1
|
de Graaff MR, Hogenbirk RNM, Janssen YF, Elfrink AKE, Liem RSL, Nienhuijs SW, de Vries JPPM, Elshof JW, Verdaasdonk E, Melenhorst J, van Westreenen HL, Besselink MGH, Ruurda JP, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Klaase JM, den Dulk M, van Heijl M, Hegeman JH, Braun J, Voeten DM, Würdemann FS, Warps ALK, Alberga AJ, Suurmeijer JA, Akpinar EO, Wolfhagen N, van den Boom AL, Bolster-van Eenennaam MJ, van Duijvendijk P, Heineman DJ, Wouters MWJM, Kruijff S, Koningswoud-Terhoeve CL, Belt E, van der Hoeven JAB, Marres GMH, Tozzi F, von Meyenfeldt EM, Coebergh RRJ, van den Braak, Huisman S, Rijken AM, Balm R, Daams F, Dickhoff C, Eshuis WJ, Gisbertz SS, Zandbergen HR, Hartemink KJ, Keessen SA, Kok NFM, Kuhlmann KFD, van Sandick JW, Veenhof AA, Wals A, van Diepen MS, Schoonderwoerd L, Stevens CT, Susa D, Bendermacher BLW, Olofsen N, van Himbeeck M, de Hingh IHJT, Janssen HJB, Luyer MDP, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, Ramaekers M, Stacie R, Talsma AK, Tissink MW, Dolmans D, Berendsen R, Heisterkamp J, Jansen WA, de Kort-van Oudheusden M, Matthijsen RM, Grünhagen DJ, Lagarde SM, Maat APWM, van der Sluis PC, Waalboer RB, Brehm V, van Brussel JP, Morak M, Ponfoort ED, Sybrandy JEM, Klemm PL, Lastdrager W, Palamba HW, van Aalten SM, Tseng LNL, van der Bogt KEA, de Jong WJ, Oosterhuis JWA, Tummers Q, van der Wilden GM, Ooms S, Pasveer EH, Veger HTC, Molegraafb MJ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Patijn GA, van der Veldt MEV, Boersma D, van Haelst STW, van Koeverden ID, Rots ML, Bonsing BA, Michiels N, Bijlstra OD, Braun J, Broekhuis D, Brummelaar HW, Hartgrink HH, Metselaar A, Mieog JSD, Schipper IB, de Steur WO, Fioole B, Terlouw EC, Biesmans C, Bosmans JWAM, Bouwense SAW, Clermonts SHEM, Coolsen MME, Mees BME, Schurink GWH, Duijff JW, van Gent T, de Nes LCF, Toonen D, Beverwijk MJ, van den Hoed E, Keizers B, Kelder W, Keller BPJA, Pultrum BB, van Rosum E, Wijma AG, van den Broek F, Leclercq WKG, Loos MJA, Sijmons JML, Vaes RHD, Vancoillie PJ, Consten ECJ, Jongen JMJ, Verheijen PM, van Weel V, Arts CHP, Jonker J, Murrmann-Boonstra G, Pierie JPEN, Swart J, van Duyn EB, Geelkerken RH, de Groot R, Moekotte NL, Stam A, Voshaar A, van Acker GJD, Bulder RMA, Swank DJ, Pereboom ITA, Hoffmann WH, Orsini M, Blok JJ, Lardenoije JHP, Reijne MMPJ, van Schaik P, Smeets L, van Sterkenburg SMM, Harlaar NJ, Mekke S, Verhaakt T, Cancrinus E, van Lammeren GW, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC, Vos AWF, Schouten- van der Velden AP, Woensdregt K, Mooy-Vermaat SP, Scharn DM, Marsman HA, Rassam F, Halfwerk FR, Andela AJ, Buis CI, van Dam GM, ten Duis K, van Etten B, Lases L, Meerdink M, de Meijer VE, Pranger B, Ruiter S, Rurenga M, Wiersma A, Wijsmuller AR, Albers KI, van den Boezem PB, Klarenbeek B, van der Kolk BM, van Laarhoven CJHM, Matthée E, Peters N, Rosman C, Schroen AMA, Stommel MWJ, Verhagen AFTM, van der Vijver R, Warlé MC, de Wilt JHW, van den Berg JW, Bloemert T, de Borst GJ, van Hattum EH, Hazenberg CEVB, van Herwaarden JA, van Hillegerberg R, Kroese TE, Petri BJ, Toorop RJ, Aarts F, Janssen RJL, Janssen-Maessen SHP, Kool M, Verberght H, Moes DE, Smit JW, Wiersema AM, Vierhout BP, de Vos B, den Boer FC, Dekker NAM, Botman JMJ, van Det MJ, Folbert EC, de Jong E, Koenen JC, Kouwenhoven EA, Masselink I, Navis LH, Belgers HJ, Sosef MN, Stoot JHMB. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical care in the Netherlands. Br J Surg 2022; 109:1282-1292. [PMID: 36811624 PMCID: PMC10364688 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac301] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2022] [Revised: 05/14/2022] [Accepted: 07/31/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic caused disruption of regular healthcare leading to reduced hospital attendances, repurposing of surgical facilities, and cancellation of cancer screening programmes. This study aimed to determine the impact of COVID-19 on surgical care in the Netherlands. METHODS A nationwide study was conducted in collaboration with the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing. Eight surgical audits were expanded with items regarding alterations in scheduling and treatment plans. Data on procedures performed in 2020 were compared with those from a historical cohort (2018-2019). Endpoints included total numbers of procedures performed and altered treatment plans. Secondary endpoints included complication, readmission, and mortality rates. RESULTS Some 12 154 procedures were performed in participating hospitals in 2020, representing a decrease of 13.6 per cent compared with 2018-2019. The largest reduction (29.2 per cent) was for non-cancer procedures during the first COVID-19 wave. Surgical treatment was postponed for 9.6 per cent of patients. Alterations in surgical treatment plans were observed in 1.7 per cent. Time from diagnosis to surgery decreased (to 28 days in 2020, from 34 days in 2019 and 36 days in 2018; P < 0.001). For cancer-related procedures, duration of hospital stay decreased (5 versus 6 days; P < 0.001). Audit-specific complications, readmission, and mortality rates were unchanged, but ICU admissions decreased (16.5 versus 16.8 per cent; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION The reduction in the number of surgical operations was greatest for those without cancer. Where surgery was undertaken, it appeared to be delivered safely, with similar complication and mortality rates, fewer admissions to ICU, and a shorter hospital stay.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle R de Graaff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.,Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Gelre Ziekenhuizen, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
| | - Rianne N M Hogenbirk
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Yester F Janssen
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Arthur K E Elfrink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ronald S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Dutch Obesity Clinic, Gouda, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Groene Hart Hospital, Gouda, the Netherlands
| | - Simon W Nienhuijs
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jan-Willem Elshof
- Department of Surgery, VieCuri Medical Centre, Venlo, the Netherlands
| | - Emiel Verdaasdonk
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Jarno Melenhorst
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marc G H Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jelle P Ruurda
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Mark van Heijl
- Department of Surgery, Diakonessenhuis, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Johannes H Hegeman
- Department of Surgery, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente Almelo-Hengelo, Almelo, Hengelo, the Netherlands
| | - Jerry Braun
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Daan M Voeten
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Franka S Würdemann
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Anne-Loes K Warps
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Anna J Alberga
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J Annelie Suurmeijer
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Erman O Akpinar
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Nienke Wolfhagen
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - David J Heineman
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Michel W J M Wouters
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Schelto Kruijff
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dewulf M, Hildebrand ND, Bouwense SAW, Bouvy ND, Muysoms F. Parastomal hernias after cystectomy and ileal conduit urinary diversion: surgical treatment and the use of prophylactic mesh: a systematic review. BMC Surg 2022; 22:118. [PMID: 35351086 PMCID: PMC8966280 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-022-01509-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [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] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2021] [Accepted: 02/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Parastomal hernia after ileal conduit urinary diversion is an underestimated and undertreated clinical entity, which heavily impairs patients’ quality of life due to symptoms of pain, leakage, application or skin problems. As for all gastrointestinal stomata the best surgical repair technique has yet to be determined. Thereby, surgery for ileal conduit parastomal hernias poses some specific perioperative challenges. This review aims to give an overview of current evidence on the surgical treatment of parastomal hernia after cystectomy and ileal conduit urinary diversion, and on the use of prophylactic mesh at index surgery in its prevention. Methods A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA-guidelines. The electronic databases Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched. Studies were included if they presented postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing surgical treatment of parastomal hernia at the ileal conduit site, irrespective of the technique used. A search was performed to identify additional studies on prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernia, that were not identified by the initial search. Results Eight retrospective case-series were included for analysis, reporting different surgical techniques. If reported, highest complication rate was 45%. Recurrence rates varied highly, ranging from 0 to 80%. Notably, lower recurrence rates were reported in studies with shorter follow-up. Overall, available data suggest significant morbidity after the surgical treatment of ileal conduit parastomal hernias. Data from five conference abstracts on the matter were retrieved, and systematically reported. Regarding prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernia, 5 communications were identified. All of them used keyhole mesh in a retromuscular position, and reported on favorable results in the mesh group without an increase in mesh-related complications. Conclusion Data on the surgical treatment of ileal conduit parastomal hernias and the use of prophylactic mesh in its prevention is scarce. Given the specific perioperative challenges and the paucity of reported results, more high-quality evidence is needed to determine the optimal treatment of this specific surgical problem. Initial results on the use of prophylactic mesh in the prevention of ileal conduit parastomal hernias seem promising. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12893-022-01509-y.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M Dewulf
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands. .,Department of Surgery, Maria Middelares, Gent, Belgium.
| | - N D Hildebrand
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - S A W Bouwense
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - N D Bouvy
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, P. Debyelaan 25, 6229 HX, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - F Muysoms
- Department of Surgery, Maria Middelares, Gent, Belgium
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
de Vos-Geelen J, Geurts SME, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, Voncken FEM, Bogers JA, Braam PM, Muijs CT, de Jong MA, Kasperts N, Rozema T, Blom GJ, Bouwense SAW, Valkenburg-van Iersel LBJ, Jeene PM, Hoebers FJP, Tjan-Heijnen VCG. Patterns of recurrence following definitive chemoradiation for patients with proximal esophageal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2021; 47:2016-2022. [PMID: 33583629 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.02.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [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: 10/14/2020] [Revised: 12/20/2020] [Accepted: 02/01/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the patterns of recurrence and overall survival (OS) in patients achieving clinical complete response after treatment with definitive chemoradiation (CRT) for proximal esophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Patients with proximal esophageal cancer treated with CRT between 2004 and 2014 in 11 centers in the Netherlands were included. OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cumulative incidence of first recurrence (locoregional or distant) and locoregional recurrence (LRR) were assessed using competing risk analyses. RESULTS In 197 of the 200 identified patients, response was evaluated, 133 (68%) showed a complete response. In complete responders, median OS, three-year OS, and PFS were 45.0 months (95% CI 34.8-61.5 months), 58% (95% CI 48-66), and 49% (95% CI 40-57), respectively. Three- and five-year risk of recurrence were respectively 40% (95% CI 31-48), and 45% (95% CI 36-54). Three- and five-year risk of LRR were 26% (95% CI 19-33), and 30% (95% CI 22-38). Eight of 32 patients with an isolated LRR underwent salvage surgery, with a median OS of 32.0 months (95% CI 6.8-not reached). CONCLUSION In patients with a complete response after definitive CRT for proximal esophageal cancer, most recurrences were locoregional and developed within the first three years after CRT. These findings suggest to shorten locoregional follow-up from five to three years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J de Vos-Geelen
- Dept. of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. box 5800, 6202, AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
| | - S M E Geurts
- Dept. of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. box 5800, 6202, AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - G A P Nieuwenhuijzen
- Dept. of Surgery, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, P.O. box 1350, 5602, ZA, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - F E M Voncken
- Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, P.O. box 90203, 1006, BE, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J A Bogers
- Radiotherapiegroep Arnhem, P.O. box 60160, 6800, JD, Arnhem, the Netherlands
| | - P M Braam
- Dept. of Radiotherapy, RadboudUMC, P.O. box 9101, 6500, HB, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - C T Muijs
- Dept. of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, P.O. box 11120, 9700, RB, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - M A de Jong
- Dept. of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, P.O. box 9699, 2300, RC, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - N Kasperts
- Dept. of Radiotherapy, University Medical Center Utrecht, P.O. box 85500, 3508, GA, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - T Rozema
- Insituut Verbeeten, P.O. box 90120, 5000, LA, Tilburg, the Netherlands
| | - G J Blom
- Dept. of Radiation Oncology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, VU University, P.O. box 7057, 1007, MB, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S A W Bouwense
- Dept. of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. box 5800, 6202, AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - L B J Valkenburg-van Iersel
- Dept. of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. box 5800, 6202, AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - P M Jeene
- Dept. of Radiotherapy, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, P.O. box 22660, 1100, DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Radiotherapiegroep Deventer, P.O. box 123, 7400, AC, Deventer, the Netherlands
| | - F J P Hoebers
- Dept. of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. box 3035, 6202, NA, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - V C G Tjan-Heijnen
- Dept. of Internal Medicine, Division of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, P.O. box 5800, 6202, AZ, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Umans DS, Hallensleben ND, Verdonk RC, Bouwense SAW, Fockens P, van Santvoort HC, Voermans RP, Besselink MG, Bruno MJ, van Hooft JE. Recurrence of idiopathic acute pancreatitis after cholecystectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Surg 2019; 107:191-199. [PMID: 31875953 PMCID: PMC7003758 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11429] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [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: 08/07/2019] [Revised: 09/26/2019] [Accepted: 10/04/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
Background Occult biliary disease has been suggested as a frequent underlying cause of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP). Cholecystectomy has been proposed as a strategy to prevent recurrent IAP. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the efficacy of cholecystectomy in reducing the risk of recurrent IAP. Methods PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically for studies including patients with IAP treated by cholecystectomy, with data on recurrence of pancreatitis. Studies published before 1980 or including chronic pancreatitis and case reports were excluded. The primary outcome was recurrence rate. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. Meta‐analyses were undertaken to calculate risk ratios using a random‐effects model with the inverse‐variance method. Results Overall, ten studies were included, of which nine were used in pooled analyses. The study population consisted of 524 patients with 126 cholecystectomies. Of these 524 patients, 154 (29·4 (95 per cent c.i. 25·5 to 33·3) per cent) had recurrent disease. The recurrence rate was significantly lower after cholecystectomy than after conservative management (14 of 126 (11·1 per cent) versus 140 of 398 (35·2 per cent); risk ratio 0·44, 95 per cent c.i. 0·27 to 0·71). Even in patients in whom IAP was diagnosed after more extensive diagnostic testing, including endoscopic ultrasonography or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, the recurrence rate appeared to be lower after cholecystectomy (4 of 36 (11 per cent) versus 42 of 108 (38·9 per cent); risk ratio 0·41, 0·16 to 1·07). Conclusion Cholecystectomy after an episode of IAP reduces the risk of recurrent pancreatitis. This implies that current diagnostics are insufficient to exclude a biliary cause.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- D S Umans
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - N D Hallensleben
- Department of Gastroenterology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Research and Development, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - R C Verdonk
- Department of Gastroenterology, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - S A W Bouwense
- Department of Surgery, MUMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - P Fockens
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - R P Voermans
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M J Bruno
- Department of Gastroenterology, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J E van Hooft
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amsterdam Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|