 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-016-2557-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/19/2016] [Accepted: 07/13/2016] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Rectal cancer surgery is accompanied with high morbidity and poor long term functional outcome. Screening programs have shown a shift towards more early staged cancers. Patients with early rectal cancer can potentially benefit significantly from rectal preserving therapy. For the earliest stage cancers, local excision is sufficient when the risk of lymph node disease and subsequent recurrence is below 5 %. However, the majority of early cancers are associated with an intermediate risk of lymph node involvement (5–20 %) suggesting that local excision alone is not sufficient, while completion radical surgery, which is currently standard of care, could be a substantial overtreatment for this group of patients. Methods/Study design In this multicentre randomised trial, patients with an intermediate risk T1-2 rectal cancer, that has been locally excised using an endoluminal technique, will be randomized between adjuvant chemo-radiotherapylimited to the mesorectum and standard completion total mesorectal excision (TME). To strictly monitor the risk of locoregional recurrence in the experimental arm and enable early salvage surgery, there will be additional follow up with frequent MRI and endoscopy. The primary outcome of the study is three-year local recurrence rate. Secondary outcomes are morbidity, disease free and overall survival, stoma rate, functional outcomes, health related quality of life and costs. The design is a non inferiority study with a total sample size of 302 patients. Discussion The results of the TESAR trial will potentially demonstrate that adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is an oncological safe treatment option in patients who are confronted with the difficult clinical dilemma of a radically removed intermediate risk early rectal cancer by polypectomy or transanal surgery that is conventionally treated with subsequent radical surgery. Preserving the rectum using adjuvant radiotherapy is expected to significantly improve morbidity, function and quality of life if compared to completion TME surgery. Trial registration NCT02371304, registration date: February 2015
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W A A Borstlap
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - T W A Koedam
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C A M Marijnen
- Department of Radiotherapy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - C Cunningham
- Department of Surgery, Oxford University Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - E Dekker
- Department of Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M E van Leerdam
- Department of Gastroenterology, Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G Meijer
- Department of Pathology, Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - N van Grieken
- Department of Pathology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I D Nagtegaal
- Department of Pathology, RadboudUMC, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - C J A Punt
- Department of Medical Oncology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M G W Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J H De Wilt
- Department of Surgery, RadboudUMC, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - G Beets
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E J de Graaf
- Department of Surgery, IJselland Hospital, Capelle aan de Ijssel, The Netherlands
| | | | - M F Gerhards
- Department of surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - I H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - J W A Leijtens
- Department of Surgery, Laurentius Hospital, Roermond, The Netherlands
| | - C Sietses
- Department of Surgery, Gelderse Vallei Hospital, Ede, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - C Hoff
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Centrum Leewarden, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| | - J W A Burger
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - A Pronk
- Department of Surgery, Diaconessenziekehuis, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - R J I Bosker
- Department of Surgery, Deventer Hospital, Deventer, The Netherlands
| | - H Prins
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - A B Smits
- Department of Surgery, Sint. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - S Bruin
- Department of Surgery, Slotervaart Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - D D Zimmerman
- Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | - L P S Stassen
- Department of Surgery, MUMC, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - M S Dunker
- Department of Surgery, Noordwest Ziekenhuisgroep, Alkmaar, The Netherlands
| | - M Westerterp
- Department of Surgery, Medical Center Haaglanden, The Hague, The Netherlands
| | - P P Coene
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Stoot
- Department of Surgery, Zuyderland Hospital, Sittard, The Netherlands
| | - W A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1117, 1081 HZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
35
|
Marsman EM, de Rooij T, van Eijck CH, Boerma D, Bonsing BA, van Dam RM, van Dieren S, Erdmann JI, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, Klaase J, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, Scheepers JJ, Tanis PJ, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Pancreatoduodenectomy with colon resection for cancer: A nationwide retrospective analysis. Surgery 2016; 160:145-152. [DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.02.022] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2015] [Revised: 02/18/2016] [Accepted: 02/21/2016] [Indexed: 01/02/2023]
|
36
|
de Rooij T, Tol JA, van Eijck CH, Boerma D, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, Dijkgraaf MG, Gerhards MF, van Goor H, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, Klaase JM, Molenaar IQ, Patijn GA, van Santvoort HC, Scheepers JJ, van der Schelling GP, Sieders E, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Outcomes of Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma in the Netherlands: A Nationwide Retrospective Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23:585-91. [PMID: 26508153 PMCID: PMC4718962 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-015-4930-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/28/2015] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Large multicenter series on outcomes and predictors of survival after distal pancreatectomy (DP) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are scarce. METHODS Adults who underwent DP for PDAC in 17 Dutch pancreatic centers between January 2005 and September 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. The primary outcome was survival, and predictors of survival were identified using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS In total, 761 consecutive patients after DP were assessed, of whom 620 patients were excluded because of non-PDAC histopathology (n = 616) or a lack of data (n = 4), leaving a total of 141 patients included in the study [45 % (n = 63) male, mean age 64 years (SD = 10)]. Multivisceral resection was performed in 43 patients (30 %) and laparoscopic resection was performed in 7 patients (5 %). A major complication (Clavien-Dindo score of III or higher) occurred in 46 patients (33 %). Mean tumor size was 44 mm (SD 23), and histopathological examination showed 70 R0 resections (50 %), while 30-day and 90-day mortality was 3 and 6 %, respectively. Overall, 63 patients (45 %) received adjuvant chemotherapy. Median survival was 17 months [interquartile range (IQR) 13-21], with a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 8-29). Cumulative survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 64, 29, and 22 %, respectively. Independent predictors of worse postoperative survival were R1/R2 resection [hazard ratio (HR) 1.6, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.1-2.4], pT3/pT4 stage (HR 1.9, 95 % CI 1.3-2.9), a major complication (HR 1.7, 95 % CI 1.1-2.5), and not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 1.5, 95 % CI 1.0-2.3). CONCLUSION Survival after DP for PDAC is poor and is related to resection margin, tumor stage, surgical complications, and adjuvant chemotherapy. Further studies should assess to what extent prevention of surgical complications and more extensive use of adjuvant chemotherapy can improve survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johanna A Tol
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Marcel G Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Harry van Goor
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | | | - Joris J Scheepers
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, The Netherlands
| | | | - Egbert Sieders
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Vennix S, Lips DJ, Di Saverio S, van Wagensveld BA, Brokelman WJ, Gerhards MF, van Geloven AA, van Dieren S, Lange JF, Bemelman WA. Acute laparoscopic and open sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis: a propensity score-matched cohort. Surg Endosc 2015; 30:3889-96. [PMID: 26679173 PMCID: PMC4992031 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4694-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/16/2015] [Accepted: 11/17/2015] [Indexed: 01/12/2023]
Abstract
Background
Hartmann’s procedure for perforated diverticulitis can be characterised by high morbidity and mortality rates. While the scientific community focuses on laparoscopic lavage as an alternative for laparotomy, the option of laparoscopic sigmoidectomy seems overlooked. We compared morbidity and hospital stay following acute laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (LS) and open sigmoidectomy (OS) for perforated diverticulitis. Methods This retrospective cohort parallel to the Ladies trial included patients from 28 Dutch academic or teaching hospitals between July 2010 and July 2014. Patients with LS were matched 1:2 to OS using the propensity score for age, gender, previous laparotomy, CRP level, gastrointestinal surgeon, and Hinchey classification. Results The propensity-matched cohort consisted of 39 patients with LS and 78 patients with OS, selected from a sample of 307 consecutive patients with purulent or faecal perforated diverticulitis. In both groups, 66 % of the patients had Hartmann’s procedure and 34 % had primary anastomosis. The hospital stay was shorter following LS (LS 7 vs OS 9 days; P = 0.016), and the postoperative morbidity rate was lower following LS (LS 44 % vs OS 66 %; P = 0.016). Mortality was low in both groups (LS 3 % vs OS 4 %; P = 0.685). The stoma reversal rate after Hartmann’s procedure was higher following laparoscopy, with a probability of being stoma-free at 12 months of 88 and 62 % in the laparoscopic and open groups, respectively (P = 0.019). After primary anastomosis, the probability of reversal was 100 % in both groups. Conclusions In this propensity score-matched cohort, laparoscopic sigmoidectomy is superior to open sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with regard to postoperative morbidity and hospital stay. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00464-015-4694-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Vennix
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Postbox 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Daniel J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Walter J Brokelman
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Susan van Dieren
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Johan F Lange
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Postbox 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
38
|
Borstlap WAA, Buskens CJ, Tytgat KMAJ, Tuynman JB, Consten ECJ, Tolboom RC, Heuff G, van Geloven AAW, van Wagensveld BA, Wientjes CACA, Gerhards MF, de Castro SMM, Jansen J, van der Ven AWH, van der Zaag E, Omloo JM, van Westreenen HL, Winter DC, Kennelly RP, Dijkgraaf MGW, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA. Erratum to: Multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing ferric(III) carboxymaltose infusion with oral iron supplementation in the treatment of preoperative anaemia in colorectal cancer patients. BMC Surg 2015; 15:110. [PMID: 26450558 PMCID: PMC4599035 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-015-0090-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/07/2015] [Accepted: 09/07/2015] [Indexed: 01/22/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- W A A Borstlap
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - C J Buskens
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - K M A J Tytgat
- Department of Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E C J Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - R C Tolboom
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - G Heuff
- Department of Surgery, Borstlap et al. BMC Surgery (2015) 15:78 Spaarne Hospital, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
| | | | - B A van Wagensveld
- Department of Surgery, Sint Lucas Andreas Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C A C A Wientjes
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sint Lucas Andreas Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S M M de Castro
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Jansen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - E van der Zaag
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospital, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
| | - J M Omloo
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospital, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
| | | | - D C Winter
- Department of Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - R P Kennelly
- Department of Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - M G W Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - W A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
39
|
Vennix S, Musters GD, Mulder IM, Swank HA, Consten EC, Belgers EH, van Geloven AA, Gerhards MF, Govaert MJ, van Grevenstein WM, Hoofwijk AG, Kruyt PM, Nienhuijs SW, Boermeester MA, Vermeulen J, van Dieren S, Lange JF, Bemelman WA. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial. Lancet 2015. [PMID: 26209030 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(15)61168-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 165] [Impact Index Per Article: 18.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Case series suggest that laparoscopic peritoneal lavage might be a promising alternative to sigmoidectomy in patients with perforated diverticulitis. We aimed to assess the superiority of laparoscopic lavage compared with sigmoidectomy in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis, with respect to overall long-term morbidity and mortality. METHODS We did a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial in 34 teaching hospitals and eight academic hospitals in Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands (the Ladies trial). The Ladies trial is split into two groups: the LOLA group comparing laparoscopic lavage with sigmoidectomy and the DIVA group comparing Hartmann's procedure with sigmoidectomy plus primary anastomosis. The DIVA section of this trial is still underway but here we report the results of the LOLA section. Patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis were enrolled for LOLA, excluding patients with faecal peritonitis, aged older than 85 years, with high-dose steroid use (≥20 mg daily), and haemodynamic instability. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1; stratified by age [<60 years vs ≥60 years]) using secure online computer randomisation to laparoscopic lavage, Hartmann's procedure, or primary anastomosis in a parallel design after diagnostic laparoscopy. Patients were analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat principle and were followed up after the index operation at least once in the outpatient setting and after sigmoidoscopy and stoma reversal, according to local protocols. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of major morbidity and mortality within 12 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01317485. FINDINGS Between July 1, 2010, and Feb 22, 2013, 90 patients were randomly assigned in the LOLA section of the Ladies trial when the study was terminated by the data and safety monitoring board because of an increased event rate in the lavage group. Two patients were excluded for protocol violations. The primary endpoint occurred in 30 (67%) of 45 patients in the lavage group and 25 (60%) of 42 patients in the sigmoidectomy group (odds ratio 1·28, 95% CI 0·54-3·03, p=0·58). By 12 months, four patients had died after lavage and six patients had died after sigmoidectomy (p=0·43). INTERPRETATION Laparoscopic lavage is not superior to sigmoidectomy for the treatment of purulent perforated diverticulitis. FUNDING Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Vennix
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Irene M Mulder
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Hilko A Swank
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Esther C Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, Netherlands
| | - Eric H Belgers
- Department of Surgery, Atrium Medical Centre, Heerlen, Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marc J Govaert
- Department of Surgery, Westfriesgasthuis, Hoorn, Netherlands
| | | | - Anton G Hoofwijk
- Department of Surgery, Orbis Medical Centre, Sittard, Netherlands
| | - Philip M Kruyt
- Department of Surgery, Gelderse Vallei Hospital, Ede, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Susan van Dieren
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Johan F Lange
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
40
|
de Groof EJ, Buskens CJ, Ponsioen CY, Dijkgraaf MGW, D'Haens GRAM, Srivastava N, van Acker GJD, Jansen JM, Gerhards MF, Dijkstra G, Lange JFM, Witteman BJM, Kruyt PM, Pronk A, van Tuyl SAC, Bodelier A, Crolla RMPH, West RL, Vrijland WW, Consten ECJ, Brink MA, Tuynman JB, de Boer NKH, Breukink SO, Pierik MJ, Oldenburg B, van der Meulen AE, Bonsing BA, Spinelli A, Danese S, Sacchi M, Warusavitarne J, Hart A, Yassin NA, Kennelly RP, Cullen GJ, Winter DC, Hawthorne AB, Torkington J, Bemelman WA. Multimodal treatment of perianal fistulas in Crohn's disease: seton versus anti-TNF versus advancement plasty (PISA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2015; 16:366. [PMID: 26289163 PMCID: PMC4545975 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-015-0831-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2015] [Accepted: 06/30/2015] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Currently there is no guideline for the treatment of patients with Crohn’s disease and high perianal fistulas. Most patients receive anti-TNF medication, but no long-term results of this expensive medication have been described, nor has its efficiency been compared to surgical strategies. With this study, we hope to provide treatment consensus for daily clinical practice with reduction in costs. Methods/Design This is a multicentre, randomized controlled trial. Patients with Crohn’s disease who are over 18 years of age, with newly diagnosed or recurrent active high perianal fistulas, with one internal opening and no anti-TNF usage in the past three months will be considered. Patients with proctitis, recto-vaginal fistulas or anal stenosis will be excluded. Prior to randomisation, an MRI and ileocolonoscopy are required. All treatment will start with seton placement and a course of antibiotics. Patients will then be randomised to: (1) chronic seton drainage (with oral 6-mercaptopurine (6MP)) for one year, (2) anti-TNF medication (with 6MP) for one year (seton removal after six weeks) or (3) advancement plasty after eight weeks of seton drainage (under four months anti-TNF and 6MP for one year). The primary outcome parameter is the number of patients needing fistula-related re-intervention(s). Secondary outcomes are the number of patients with closed fistulas (based on an evaluated MRI score) after 18 months, disease activity, quality of life and costs. Discussion The PISA trial is a multicentre, randomised controlled trial of patients with Crohn’s disease and high perianal fistulas. With the comparison of three generally accepted treatment strategies, we will be able to comment on the efficiency of the various treatment strategies, with respect to several long-term outcome parameters. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register identifier: NTR4137 (registered on 23 August 2013). Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-015-0831-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Joline de Groof
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, 1100, DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. .,Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Christianne J Buskens
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, 1100, DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Cyriel Y Ponsioen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Marcel G W Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Geert R A M D'Haens
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Nidhi Srivastava
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Medical Center Haaglanden, Lijnbaan 32, 2512 VA Den Haag, The Netherlands.
| | - Gijs J D van Acker
- Department of Surgery, Medical Center Haaglanden, Lijnbaan 32, 2512 VA Den Haag, The Netherlands.
| | - Jeroen M Jansen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Gerard Dijkstra
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Johan F M Lange
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - Ben J M Witteman
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Hospital Gelderse Vallei, Willy Brandtlaan 10, 6716 RP Ede, The Netherlands.
| | - Philip M Kruyt
- Department of Surgery, Hospital Gelderse Vallei, Willy Brandtlaan 10, 6716 RP Ede, The Netherlands.
| | - Apollo Pronk
- Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, Bosboomstraat 1, 3582 KE Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Sebastiaan A C van Tuyl
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Diakonessenhuis Utrecht, Bosboomstraat 1, 3582 KE Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Alexander Bodelier
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amphia Hospital, Molengracht 21, 4818 CK Breda, The Netherlands.
| | - Rogier M P H Crolla
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Molengracht 21, 4818 CK Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Rachel L West
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St Franciscus Gasthuis, Kleiweg 500, 3045 PM Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Wietske W Vrijland
- Department of Surgery, St Franciscus Gasthuis, Kleiweg 500, 3045 PM Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Esther C J Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Maatweg 3, 3813 TZ Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
| | - Menno A Brink
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Meander Medical Center, Maatweg 3, 3813 TZ Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
| | - Jurriaan B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, VU Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1118, 1081 HZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Nanne K H de Boer
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, VU Medical Center, De Boelelaan 1118, 1081 HZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - Stephanie O Breukink
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Marieke J Pierik
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Bas Oldenburg
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Andrea E van der Meulen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands.
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands.
| | - Antonino Spinelli
- Department of Surgery, Humanitas Hospital, Via Alessandro Manzoni, 56, 20089 Rozzano MI, Milan, Italy.
| | - Silvio Danese
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Humanitas Hospital, Via Alessandro Manzoni, 56, 20089 Rozzano MI, Milan, Italy.
| | - Matteo Sacchi
- Department of Surgery, Humanitas Hospital, Via Alessandro Manzoni, 56, 20089 Rozzano MI, Milan, Italy.
| | - Janindra Warusavitarne
- Department of Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, Watford Road, Harrow, Middlesex HA1 3UJ, London, UK.
| | - Ailsa Hart
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St Mark's Hospital, Watford Road, Harrow, Middlesex HA1 3UJ, London, England.
| | - Nuha A Yassin
- Department of Surgery, St Mark's Hospital, Watford Road, Harrow, Middlesex HA1 3UJ, London, UK.
| | - Rory P Kennelly
- Department of Surgery, St Vincent's Healthcare Group, Elm Park, Merrion Rd, Dublin 4, Ireland.
| | - Garret J Cullen
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, St Vincent's Healthcare Group, Elm Park, Merrion Rd, Dublin 4, Ireland.
| | - Desmond C Winter
- Department of Surgery, St Vincent's Healthcare Group, Elm Park, Merrion Rd, Dublin 4, Ireland.
| | - A Barney Hawthorne
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Spire Cardiff Hospital, Glamorgan House, Croescadarn Rd, Cardiff, South Glamorgan CF23 8XL, UK.
| | - Jared Torkington
- Department of Surgery, Spire Cardiff Hospital, Glamorgan House, Croescadarn Rd, Cardiff, South Glamorgan CF23 8XL, England.
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, 1100, DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
41
|
Vennix S, Musters GD, Mulder IM, Swank HA, Consten EC, Belgers EH, van Geloven AA, Gerhards MF, Govaert MJ, van Grevenstein WM, Hoofwijk AG, Kruyt PM, Nienhuijs SW, Boermeester MA, Vermeulen J, van Dieren S, Lange JF, Bemelman WA. Laparoscopic peritoneal lavage or sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis: a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial. Lancet 2015. [PMID: 26209030 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(15)] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Case series suggest that laparoscopic peritoneal lavage might be a promising alternative to sigmoidectomy in patients with perforated diverticulitis. We aimed to assess the superiority of laparoscopic lavage compared with sigmoidectomy in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis, with respect to overall long-term morbidity and mortality. METHODS We did a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial in 34 teaching hospitals and eight academic hospitals in Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands (the Ladies trial). The Ladies trial is split into two groups: the LOLA group comparing laparoscopic lavage with sigmoidectomy and the DIVA group comparing Hartmann's procedure with sigmoidectomy plus primary anastomosis. The DIVA section of this trial is still underway but here we report the results of the LOLA section. Patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis were enrolled for LOLA, excluding patients with faecal peritonitis, aged older than 85 years, with high-dose steroid use (≥20 mg daily), and haemodynamic instability. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1; stratified by age [<60 years vs ≥60 years]) using secure online computer randomisation to laparoscopic lavage, Hartmann's procedure, or primary anastomosis in a parallel design after diagnostic laparoscopy. Patients were analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat principle and were followed up after the index operation at least once in the outpatient setting and after sigmoidoscopy and stoma reversal, according to local protocols. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of major morbidity and mortality within 12 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01317485. FINDINGS Between July 1, 2010, and Feb 22, 2013, 90 patients were randomly assigned in the LOLA section of the Ladies trial when the study was terminated by the data and safety monitoring board because of an increased event rate in the lavage group. Two patients were excluded for protocol violations. The primary endpoint occurred in 30 (67%) of 45 patients in the lavage group and 25 (60%) of 42 patients in the sigmoidectomy group (odds ratio 1·28, 95% CI 0·54-3·03, p=0·58). By 12 months, four patients had died after lavage and six patients had died after sigmoidectomy (p=0·43). INTERPRETATION Laparoscopic lavage is not superior to sigmoidectomy for the treatment of purulent perforated diverticulitis. FUNDING Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Vennix
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | | | - Irene M Mulder
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Hilko A Swank
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Esther C Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, Netherlands
| | - Eric H Belgers
- Department of Surgery, Atrium Medical Centre, Heerlen, Netherlands
| | | | | | - Marc J Govaert
- Department of Surgery, Westfriesgasthuis, Hoorn, Netherlands
| | | | - Anton G Hoofwijk
- Department of Surgery, Orbis Medical Centre, Sittard, Netherlands
| | - Philip M Kruyt
- Department of Surgery, Gelderse Vallei Hospital, Ede, Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Susan van Dieren
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Johan F Lange
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
42
|
Gerritsen A, Bollen TL, Nio CY, Molenaar IQ, Dijkgraaf MG, van Santvoort HC, Offerhaus GJ, Brosens LA, Biermann K, Sieders E, de Jong KP, van Dam RM, van der Harst E, van Goor H, van Ramshorst B, Bonsing BA, de Hingh IH, Gerhards MF, van Eijck CH, Gouma DJ, Borel Rinkes IH, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Diagnostic value of a pancreatic mass on computed tomography in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for presumed pancreatic cancer. Surgery 2015; 158:173-82. [DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.03.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2014] [Revised: 02/21/2015] [Accepted: 03/14/2015] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
|
43
|
Borstlap WAA, Buskens CJ, Tytgat KMAJ, Tuynman JB, Consten ECJ, Tolboom RC, Heuff G, van Geloven N, van Wagensveld BA, C A Wientjes CA, Gerhards MF, de Castro SMM, Jansen J, van der Ven AWH, van der Zaag E, Omloo JM, van Westreenen HL, Winter DC, Kennelly RP, Dijkgraaf MGW, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA. Multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing ferric(III)carboxymaltose infusion with oral iron supplementation in the treatment of preoperative anaemia in colorectal cancer patients. BMC Surg 2015; 15:78. [PMID: 26123286 PMCID: PMC4485873 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-015-0065-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/03/2015] [Accepted: 06/15/2015] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background At least a third of patients with a colorectal carcinoma who are candidate for surgery, are anaemic preoperatively. Preoperative anaemia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. In general practice, little attention is paid to these anaemic patients. Some will have oral iron prescribed others not. The waiting period prior to elective colorectal surgery could be used to optimize a patients’ physiological status. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of preoperative intravenous iron supplementation in comparison with the standard preoperative oral supplementation in anaemic patients with colorectal cancer. Methods/Design In this multicentre randomized controlled trial, patients with an M0-staged colorectal carcinoma who are scheduled for curative resection and with a proven iron deficiency anaemia are eligible for inclusion. Main exclusion criteria are palliative surgery, metastatic disease, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (5 × 5 Gy = no exclusion) and the use of Recombinant Human Erythropoietin within three months before inclusion or a blood transfusion within a month before inclusion. Primary endpoint is the percentage of patients that achieve normalisation of the haemoglobin level between the start of the treatment and the day of admission for surgery. This study is a superiority trial, hypothesizing a greater proportion of patients achieving the primary endpoint in favour of iron infusion compared to oral supplementation. A total of 198 patients will be randomized to either ferric(III)carboxymaltose infusion in the intervention arm or ferrofumarate in the control arm. This study will be performed in ten centres nationwide and one centre in Ireland. Discussion This is the first randomized controlled trial to determine the efficacy of preoperative iron supplementation in exclusively anaemic patients with a colorectal carcinoma. Our trial hypotheses a more profound haemoglobin increase with intravenous iron which may contribute to a superior optimisation of the patient’s condition and possibly a decrease in postoperative morbidity. Trial registration ClincalTrials.gov: NCT02243735.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W A A Borstlap
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - C J Buskens
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - K M A J Tytgat
- Department of Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J B Tuynman
- Department of Surgery, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E C J Consten
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - R C Tolboom
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - G Heuff
- Department of Surgery, Spaarne Hospital, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands
| | - N van Geloven
- Department of Surgery, Tergooi Hospital, Hilversum, The Netherlands
| | - B A van Wagensveld
- Department of Surgery, Sint Lucas Andreas Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - C A C A Wientjes
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sint Lucas Andreas Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S M M de Castro
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J Jansen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - E van der Zaag
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospital, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
| | - J M Omloo
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospital, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
| | | | - D C Winter
- Department of Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - R P Kennelly
- Department of Surgery, St. Vincent's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - M G W Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - W A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
44
|
Gardenbroek TJ, Pinkney TD, Sahami S, Morton DG, Buskens CJ, Ponsioen CY, Tanis PJ, Löwenberg M, van den Brink GR, Broeders IA, Pullens PH, Seerden T, Boom MJ, Mallant-Hent RC, Pierik RE, Vecht J, Sosef MN, van Nunen AB, van Wagensveld BA, Stokkers PC, Gerhards MF, Jansen JM, Acherman Y, Depla AC, Mannaerts GH, West R, Iqbal T, Pathmakanthan S, Howard R, Magill L, Singh B, Htun Oo Y, Negpodiev D, Dijkgraaf MG, Ram D'Haens G, Bemelman WA. The ACCURE-trial: the effect of appendectomy on the clinical course of ulcerative colitis, a randomised international multicenter trial (NTR2883) and the ACCURE-UK trial: a randomised external pilot trial (ISRCTN56523019). BMC Surg 2015; 15:30. [PMID: 25887789 PMCID: PMC4393565 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-015-0017-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2014] [Accepted: 02/26/2015] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Over the past 20 years evidence has accumulated confirming the immunomodulatory role of the appendix in ulcerative colitis (UC). This led to the idea that appendectomy might alter the clinical course of established UC. The objective of this body of research is to evaluate the short-term and medium-term efficacy of appendectomy to maintain remission in patients with UC, and to establish the acceptability and cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to standard treatment. Methods/Design These paired phase III multicenter prospective randomised studies will include patients over 18 years of age with an established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis and a disease relapse within 12 months prior to randomisation. Patients need to have been medically treated until complete clinical (Mayo score <3) and endoscopic (Mayo score 0 or 1) remission. Patients will then be randomised 1:1 to a control group (maintenance 5-ASA treatment, no appendectomy) or elective laparoscopic appendectomy plus maintenance treatment. The primary outcome measure is the one year cumulative UC relapse rate - defined both clinically and endoscopically as a total Mayo-score ≥5 with endoscopic subscore of 2 or 3. Secondary outcomes that will be assessed include the number of relapses per patient at 12 months, the time to first relapse, health related quality of life and treatment costs, and number of colectomies in each arm. Discussion The ACCURE and ACCURE-UK trials will provide evidence on the role and acceptability of appendectomy in the treatment of ulcerative colitis and the effects of appendectomy on the disease course. Trial registration NTR2883; ISRCTN56523019
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tjibbe J Gardenbroek
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas D Pinkney
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Saloomeh Sahami
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Dion G Morton
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Christianne J Buskens
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cyriel Y Ponsioen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Mark Löwenberg
- Department of Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs R van den Brink
- Department of Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Ivo Amj Broeders
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - Paul Hjm Pullens
- Department of Gastroenterology, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - Tom Seerden
- Department of Gastroenterology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, The Netherlands
| | - Maarten J Boom
- Department of Surgery, Flevo Hospital, Almere, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Juda Vecht
- Department of Gastroenterology, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Meindert N Sosef
- Department of Surgery, Atrium Medical Center, Heerlen, The Netherlands
| | - Annick B van Nunen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Atrium Medical Center, Heerlen, The Netherlands
| | | | - Pieter Cf Stokkers
- Department of Gastroenterology, Lucas Andreas Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen M Jansen
- Department of Gastroenterology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Yair Acherman
- Department of Surgery, Slotervaart Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Guido Hh Mannaerts
- Department of Surgery, St. Franciscus Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Rachel West
- Department of Gastroenterology, St. Franciscus Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tariq Iqbal
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Rebecca Howard
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Laura Magill
- Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Baljit Singh
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Ye Htun Oo
- School of Immunity and Infection, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Dmitri Negpodiev
- Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | | | - Geert Ram D'Haens
- Department of Gastroenterology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Willem A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
de Rooij T, Jilesen AP, Boerma D, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, van Dieren S, Dijkgraaf MG, van Eijck CH, Gerhards MF, van Goor H, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, Klaase JM, Molenaar IQ, Nieveen van Dijkum EJ, Patijn GA, van Santvoort HC, Scheepers JJ, van der Schelling GP, Sieders E, Vogel JA, Busch OR, Besselink MG. A nationwide comparison of laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy for benign and malignant disease. J Am Coll Surg 2014; 220:263-270.e1. [PMID: 25600974 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.11.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 62] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2014] [Accepted: 11/13/2014] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cohort studies from expert centers suggest that laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) is superior to open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) regarding postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay. But the generalizability of these findings is unknown because nationwide data on LDP are lacking. STUDY DESIGN Adults who had undergone distal pancreatectomy in 17 centers between 2005 and 2013 were analyzed retrospectively. First, all LDPs were compared with all ODPs. Second, groups were matched using a propensity score. Third, the attitudes of pancreatic surgeons toward LDP were surveyed. The primary outcome was major complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III). RESULTS Among 633 included patients, 64 patients (10%) had undergone LDP and 569 patients (90%) had undergone ODP. Baseline characteristics were comparable, except for previous abdominal surgery and mean tumor size. In the full cohort, LDP was associated with fewer major complications (16% vs 29%; p = 0.02) and a shorter median [interquartile range, IQR] hospital stay (8 days [7-12 days] vs 10 days [8-14 days]; p = 0.03). Of all LDPs, 33% were converted to ODP. Matching succeeded for 63 LDP patients. After matching, the differences in major complications (9 patients [14%] vs 19 patients [30%]; p = 0.06) and median [IQR] length of hospital stay (8 days [7-12 days] vs 10 days [8-14 days]; p = 0.48) were not statistically significant. The survey demonstrated that 85% of surgeons welcomed LDP training. CONCLUSIONS Despite nationwide underuse and an impact of selection bias, outcomes of LDP seemed to be at least noninferior to ODP. Specific training is welcomed and could improve both the use and outcomes of LDP.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Anneke P Jilesen
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Susan van Dieren
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel G Dijkgraaf
- Clinical Research Unit, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Michael F Gerhards
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Harry van Goor
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clincs, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | | | - Joris J Scheepers
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, the Netherlands
| | | | - Egbert Sieders
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Jantien A Vogel
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
46
|
Bartels SAL, Vlug MS, Hollmann MW, Dijkgraaf MGW, Ubbink DT, Cense HA, van Wagensveld BA, Engel AF, Gerhards MF, Bemelman WA. Small bowel obstruction, incisional hernia and survival after laparoscopic and open colonic resection (LAFA study). Br J Surg 2014; 101:1153-9. [PMID: 24977342 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9585] [Citation(s) in RCA: 71] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/25/2013] [Revised: 03/29/2014] [Accepted: 05/09/2014] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Short-term advantages to laparoscopic surgery are well described. This study compared medium- to long-term outcomes of a randomized clinical trial comparing laparoscopic and open colonic resection for cancer. METHODS The case notes of patients included in the LAFA study (perioperative strategy in colonic surgery; LAparoscopy and/or FAst track multimodal management versus standard care) were reviewed 2-5 years after randomization for incisional hernia, adhesional small bowel obstruction (SBO), overall survival, cancer recurrence and quality of life (QoL). The laparoscopic and open groups were compared irrespective of fast-track or standard perioperative care. RESULTS Data on incisional hernias, SBO, survival and recurrence were available for 399 of 400 patients: 208 laparoscopic and 191 open resections. These outcomes were corrected for duration of follow-up. Median follow-up was 3·4 (i.q.r. 2·6-4·4) years. Multivariable regression analysis showed that open resection was a risk factor for incisional hernia (odds ratio (OR) 2·44, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1·12 to 5·26; P = 0·022) and SBO (OR 3·70, 1·07 to 12·50; P = 0·039). There were no differences in overall survival (hazard ratio 1·10, 95 per cent c.i. 0·67 to 1·80; P = 0·730) or in cumulative incidence of recurrence (P = 0·514) between the laparoscopic and open groups. There were no measured differences in QoL in 281 respondents (P > 0·350 for all scales). CONCLUSION Laparoscopic colonic surgery led to fewer incisional hernia and adhesional SBO events. REGISTRATION NUMBER NTR222 (http://www.trialregister.nl).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S A L Bartels
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
47
|
van der Meer JG, Moerman E, van de Kar AL, Vermaas M, Gerhards MF. Lotus petal perforator flap for reconstruction of an extended chronic presacral defect after radiotherapy and rectal cancer resection. Colorectal Dis 2014; 16:O220-2. [PMID: 24308419 DOI: 10.1111/codi.12511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/15/2013] [Accepted: 10/15/2013] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM As a result of their extent and complexity, pelvic wounds after surgery for anorectal malignancy often require a multidisciplinary approach to accomplish closure. This report describes a successful reconstruction using the lotus petal perforator flap. METHOD This flap is based on perforators of the internal pudendal artery and was partially depithelialized for plugging the defect. RESULTS Wound healing was achieved after 12 days. CONCLUSION The lotus petal flap is a relatively simple and successful choice for reconstruction of an extended chronic presacral defect after radiotherapy and rectal cancer resection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J G van der Meer
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Hand Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
48
|
Gerritsen A, Molenaar IQ, Bollen TL, Nio CY, Dijkgraaf MG, van Santvoort HC, Offerhaus GJ, Brosens LA, Biermann K, Sieders E, de Jong KP, van Dam RM, van der Harst E, van Goor H, van Ramshorst B, Bonsing BA, de Hingh IH, Gerhards MF, van Eijck CH, Gouma DJ, Borel Rinkes IHM, Busch ORC, Besselink MG. Preoperative characteristics of patients with presumed pancreatic cancer but ultimately benign disease: a multicenter series of 344 pancreatoduodenectomies. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21:3999-4006. [PMID: 24871781 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-3810-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2014] [Indexed: 01/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Preoperative differentiation between malignant and benign pancreatic tumors can be difficult. Consequently, a proportion of patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for suspected malignancy will ultimately have benign disease. The aim of this study was to compare preoperative clinical and diagnostic characteristics of patients with unexpected benign disease after pancreatoduodenectomy with those of patients with confirmed (pre)malignant disease. METHODS We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study in 1,629 consecutive patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for suspected malignancy between 2003 and 2010 in 11 Dutch centers. Preoperative characteristics were compared in a benign:malignant ratio of 1:3. Malignant cases were selected from the entire cohort by using a random number list. A multivariable logistic regression prediction model was constructed to predict benign disease. RESULTS Of 107 patients (6.6 %) with unexpected benign disease after pancreatoduodenectomy, 86 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were compared with 258 patients with (pre)malignant disease. Patients with benign disease presented more often with pain (56 vs. 38 %; P = 0.004), but less frequently with jaundice (60 vs. 80 %; P < 0.01), a pancreatic mass (13 vs. 54 %, P < 0.001), or a double duct sign on computed tomography (21 vs. 47 %; P < 0.001). In a prediction model using these parameters, only 19 % of patients with benign disease were correctly predicted, and 1.4 % of patients with malignant disease were missed. CONCLUSIONS Nearly 7 % of patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for suspected malignancy were ultimately diagnosed with benign disease. Although some preoperative clinical and imaging characteristics might indicate absence of malignancy, their discriminatory value is insufficient for clinical use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arja Gerritsen
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
49
|
Roos D, Dijksman LM, Tijssen JG, Gouma DJ, Gerhards MF, Oudemans-van Straaten HM. Systematic review of perioperative selective decontamination of the digestive tract in elective gastrointestinal surgery. Br J Surg 2014; 100:1579-88. [PMID: 24264779 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9254] [Citation(s) in RCA: 42] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 07/03/2013] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Studies on selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) in elective gastrointestinal surgery have shown decreased rates of postoperative infection and anastomotic leakage. However, the prophylactic use of perioperative SDD in elective gastrointestinal surgery is not generally accepted. METHODS A systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was conducted to compare the effect of perioperative SDD with systemic antibiotics (SDD group) with systemic antibiotic prophylaxis alone (control group), using MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Endpoints included postoperative infection, anastomotic leakage, and in-hospital or 30-day mortality. RESULTS Eight RCTs published between 1988 and 2011, with a total of 1668 patients (828 in the SDD group and 840 in the control group), were included in the meta-analysis. The total number of patients with infection (reported in 5 trials) was 77 (19.2 per cent) of 401 in the SDD group, compared with 118 (28.2 per cent) of 418 in the control group (odds ratio 0.58, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.42 to 0.82; P = 0.002). The incidence of anastomotic leakage was significantly lower in the SDD group: 19 (3.3 per cent) of 582 patients versus 44 (7.4 per cent) of 595 patients in the control group (odds ratio 0.42, 0.24 to 0.73; P = 0.002). CONCLUSION This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that a combination of perioperative SDD and perioperative intravenous antibiotics in elective gastrointestinal surgery reduces the rate of postoperative infection including anastomotic leakage compared with use of intravenous antibiotics alone.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D Roos
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, and
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
50
|
Ünlü Ç, van de Wall BJ, Gerhards MF, Wiezer M, Draaisma WA, Consten EC, Boermeester MA, Vrouenraets BC. Influence of age on clinical outcome of acute diverticulitis. J Gastrointest Surg 2013; 17:1651-6. [PMID: 23733363 DOI: 10.1007/s11605-013-2240-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2013] [Accepted: 05/22/2013] [Indexed: 01/31/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The controversy about the treatment of acute colonic diverticulitis in young patients continues. The discussion is focused on whether younger age is a risk factor for recurrence or a complicated course, thereby subject to different treatment choices. AIM In this study, we investigated whether an episode of acute diverticulitis at a younger age (≤50 years) has a higher recurrence rate or a more severe outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective cohort study was conducted in four teaching hospitals using hospital registry codes for diverticulitis. All patients diagnosed with acute diverticulitis between January 2004 and January 2012, confirmed by imaging, were included. RESULTS A total of 1,441 consecutive patients were identified as having primary acute diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon. Four hundred and sixty-three patients (32.1%) were ≤50 years (group 1) and 978 patients (67.9%) were older than 50 years (group 2). Twenty patients (4.3%) needed emergency surgery, due to perforated diverticulitis, within 72 h at first presentation in group 1 compared to 77 patients (7.8%) in group 2 (p = 0.029). Surgery within 30 days was needed for 29 of 463 patient (6.2%) in group 1 and 104 of 978 patients (10.6%) in group 2 (p = 0.02). Recurrence rate after a median follow-up of 22 months was comparable among groups (25.6% (111 patients) in group 1 versus 23.8% (208 patients) in group 2; p = 0.278). Also, cumulative recurrence was comparable among groups. CONCLUSION Younger age is neither associated with a more severe presentation of diverticulitis nor with a higher incidence in recurrence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ç Ünlü
- Department of Surgery, Sint Lucas Andreas Hospital, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|