1
|
Padovan BV, Bijl MAJ, Langendijk JA, van der Laan HP, Van Dijk BAC, Festen S, Halmos GB. Evaluation of a new two-step frailty assessment of head and neck patients in a prospective cohort. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2024:10.1007/s00405-024-08651-8. [PMID: 38653824 DOI: 10.1007/s00405-024-08651-8] [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] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2024] [Accepted: 03/28/2024] [Indexed: 04/25/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE Assessing frailty, in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients is key when choosing appropriate treatment. Optimal screening is challenging, as it should be feasible and should avoid over-referral for comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) This study aims to evaluate the association between geriatric assessment using a new two-step care pathway, referral to geriatrician and adverse outcomes. METHODS This institutional retrospective analysis on a prospective cohort analysed the multimodal geriatric assessment (GA) of newly diagnosed HNC patients. Uni- and multivariable logistic regression was performed to study the association between the screening tests, and referral to the geriatrician for complete geriatric screening, and adverse outcomes. RESULTS This study included 539 patients, of whom 276 were screened. Patients who underwent the GA, were significantly older and more often had advanced tumour stages compared to non-screened patients. Referral to the geriatrician was done for 30.8% of patients. Of the 130 patients who underwent surgery, 26/130 (20%) experienced clinically relevant postoperative complications. Of the 184 patients who underwent (radio)chemotherapy, 50/184 (27.2%) had clinically relevant treatment-related toxicity. Age, treatment intensity, polypharmacy and cognitive deficits, were independently associated with referral to geriatrician. A medium to high risk of malnutrition was independently associated with acute radiation induced toxicity and adverse outcomes in general. CONCLUSION The current study showed a 30.8% referral rate for CGA by a geriatrician. Age, treatment intensity, cognitive deficits and polypharmacy were associated with higher rates of referral. Furthermore, nutritional status was found to be an important negative factor for adverse treatment outcomes, that requires attention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Beniamino Vincenzoni Padovan
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
| | - M A J Bijl
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J A Langendijk
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - H P van der Laan
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - B A C Van Dijk
- Department of Research and Development, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, The Netherlands
- Department of Epidemiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- University Medical Center Groningen, University Medical Center for Geriatric Medicine, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - G B Halmos
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
van Bodegraven EA, den Haring FET, Pollemans B, Monselis D, De Pastena M, van Eijck C, Daams F, de Hingh I, Luyer M, Stommel MWJ, van Santvoort HC, Festen S, Mieog JSD, Klaase J, Lips D, Coolsen MME, van der Schelling GP, Manusama ER, Patijn G, van der Harst E, Bosscha K, Marchegiani G, Besselink MG. Nationwide validation of the distal fistula risk score (D-FRS). Langenbecks Arch Surg 2023; 409:14. [PMID: 38114826 DOI: 10.1007/s00423-023-03192-w] [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: 04/19/2023] [Accepted: 11/24/2023] [Indexed: 12/21/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Distal pancreatectomy (DP) is associated with a high complication rate of 30-50% with postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) as a dominant contributor. Adequate risk estimation for POPF enables surgeons to use a tailor-made approach. Assessment of the risk of POPF prior to DP can lead to the application of preventive strategies. The current study aims to validate the recently published preoperative and intraoperative distal fistula risk score (D-FRS) in a nationwide cohort. METHODS This nationwide retrospective Dutch cohort study included all patients after DP for any indication, all of whom were registered in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (DPCA) database between 2013 and 2021. The D-FRS was validated by filling in the probability equations with data from this cohort. The predictive capacity of the models was represented by an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. RESULTS A total of 896 patients underwent DP of which 152 (17%) developed POPF of whom 144 grade B (95%) and 8 grade C (5%). The preoperative D-FRS, consisting of the variables pancreatic neck thickness and pancreatic duct diameter, showed an AUROC of 0.73 (95%CI 0.68-0.78). The intraoperative D-FRS, comprising pancreatic neck, duct diameter, BMI, operating time, and soft pancreatic aspect, showed an AUROC of 0.69 (95%CI 0.64-0.74). CONCLUSION The current study is the first nationwide validation of the preoperative and intraoperative D-FRS showing acceptable distinguishing capacity for only the preoperative D-FRS for POPF. Therefore, the preoperative score could improve prevention and mitigation strategies such as drain management, which is currently investigated in the multicenter PANDORINA trial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eduard A van Bodegraven
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081, HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Femke E T den Haring
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081, HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Britt Pollemans
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081, HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Damaris Monselis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081, HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Matteo De Pastena
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Casper van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081, HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ignace de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Misha Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, LUMC, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - J Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - D Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - M M E Coolsen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht Universitair Medisch Centrum, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - G P van der Schelling
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - E R Manusama
- Department of Surgery, Medical Center Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands
| | - G Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - E van der Harst
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - Giovanni Marchegiani
- General and Pancreatic Surgery Department, Pancreas Institute, University and Hospital Trust of Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location University of Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1117 (ZH-7F), 1081, HV, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Emmen AMLH, Görgec B, Zwart MJW, Daams F, Erdmann J, Festen S, Gouma DJ, van Gulik TM, van Hilst J, Kazemier G, Lof S, Sussenbach SI, Tanis PJ, Zonderhuis BM, Busch OR, Swijnenburg RJ, Besselink MG. Impact of shifting from laparoscopic to robotic surgery during 600 minimally invasive pancreatic and liver resections. Surg Endosc 2023; 37:2659-2672. [PMID: 36401105 PMCID: PMC10082117 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09735-4] [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] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2022] [Accepted: 10/11/2022] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many centers worldwide are shifting from laparoscopic to robotic minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary resections (MIS-HPB) but large single center series assessing this process are lacking. We hypothesized that the introduction of robot-assisted surgery was safe and feasible in a high-volume center. METHODS Single center, post-hoc assessment of prospectively collected data including all consecutive MIS-HPB resections (January 2010-February 2022). As of December 2018, all MIS pancreatoduodenectomy and liver resections were robot-assisted. All surgeons had participated in dedicated training programs for laparoscopic and robotic MIS-HPB. Primary outcomes were in-hospital/30-day mortality and Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications. RESULTS Among 1875 pancreatic and liver resections, 600 (32%) were MIS-HPB resections. The overall rate of conversion was 4.3%, Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications 25.7%, and in-hospital/30-day mortality 1.8% (n = 11). When comparing the period before and after the introduction of robotic MIS-HPB (Dec 2018), the overall use of MIS-HPB increased from 25.3 to 43.8% (P < 0.001) and blood loss decreased from 250 ml [IQR 100-500] to 150 ml [IQR 50-300] (P < 0.001). The 291 MIS pancreatic resections included 163 MIS pancreatoduodenectomies (52 laparoscopic, 111 robotic) with 4.3% conversion rate. The implementation of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was associated with reduced operation time (450 vs 361 min; P < 0.001), reduced blood loss (350 vs 200 ml; P < 0.001), and a decreased rate of delayed gastric emptying (28.8% vs 9.9%; P = 0.009). The 309 MIS liver resections included 198 laparoscopic and 111 robotic procedures with a 3.6% conversion rate. The implementation of robotic liver resection was associated with less overall complications (24.7% vs 10.8%; P = 0.003) and shorter hospital stay (4 vs 3 days; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION The introduction of robotic surgery was associated with greater implementation of MIS-HPB in up to nearly half of all pancreatic and liver resections. Although mortality and major morbidity were not affected, robotic surgery was associated with improvements in some selected outcomes. Ultimately, randomized studies and high-quality registries should determine its added value.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anouk. M. L. H. Emmen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B. Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. J. W. Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - F. Daams
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. Erdmann
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. Festen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - D. J. Gouma
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - T. M. van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G. Kazemier
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. Lof
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. I. Sussenbach
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P. J. Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B. M. Zonderhuis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - O. R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R. J. Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - for HPB-Amsterdam
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Vissers FL, Balduzzi A, van Bodegraven EA, van Hilst J, Festen S, Hilal MA, Asbun HJ, Mieog JSD, Koerkamp BG, Busch OR, Daams F, Luyer M, De Pastena M, Malleo G, Marchegiani G, Klaase J, Molenaar IQ, Salvia R, van Santvoort HC, Stommel M, Lips D, Coolsen M, Bassi C, van Eijck C, Besselink MG. Correction: Prophylactic abdominal drainage or no drainage after distal pancreatectomy (PANDORINA): a study protocol of a binational multicenter randomized controlled trial. Trials 2023; 24:121. [PMID: 36803266 PMCID: PMC9940380 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06957-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/22/2023] Open
Affiliation(s)
- F. L. Vissers
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A. Balduzzi
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - E. A. van Bodegraven
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J. van Hilst
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S. Festen
- grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. Abu Hilal
- grid.430506.40000 0004 0465 4079Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK ,grid.415090.90000 0004 1763 5424Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Hospital Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - H. J. Asbun
- grid.418212.c0000 0004 0465 0852Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, USA
| | - J. S. D. Mieog
- grid.10419.3d0000000089452978Department of Surgery, LUMC, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - B. Groot Koerkamp
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O. R. Busch
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F. Daams
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. Luyer
- grid.413532.20000 0004 0398 8384Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M. De Pastena
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G. Malleo
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G. Marchegiani
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - J. Klaase
- grid.4494.d0000 0000 9558 4598Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - I. Q. Molenaar
- grid.7692.a0000000090126352Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - R. Salvia
- grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H. C. van Santvoort
- grid.415960.f0000 0004 0622 1269Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - M. Stommel
- grid.10417.330000 0004 0444 9382Department of Surgery, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - D. Lips
- grid.415214.70000 0004 0399 8347Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - M. Coolsen
- grid.412966.e0000 0004 0480 1382Department of Surgery, Maastricht Universitair Medisch Centrum, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - C. Bassi
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - C. van Eijck
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. G. Besselink
- grid.7177.60000000084992262Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Emmen AMLH, Görgec B, Zwart MJW, Daams F, Erdmann J, Festen S, Gouma DJ, van Gulik TM, van Hilst J, Kazemier G, Lof S, Sussenbach SI, Tanis PJ, Zonderhuis BM, Busch OR, Swijnenburg RJ, Besselink MG. Correction: Impact of shifting from laparoscopic to robotic surgery during 600 minimally invasive pancreatic and liver resections. Surg Endosc 2022; 37:3291-3292. [PMID: 36575223 PMCID: PMC10082094 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-022-09848-w] [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: 12/28/2022]
Abstract
Graphical abstract
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anouk. M. L. H. Emmen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B. Görgec
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. J. W. Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - F. Daams
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. Erdmann
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. Festen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - D. J. Gouma
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - T. M. van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - J. van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G. Kazemier
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. Lof
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S. I. Sussenbach
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P. J. Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B. M. Zonderhuis
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - O. R. Busch
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R. J. Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M. G. Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Vissers FL, Balduzzi A, van Bodegraven EA, van Hilst J, Festen S, Hilal MA, Asbun HJ, Mieog JSD, Koerkamp BG, Busch OR, Daams F, Luyer M, De Pastena M, Malleo G, Marchegiani G, Klaase J, Molenaar IQ, Salvia R, van Santvoort HC, Stommel M, Lips D, Coolsen M, Bassi C, van Eijck C, Besselink MG. Prophylactic abdominal drainage or no drainage after distal pancreatectomy (PANDORINA): a binational multicenter randomized controlled trial. Trials 2022; 23:809. [PMID: 36153559 PMCID: PMC9509576 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-022-06736-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [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] [Received: 06/17/2022] [Accepted: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Prophylactic abdominal drainage is current standard practice after distal pancreatectomy (DP), with the aim to divert pancreatic fluid in case of a postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) aimed to prevent further complications as bleeding. Whereas POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy, by definition, involves infection due to anastomotic dehiscence, a POPF after DP is essentially sterile since the bowel is not opened and no anastomoses are created. Routine drainage after DP could potentially be omitted and this could even be beneficial because of the hypothetical prevention of drain-induced infections (Fisher, Surgery 52:205-22, 2018). Abdominal drainage, moreover, should only be performed if it provides additional safety or comfort to the patient. In clinical practice, drains cause clear discomfort. One multicenter randomized controlled trial confirmed the safety of omitting abdominal drainage but did not stratify patients according to their risk of POPF and did not describe a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Therefore, a large pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial is required, with prespecified POPF risk groups and a homogeneous method of stump closure. The objective of the PANDORINA trial is to evaluate the non-inferiority of omitting routine intra-abdominal drainage after DP on postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3), and, secondarily, POPF grade B/C. METHODS/DESIGN Binational multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial, stratifying patients to high and low risk for POPF grade B/C and incorporating a standardized strategy for pancreatic transection. Two groups of 141 patients (282 in total) undergoing elective DP (either open or minimally invasive, with or without splenectomy). Primary outcome is postoperative rate of morbidity (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ 3), and the most relevant secondary outcome is grade B/C POPF. Other secondary outcomes include surgical reintervention, percutaneous catheter drainage, endoscopic catheter drainage, abdominal collections (not requiring drainage), wound infection, delayed gastric emptying, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage as defined by the international study group for pancreatic surgery (ISGPS) (Wente et al., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007), length of stay (LOS), readmission within 90 days, in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality. DISCUSSION PANDORINA is the first binational, multicenter, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with the primary objective to evaluate the hypothesis that omitting prophylactic abdominal drainage after DP does not worsen the risk of postoperative severe complications (Wente etal., Surgery 142:20-5, 2007; Bassi et al., Surgery 161:584-91, 2017). Most of the published studies on drain placement after pancreatectomy focus on both pancreatoduodenectomy and DP, but these two entities present are associated with different complications and therefore deserve separate evaluation (McMillan et al., Surgery 159:1013-22, 2016; Pratt et al., J Gastrointest Surg 10:1264-78, 2006). The PANDORINA trial is innovative since it takes the preoperative risk on POPF into account based on the D-FRS and it warrants homogenous stump closing by using the same graded compression technique and same stapling device (de Pastena et al., Ann Surg 2022; Asbun and Stauffer, Surg Endosc 25:2643-9, 2011).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F. L. Vissers
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A. Balduzzi
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - E. A. van Bodegraven
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J. van Hilst
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S. Festen
- grid.440209.b0000 0004 0501 8269Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. Abu Hilal
- grid.430506.40000 0004 0465 4079Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK ,grid.415090.90000 0004 1763 5424Department of Surgery, Poliambulanza Hospital Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - H. J. Asbun
- grid.418212.c0000 0004 0465 0852Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreas Surgery, Miami Cancer Institute, Miami, USA
| | - J. S. D. Mieog
- grid.10419.3d0000000089452978Department of Surgery, LUMC, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - B. Groot Koerkamp
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O. R. Busch
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F. Daams
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. Luyer
- grid.413532.20000 0004 0398 8384Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M. De Pastena
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G. Malleo
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - G. Marchegiani
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - J. Klaase
- grid.4494.d0000 0000 9558 4598Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - I. Q. Molenaar
- grid.7692.a0000000090126352Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - R. Salvia
- grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H. C. van Santvoort
- grid.415960.f0000 0004 0622 1269Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - M. Stommel
- grid.10417.330000 0004 0444 9382Department of Surgery, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - D. Lips
- grid.415214.70000 0004 0399 8347Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - M. Coolsen
- grid.412966.e0000 0004 0480 1382Department of Surgery, Maastricht Universitair Medisch Centrum, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - C. Bassi
- grid.411475.20000 0004 1756 948XDepartment of Surgery, Pancreas Institute, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - C. van Eijck
- grid.5645.2000000040459992XDepartment of Surgery, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M. G. Besselink
- grid.509540.d0000 0004 6880 3010Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands ,grid.16872.3a0000 0004 0435 165XCancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Henry AC, Schouten TJ, Daamen LA, Walma MS, Noordzij P, Cirkel GA, Los M, Besselink MG, Busch OR, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Kazemier G, Liem MS, de Meijer VE, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Roos D, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC. ASO Visual Abstract: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Pancreatic Cancer Resection for Elderly Patients: A Nationwide Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 2022. [PMID: 35543910 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11873-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- A C Henry
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, , UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - T J Schouten
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, , UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - L A Daamen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, , UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M S Walma
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, , UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - P Noordzij
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - G A Cirkel
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Meander Medical Center Amersfoort, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - O R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, The Netherlands
| | - R M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwen Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - E van der Harst
- Department of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I H J T de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - G Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M S Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - V E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | | | - D Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, The Netherlands
| | | | - M W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, , UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, , UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
van Goor I, Nagelhout A, Besselink M, Bonsing B, Bosscha K, Brosens L, Busch O, Cirkel G, van Dam R, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh I, Kazemier G, Meijer G, de Meijer V, Nieuwenhuijs V, Roos D, Schreinemakers J, Stommel M, Verdonk R, van Santvoort H, Molenaar Q, Daamen L, Intven M. OC-0111 Prognostic factors for isolated local recurrence after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Radiother Oncol 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(22)02487-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
9
|
Festen S, Nijmeijer H, van Leeuwen BL, van Etten B, van Munster BC, de Graeff P. Multidisciplinary decision-making in older patients with cancer, does it differ from younger patients? Eur J Surg Oncol 2021; 47:2682-2688. [PMID: 34127326 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.06.003] [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: 04/13/2021] [Revised: 05/14/2021] [Accepted: 06/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND In order to tailor treatment to the individual patient, it is important to take the patients context and preferences into account, especially for older patients. We assessed the quality of information used in the decision-making process in different oncological MDTs and compared this for older (≥70 years) and younger patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS Cross-sectional observations of oncological MDTs were performed, using an observation tool in a University Hospital. Primary outcome measures were quality of input of information into the discussion for older and younger patients. Secondary outcomes were the contribution of different team members, discussion time for each case and whether or not a treatment decision was formulated. RESULTS Five-hundred and three cases were observed. The median patient age was 63 year, 32% were ≥70. In both age groups quality of patient-centered information (psychosocial information and patient's view) was poor. There was no difference in quality of information between older and younger patients, only for comorbidities the quality of information for older patients was better. There was no significant difference in the contributions by team members, discussion time (median 3.54 min) or number of decision reached (87.5%). CONCLUSION For both age groups, we observed a lack of patient-centered information. The only difference between the age groups was for information on comorbidities. There were also no differences in contributions by different team members, case discussion time or number of decisions. Decision-making in the observed oncological MDTs was mostly based on medical technical information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Festen
- University Center for Geriatric Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - H Nijmeijer
- University Center for Geriatric Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - B L van Leeuwen
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - B van Etten
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - B C van Munster
- University Center for Geriatric Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - P de Graeff
- University Center for Geriatric Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Walma MS, Rombouts SJ, Brada LJH, Borel Rinkes IH, Bosscha K, Bruijnen RC, Busch OR, Creemers GJ, Daams F, van Dam RM, van Delden OM, Festen S, Ghorbani P, de Groot DJ, de Groot JWB, Haj Mohammad N, van Hillegersberg R, de Hingh IH, D'Hondt M, Kerver ED, van Leeuwen MS, Liem MS, van Lienden KP, Los M, de Meijer VE, Meijerink MR, Mekenkamp LJ, Nio CY, Oulad Abdennabi I, Pando E, Patijn GA, Polée MB, Pruijt JF, Roeyen G, Ropela JA, Stommel MWJ, de Vos-Geelen J, de Vries JJ, van der Waal EM, Wessels FJ, Wilmink JW, van Santvoort HC, Besselink MG, Molenaar IQ. Radiofrequency ablation and chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (PELICAN): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2021; 22:313. [PMID: 33926539 PMCID: PMC8082784 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-021-05248-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [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: 09/14/2020] [Accepted: 04/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Approximately 80% of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) are treated with chemotherapy, of whom approximately 10% undergo a resection. Cohort studies investigating local tumor ablation with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have reported a promising overall survival of 26–34 months when given in a multimodal setting. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of RFA in combination with chemotherapy in patients with LAPC are lacking. Methods The “Pancreatic Locally Advanced Unresectable Cancer Ablation” (PELICAN) trial is an international multicenter superiority RCT, initiated by the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (DPCG). All patients with LAPC according to DPCG criteria, who start with FOLFIRINOX or (nab-paclitaxel/)gemcitabine, are screened for eligibility. Restaging is performed after completion of four cycles of FOLFIRINOX or two cycles of (nab-paclitaxel/)gemcitabine (i.e., 2 months of treatment), and the results are assessed within a nationwide online expert panel. Eligible patients with RECIST stable disease or objective response, in whom resection is not feasible, are randomized to RFA followed by chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone. In total, 228 patients will be included in 16 centers in The Netherlands and four other European centers. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, RECIST response, CA 19.9 and CEA response, toxicity, quality of life, pain, costs, and immunomodulatory effects of RFA. Discussion The PELICAN RCT aims to assess whether the combination of chemotherapy and RFA improves the overall survival when compared to chemotherapy alone, in patients with LAPC with no progression of disease following 2 months of systemic treatment. Trial registration Dutch Trial RegistryNL4997. Registered on December 29, 2015. ClinicalTrials.govNCT03690323. Retrospectively registered on October 1, 2018
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M S Walma
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. .,Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - S J Rombouts
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - L J H Brada
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.,Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I H Borel Rinkes
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - R C Bruijnen
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - O R Busch
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - G J Creemers
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - F Daams
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - R M van Dam
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - O M van Delden
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - P Ghorbani
- Pancreatic Surgery Unit, Division of Surgery, CLINTEC, Karolinska Institute at Center for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - D J de Groot
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, UMC Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - J W B de Groot
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - N Haj Mohammad
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - R van Hillegersberg
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - M D'Hondt
- Department of General and Digestive Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - E D Kerver
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M S van Leeuwen
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M S Liem
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - K P van Lienden
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M Los
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - V E de Meijer
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, UMC Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - M R Meijerink
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - L J Mekenkamp
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
| | - C Y Nio
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I Oulad Abdennabi
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E Pando
- HBP Surgery and Transplant Department, Hospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain
| | - G A Patijn
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, Isala, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - M B Polée
- Department of Medical Oncology, Medical Center Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, The Netherlands
| | - J F Pruijt
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands
| | - G Roeyen
- Department of Hepatobiliary, Endocrine and Transplantation Surgery, Antwerp University Hospital, Antwerp, Belgium
| | - J A Ropela
- Department of Medical Oncology, St Jansdal Hospital, Harderwijk, The Netherlands
| | - M W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - J de Vos-Geelen
- Departments of Surgery and Medical Oncology GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - J J de Vries
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E M van der Waal
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - F J Wessels
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - J W Wilmink
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Departments of Surgery, Radiology and Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Lof S, Vissers FL, Klompmaker S, Berti S, Boggi U, Coratti A, Dokmak S, Fara R, Festen S, D'Hondt M, Khatkov I, Lips D, Luyer M, Manzoni A, Rosso E, Saint-Marc O, Besselink MG, Abu Hilal M. Risk of conversion to open surgery during robotic and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy and effect on outcomes: international propensity score-matched comparison study. Br J Surg 2021; 108:80-87. [PMID: 33640946 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znaa026] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/17/2020] [Revised: 04/23/2020] [Accepted: 09/09/2020] [Indexed: 12/16/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy (MIPD) is increasingly being performed because of perceived patient benefits. Whether conversion of MIPD to open pancreatoduodenectomy worsens outcome, and which risk factors are associated with conversion, is unclear. METHODS This was a post hoc analysis of a European multicentre retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing MIPD (2012-2017) in ten medium-volume (10-19 MIPDs annually) and four high-volume (at least 20 MIPDs annually) centres. Propensity score matching (1 : 1) was used to compare outcomes of converted and non-converted MIPD procedures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for conversion, with results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i). RESULTS Overall, 65 of 709 MIPDs were converted (9.2 per cent) and the overall 30-day mortality rate was 3.8 per cent. Risk factors for conversion were tumour size larger than 40 mm (OR 2.7, 95 per cent c.i.1.0 to 6.8; P = 0.041), pancreatobiliary tumours (OR 2.2, 1.0 to 4.8; P = 0.039), age at least 75 years (OR 2.0, 1.0 to 4.1; P = 0.043), and laparoscopic pancreatoduodenectomy (OR 5.2, 2.5 to 10.7; P < 0.001). Medium-volume centres had a higher risk of conversion than high-volume centres (15.2 versus 4.1 per cent, P < 0.001; OR 4.1, 2.3 to 7.4, P < 0.001). After propensity score matching (56 converted MIPDs and 56 completed MIPDs) including risk factors, rates of complications with a Clavien-Dindo grade of III or higher (32 versus 34 per cent; P = 0.841) and 30-day mortality (12 versus 6 per cent; P = 0.274) did not differ between converted and non-converted MIPDs. CONCLUSION Risk factors for conversion during MIPD include age, large tumour size, tumour location, laparoscopic approach, and surgery in medium-volume centres. Although conversion during MIPD itself was not associated with worse outcomes, the outcome in these patients was poor in general which should be taken into account during patient selection for MIPD.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Lof
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F L Vissers
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Klompmaker
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Berti
- Department of Surgery, Sant'Andrea Hospital La Spezia, La Spezia, Italy
| | - U Boggi
- Department of Surgery, Universitá di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - A Coratti
- Department of Oncology and Robotic Surgery, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy
| | - S Dokmak
- Department of Surgery, Hospital of Beaujon, Clichy, France
| | - R Fara
- Department of Surgery, Hôpital Européen Marseille, Marseille, France
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M D'Hondt
- Department of Digestive and Hepatobiliary/Pancreatic Surgery, Groeninge Hospital, Kortrijk, Belgium
| | - I Khatkov
- Department of Surgery, Moscow Clinical Scientific Centre, Moscow, Russia
| | - D Lips
- Department of Gastro-intestinal and Oncological Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - M Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital Eindhoven, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - A Manzoni
- Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | - E Rosso
- Department of Surgery, Pôle Santé Sud, Le Mans, France
| | - O Saint-Marc
- Department of Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Regional d'Orleans, Orleans, France
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK.,Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Heidsma CM, Engelsman AF, van Dieren S, Stommel MWJ, de Hingh I, Vriens M, Hol L, Festen S, Mekenkamp L, Hoogwater FJH, Daams F, Klümpen HJ, Besselink MG, van Eijck CH, Nieveen van Dijkum EJ. Watchful waiting for small non-functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: nationwide prospective cohort study (PANDORA). Br J Surg 2021; 108:888-891. [PMID: 33783475 PMCID: PMC10364894 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znab088] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2020] [Revised: 01/21/2021] [Accepted: 02/15/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
This prospective nationwide cohort study examined the feasibility of a watchful-waiting protocol for non-functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (NF-pNET) of 2 cm or smaller. In total, 8 of 76 patients (11 per cent) with a NF-pNET no larger than 2 cm showed significant tumour progression (more than 0.5 cm/year) during 17 months of follow-up, of whom two opted for resection. No patient developed metastases. Quality of life was poorer than in the reference population. Watchful waiting seems a safe alternative to upfront surgery in patients with a NF-pNET no larger than 2 cm, although longer follow-up is necessary.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- C M Heidsma
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A F Engelsman
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - I de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M Vriens
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - L Hol
- Department of Gastroenterology and Metabolism, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - L Mekenkamp
- Department of Medical Oncology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - F J H Hoogwater
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - F Daams
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H-J Klümpen
- Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - C H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E J Nieveen van Dijkum
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Giovinazzo F, Linneman R, Riva GVD, Greener D, Morano C, Patijn GA, Besselink MGH, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Abu Hilal M, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, Festen S, de Jong KP, van Eijck CHJ, Scheepers JJG, van der Kolk M, den Dulk M, Bosscha K, Boerma D, van der Harst E, Armstrong T, Takhar A, Hamady Z. Clinical relevant pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: when negative amylase levels tell the truth. Updates Surg 2021; 73:1391-1397. [PMID: 33770412 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-021-01020-8] [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] [Received: 05/11/2020] [Accepted: 03/02/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Drain Amylase level are routinely determined to diagnose pancreatic fistula after Pancreatocoduodenectomy. Consensus is lacking regarding the cut-off value of amylase to diagnosis clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulae (POPF). The present study proposes a model based on Amylase Value in the Drain (AVD) measured in the first three postoperative days to predict a POPF. Amylase cut-offs were selected from a previous published systematic review and the accuracy were validated in a multicentre database from 12 centres in 2 countries. The present study defined POPF the 2016 ISGPS criteria (3 times the upper limit of normal serum amylase). A learning machine method was used to correlate AVD with the diagnosis of POPF. Overall, 454 (27%) of 1638 patients developed POPF. Machine learning excluded a clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulae with an AUC of 0.962 (95% CI 0.940-0.984) in the first five postoperative days. An AVD at a cut-off of 270 U/L in 2 days in the first three postoperative days excluded a POPF with an AUC of 0.869 (CI 0.81-0.90, p < 0.0001). A single AVD in the first three postoperative days may not exclude POPF after pancreatoduodenectomy. The levels should be monitored until day 3 and have two negative values before removing the drain. In the group with a positive level, the drain should be kept in and AVD monitored until postoperative day five.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Giovinazzo
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, E Level, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO166YD, UK.,General Surgery and Liver Transplant Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Ralph Linneman
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Christopher Morano
- Master of Data Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala Clinics, Zwolle, The Netherlands
| | - Mark G H Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Mohammad Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, E Level, Tremona Road, Southampton, SO166YD, UK. .,Department of Surgery, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Brada LJH, Walma MS, van Dam RM, de Vos-Geelen J, de Hingh IH, Creemers GJ, Liem MS, Mekenkamp LJ, de Meijer VE, de Groot DJA, Patijn GA, de Groot JWB, Festen S, Kerver ED, Stommel MWJ, Meijerink MR, Bosscha K, Pruijt JF, Polée MB, Ropela JA, Cirkel GA, Los M, Wilmink JW, Haj Mohammad N, van Santvoort HC, Besselink MG, Molenaar IQ. The treatment and survival of elderly patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter registry. Pancreatology 2021; 21:163-169. [PMID: 33309624 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2020.11.012] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/26/2020] [Revised: 11/03/2020] [Accepted: 11/22/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The treatment options for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) have improved in recent years and consequently survival has increased. It is unknown, however, if elderly patients benefit from these improvements in therapy. With the ongoing aging of the patient population and an increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, this patient group becomes more relevant. This study aims to clarify the association between increasing age, treatment and overall survival in patients with LAPC. METHODS Post-hoc analysis of a multicenter registry including consecutive patients with LAPC, who were registered in 14 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (April 2015-December 2017). Patients were divided in three groups according to age (<65, 65-74 and ≥75 years). Primary outcome was overall survival stratified by primary treatment strategy. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to adjust for possible confounders. RESULTS Overall, 422 patients with LAPC were included; 162 patients (38%) aged <65 years, 182 patients (43%) aged 65-74 and 78 patients (19%) aged ≥75 years. Chemotherapy was administered in 86%, 81% and 50% of the patients in the different age groups (p<0.01). Median overall survival was 12, 11 and 7 months for the different age groups (p<0.01).Patients treated with chemotherapy showed comparable median overall survival of 13, 14 and 10 months for the different age groups (p=0.11). When adjusted for confounders, age was not associated with overall survival. CONCLUSION Elderly patients are less likely to be treated with chemotherapy, but when treated with chemotherapy, their survival is comparable to younger patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L J H Brada
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and Meander Medical Center Amersfoort: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - M S Walma
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and Meander Medical Center Amersfoort: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R M van Dam
- Dept. of Surgery, Maastricht UMC, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - J de Vos-Geelen
- Dept. of Internal Medicine, Div. of Medical Oncology, GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Dept. of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands; Dept. of Epidemiology, GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - G J Creemers
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M S Liem
- Dept. of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - L J Mekenkamp
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - V E de Meijer
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - D J A de Groot
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, UMC Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - G A Patijn
- Dept. of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | | | - S Festen
- Dept. of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E D Kerver
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M W J Stommel
- Dept. of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - M R Meijerink
- Dept. of Radiology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Dept. of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - J F Pruijt
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - M B Polée
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, Medical Center Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands
| | - J A Ropela
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, St Jansdal Hospital, Harderwijk, the Netherlands
| | - G A Cirkel
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and Meander Medical Center Amersfoort: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - M Los
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and Meander Medical Center Amersfoort: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - J W Wilmink
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - N Haj Mohammad
- Dept. of Medical Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and Meander Medical Center Amersfoort: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and Meander Medical Center Amersfoort: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Dept. of Surgery, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and Meander Medical Center Amersfoort: Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Daamen LA, van Goor IWJM, Schouten TJ, Dorland G, van Roessel SR, Besselink MG, Bonsing BA, Bosscha K, Brosens LAA, Busch OR, van Dam RM, Fariña Sarasqueta A, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, van der Harst E, de Hingh IHJT, Intven MPW, Kazemier G, de Meijer VE, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Raicu GM, Roos D, Schreinemakers JMJ, Stommel MWJ, van Velthuysen MF, Verheij J, Verkooijen HM, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ. Microscopic resection margin status in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - A nationwide analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2020; 47:708-716. [PMID: 33323293 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.11.145] [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] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2020] [Revised: 11/19/2020] [Accepted: 11/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/31/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION First, this study aimed to assess the prognostic value of different definitions for resection margin status on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Second, preoperative predictors of direct margin involvement were identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS This nationwide observational cohort study included all patients who underwent upfront PDAC resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Patients were subdivided into three groups: R0 (≥1 mm margin clearance), R1 (<1 mm margin clearance) or R1 (direct margin involvement). Survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression analysis. Logistic regression with baseline variables was performed to identify preoperative predictors of R1 (direct). RESULTS 595 patients with a median OS of 18 months (IQR 10-32 months) months were analysed. R0 (≥1 mm) was achieved in 277 patients (47%), R1 (<1 mm) in 146 patients (24%) and R1 (direct) in 172 patients (29%). R1 (direct) was associated with a worse OS, as compared with both R0 (≥1 mm) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 [95% and confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.70); P < 0.01) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.29 [95%CI 1.01-1.67]; P < 0.05). No OS difference was found between R0 (≥1 mm) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.82-1.34]; P = 0.71). Preoperative predictors associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) included age, male sex, performance score 2-4, and venous or arterial tumour involvement. CONCLUSION Resection margin clearance of <1 mm, but without direct margin involvement, does not affect survival, as compared with a margin clearance of ≥1 mm. Given that any vascular tumour involvement on preoperative imaging was associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) resection with upfront surgery, neoadjuvant therapy might be considered in these patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- L A Daamen
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands; Dept. of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - I W J M van Goor
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands; Dept. of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - T J Schouten
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - G Dorland
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands; Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S R van Roessel
- Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Dept. of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Dept. of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - L A A Brosens
- Dept. of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - O R Busch
- Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - R M van Dam
- Dept. of Surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - A Fariña Sarasqueta
- Dept. of Pathology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; Dept. of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Dept. of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - E van der Harst
- Dept. of Surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - I H J T de Hingh
- Dept. of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M P W Intven
- Dept. of Radiation Oncology, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - G Kazemier
- Dept. of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - V E de Meijer
- Dept. of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - G M Raicu
- Dept. of Pathology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - D Roos
- Dept. of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft, the Netherlands
| | | | - M W J Stommel
- Dept. of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | - J Verheij
- Dept. of Pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H M Verkooijen
- Imaging Division, University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
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
|
17
|
Mackay TM, Smits FJ, Latenstein AEJ, Bogte A, Bonsing BA, Bos H, Bosscha K, Brosens LAA, Hol L, Busch ORC, Creemers GJ, Curvers WL, den Dulk M, van Dieren S, van Driel LMJW, Festen S, van Geenen EJM, van der Geest LG, de Groot DJA, de Groot JWB, Haj Mohammad N, Haberkorn BCM, Haver JT, van der Harst E, Hemmink GJM, de Hingh IH, Hoge C, Homs MYV, van Huijgevoort NC, Jacobs MAJM, Kerver ED, Liem MSL, Los M, Lubbinge H, Luelmo SAC, de Meijer VE, Mekenkamp L, Molenaar IQ, van Oijen MGH, Patijn GA, Quispel R, van Rijssen LB, Römkens TEH, van Santvoort HC, Schreinemakers JMJ, Schut H, Seerden T, Stommel MWJ, Ten Tije AJ, Venneman NG, Verdonk RC, Verheij J, van Vilsteren FGI, de Vos-Geelen J, Vulink A, Wientjes C, Wit F, Wessels FJ, Zonderhuis B, van Werkhoven CH, van Hooft JE, van Eijck CHJ, Wilmink JW, van Laarhoven HWM, Besselink MG. Impact of nationwide enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care (PACAP-1): a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. Trials 2020; 21:334. [PMID: 32299515 PMCID: PMC7161112 DOI: 10.1186/s13063-020-4180-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [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] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/22/2019] [Accepted: 02/18/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Pancreatic cancer has a very poor prognosis. Best practices for the use of chemotherapy, enzyme replacement therapy, and biliary drainage have been identified but their implementation in daily clinical practice is often suboptimal. We hypothesized that a nationwide program to enhance implementation of these best practices in pancreatic cancer care would improve survival and quality of life. Methods/design PACAP-1 is a nationwide multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled superiority trial. In a per-center stepwise and randomized manner, best practices in pancreatic cancer care regarding the use of (neo)adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy, pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, and metal biliary stents are implemented in all 17 Dutch pancreatic centers and their regional referral networks during a 6-week initiation period. Per pancreatic center, one multidisciplinary team functions as reference for the other centers in the network. Key best practices were identified from the literature, 3 years of data from existing nationwide registries within the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project (PACAP), and national expert meetings. The best practices follow the Dutch guideline on pancreatic cancer and the current state of the literature, and can be executed within daily clinical practice. The implementation process includes monitoring, return visits, and provider feedback in combination with education and reminders. Patient outcomes and compliance are monitored within the PACAP registries. Primary outcome is 1-year overall survival (for all disease stages). Secondary outcomes include quality of life, 3- and 5-year overall survival, and guideline compliance. An improvement of 10% in 1-year overall survival is considered clinically relevant. A 25-month study duration was chosen, which provides 80% statistical power for a mortality reduction of 10.0% in the 17 pancreatic cancer centers, with a required sample size of 2142 patients, corresponding to a 6.6% mortality reduction and 4769 patients nationwide. Discussion The PACAP-1 trial is designed to evaluate whether a nationwide program for enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care can improve 1-year overall survival and quality of life. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03513705. Trial opened for accrual on 22th May 2018.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T M Mackay
- Department of surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F J Smits
- Department of surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - A E J Latenstein
- Department of surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - A Bogte
- Department of gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Department of surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - H Bos
- Department of medical oncology, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, the Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Department of surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - L A A Brosens
- Department of pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands.,Department of pathology, Radboud University, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - L Hol
- Department of gastroenterology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - O R C Busch
- Department of surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - G J Creemers
- Department of medical oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - W L Curvers
- Department of gastroenterology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - M den Dulk
- Department of surgery, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - S van Dieren
- Department of surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - L M J W van Driel
- Department of gastroenterology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Department of surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E J M van Geenen
- Department of gastroenterology, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - L G van der Geest
- Department of Research, Netherlands Comprehensive Cancer Organisation (IKNL), Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - D J A de Groot
- Department of medical oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - J W B de Groot
- Department of medical oncology, Oncology Center Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - N Haj Mohammad
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - B C M Haberkorn
- Department of medical oncology, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J T Haver
- Department of nutrition and dietetics, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E van der Harst
- Department of surgery, Maasstad Hospital, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - G J M Hemmink
- Department of gastroenterology, Oncology Center Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Department of surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - C Hoge
- Department of gastroenterology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - M Y V Homs
- Department of medical oncology, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - N C van Huijgevoort
- Department of gastroenterology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M A J M Jacobs
- Department of gastroenterology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - E D Kerver
- Department of medical oncology, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M S L Liem
- Department of surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - M Los
- Department of Medical Oncology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - H Lubbinge
- Department of gastroenterology, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, the Netherlands
| | - S A C Luelmo
- Department of medical oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - V E de Meijer
- Department of surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - L Mekenkamp
- Department of medical oncology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Department of surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - M G H van Oijen
- Department of medical oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - G A Patijn
- Department of surgery, Oncology Center Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - R Quispel
- Department of gastroenterology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - L B van Rijssen
- Department of surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - T E H Römkens
- Department of gastroenterology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Department of surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - H Schut
- Department of medical oncology, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands
| | - T Seerden
- Department of gastroenterology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - M W J Stommel
- Department of surgery, Radboud UMC, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - A J Ten Tije
- Department of medical oncology, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - N G Venneman
- Department of gastroenterology and hepatology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - R C Verdonk
- Department of gastroenterology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - J Verheij
- Department of pathology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F G I van Vilsteren
- Department of gastroenterology, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - J de Vos-Geelen
- Department of medical oncology, Maastricht UMC+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - A Vulink
- Department of medical oncology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - C Wientjes
- Department of gastroenterology, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - F Wit
- Department of surgery, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, the Netherlands
| | - F J Wessels
- Department of radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht & St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - B Zonderhuis
- Department of surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - C H van Werkhoven
- Julius Center for Health Sciences and primary care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - J E van Hooft
- Department of gastroenterology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - C H J van Eijck
- Department of surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J W Wilmink
- Department of medical oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - H W M van Laarhoven
- Department of medical oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | | |
Collapse
|
18
|
Nijmeijer H, Festen S, van Leeuwen B, van Munster B, de Graeff P. DISCUSSING OLDER PATIENTS DURING ONCOLOGICAL MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM MEETINGS; IS THERE A DIFFERENCE COMPARED TO YOUNGER PATIENTS? J Geriatr Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1016/s1879-4068(19)31163-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
19
|
Festen S, Van Der Wal Huisman H, Van Der Leest A, Reyners A, De Bock G, Van Leeuwen B, De Graeff P. ONE-YEAR MORTALITY IN ONCO-GERIATRIC PATIENTS IS HIGH. J Geriatr Oncol 2019. [DOI: 10.1016/s1879-4068(19)31289-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
20
|
Linnemann RJA, Patijn GA, van Rijssen LB, Besselink MG, Mungroop TH, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, Festen S, de Jong KP, van Eijck CHJ, Scheepers JJG, van der Kolk M, Dulk MD, Bosscha K, Busch OR, Boerma D, van der Harst E, Nieuwenhuijs VB. The role of abdominal drainage in pancreatic resection - A multicenter validation study for early drain removal. Pancreatology 2019; 19:888-896. [PMID: 31378583 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2019.07.041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [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: 02/04/2019] [Revised: 03/20/2019] [Accepted: 07/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Abdominal drainage and the timing of drain removal in patients undergoing pancreatic resection are under debate. Early drain removal after pancreatic resection has been reported to be safe with a low risk for clinical relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) when drain amylase on POD1 is < 5000U/L. The aim of this study was to validate this algorithm in a large national cohort. METHODS Patients registered in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2016) who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy or enucleation were analysed. Data on post-operative drain amylase levels, drain removal, postoperative pancreatic fistulae were collected. Univariate and multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model were performed. The primary outcome measure was grade B/C pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). RESULTS Among 1402 included patients, 433 patients with a drain fluid amylase level of <5000U/L on POD1, 7% developed a CR-POPF. For patients with an amylase level >5000U/L the CR-POPF rate was 28%. When using a cut-off point of 2000U/L or 1000U/L during POD1-3, the CR-POPF rates were 6% and 5% respectively. For patients with an amylase level of >2000U/L and >1000UL during POD 1-3 the CR-POPF rates were 26% and 22% respectively (n = 223). Drain removal on POD4 or thereafter was associated with more complications (p = 0.004). Drain amylase level was shown to be the most statistically significant predicting factor for CR-POPF (Wald = 49.7; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION Our data support early drain removal after pancreatic resection. However, a cut-off of 5000U/L drain amylase on POD1 was associated with a relatively high CR-POPF rate of 7%. A cut-off point of 1000U/L during POD1-3 resulted in 5% CR-POPF and might be a safer alternative.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - G A Patijn
- Isala, Department of Surgery, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - L B van Rijssen
- Academic Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Academic Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - T H Mungroop
- Academic Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - I H de Hingh
- Catharina Hospital, Department of Surgery, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - G Kazemier
- VU Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- OLVG Oost, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - K P de Jong
- University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of HPB Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - C H J van Eijck
- Erasmus Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J J G Scheepers
- Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Department of Surgery, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - M van der Kolk
- Radboud University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - M den Dulk
- Maastricht University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - K Bosscha
- Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Department of Surgery, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - O R Busch
- Academic Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - D Boerma
- St. Antonius Hospital, Department of Surgery, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - E van der Harst
- Maasstad Hospital, Department of Surgery, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
van Hilst J, Strating EA, de Rooij T, Daams F, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, Klaase JM, Luyer M, Dijkgraaf MG, Besselink MG. Costs and quality of life in a randomized trial comparing minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy (LEOPARD trial). Br J Surg 2019; 106:910-921. [PMID: 31012498 PMCID: PMC6594097 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11147] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [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: 11/01/2018] [Revised: 01/05/2019] [Accepted: 02/01/2019] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Background Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy decreases time to functional recovery compared with open distal pancreatectomy, but the cost‐effectiveness and impact on disease‐specific quality of life have yet to be established. Methods The LEOPARD trial randomized patients to minimally invasive (robot‐assisted or laparoscopic) or open distal pancreatectomy in 14 Dutch centres between April 2015 and March 2017. Use of hospital healthcare resources, complications and disease‐specific quality of life were recorded up to 1 year after surgery. Unit costs of hospital healthcare resources were determined, and cost‐effectiveness and cost–utility analyses were performed. Primary outcomes were the costs per day earlier functional recovery and per quality‐adjusted life‐year. Results All 104 patients who had a distal pancreatectomy (48 minimally invasive and 56 open) in the trial were included in this study. Patients who underwent a robot‐assisted procedure were excluded from the cost analysis. Total medical costs were comparable after laparoscopic and open distal pancreatectomy (mean difference €–427 (95 per cent bias‐corrected and accelerated confidence interval €–4700 to 3613; P = 0·839). Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was shown to have a probability of at least 0·566 of being more cost‐effective than the open approach at a willingness‐to‐pay threshold of €0 per day of earlier recovery, and a probability of 0·676 per additional quality‐adjusted life‐year at a willingness‐to‐pay threshold of €80 000. There were no significant differences in cosmetic satisfaction scores (median 9 (i.q.r. 5·75–10) versus 7 (4–8·75); P = 0·056) and disease‐specific quality of life after minimally invasive (laparoscopic and robot‐assisted procedures) versus open distal pancreatectomy. Conclusion Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was at least as cost‐effective as open distal pancreatectomy in terms of time to functional recovery and quality‐adjusted life‐years. Cosmesis and quality of life were similar in the two groups 1 year after surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E A Strating
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - T de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - F Daams
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - J M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - M Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| | - M G Dijkgraaf
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Mackay TM, Wellner UF, van Rijssen LB, Stoop TF, Busch OR, Groot Koerkamp B, Bausch D, Petrova E, Besselink MG, Keck T, van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ, Kok N, Festen S, van Eijck CHJ, Bonsing BA, Erdmann J, de Hingh I, Buhr HJ, Klinger C. Variation in pancreatoduodenectomy as delivered in two national audits. Br J Surg 2019; 106:747-755. [DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11085] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/30/2023]
Abstract
AbstractBackgroundNationwide audits facilitate quality and outcome assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy. Differences may exist between countries but studies comparing nationwide outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomy based on audits are lacking. This study aimed to compare the German and Dutch audits for external data validation.MethodsAnonymized data from patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy between 2014 and 2016 were extracted from the German Society for General and Visceral Surgery StuDoQ|Pancreas and Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit, and compared using descriptive statistics. Univariable and multivariable risk analyses were undertaken.ResultsOverall, 4495 patients were included, 2489 in Germany and 2006 in the Netherlands. Adenocarcinoma was a more frequent indication for pancreatoduodenectomy in the Netherlands. German patients had worse ASA fitness grades, but Dutch patients had more pulmonary co-morbidity. Dutch patients underwent more minimally invasive surgery and venous resections, but fewer multivisceral resections. No difference was found in rates of grade B/C postoperative pancreatic fistula, grade C postpancreatectomy haemorrhage and in-hospital mortality. There was more centralization in the Netherlands (1·3 versus 13·3 per cent of pancreatoduodenectomies in very low-volume centres; P < 0·001). In multivariable analysis, both hospital stay (difference 2·49 (95 per cent c.i. 1·18 to 3·80) days) and risk of reoperation (odds ratio (OR) 1·55, 95 per cent c.i. 1·22 to 1·97) were higher in the German audit, whereas risk of postoperative pneumonia (OR 0·57, 0·37 to 0·88) and readmission (OR 0·38, 0·30 to 0·49) were lower. Several baseline and surgical characteristics, including hospital volume, but not country, predicted mortality.ConclusionThis comparison of the German and Dutch audits showed variation in case mix, surgical technique and centralization for pancreatoduodenectomy, but no difference in mortality and pancreas-specific complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T M Mackay
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - U F Wellner
- German Society for General and Visceral Surgery StuDoQ|Pancreas and Clinic of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - L B van Rijssen
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - T F Stoop
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, 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
| | - D Bausch
- German Society for General and Visceral Surgery StuDoQ|Pancreas and Clinic of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - E Petrova
- German Society for General and Visceral Surgery StuDoQ|Pancreas and Clinic of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - M G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - T Keck
- German Society for General and Visceral Surgery StuDoQ|Pancreas and Clinic of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - H C van Santvoort
- Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein
- University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein
- University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht
| | - N Kok
- Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam
| | | | | | | | - J Erdmann
- Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
de Leede EM, van Leersum NJ, Kroon HM, van Weel V, van der Sijp JRM, Bonsing BA, Woltz S, Tromp M, Neijenhuis PA, Maaijen RCLA, Steup WH, Schepers A, Guicherit OR, Huurman VAL, Karsten TM, van de Pool A, Boerma D, Deroose JP, Beek M, Wijsman JH, Derksen WJM, Festen S, de Nes LCF. Multicentre randomized clinical trial of the effect of chewing gum after abdominal surgery. Br J Surg 2018; 105:820-828. [DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10828] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/13/2017] [Revised: 11/30/2017] [Accepted: 12/28/2017] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Postoperative ileus is a common complication of abdominal surgery, leading to patient discomfort, morbidity and prolonged postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS). Previous studies suggested that chewing gum stimulates bowel function after abdominal surgery, but were underpowered to evaluate its effect on LOS and did not include enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)-based perioperative care. This study evaluated whether chewing gum after elective abdominal surgery reduces LOS and time to bowel recovery in the setting of ERAS-based perioperative care.
Methods
A multicentre RCT was performed of patients over 18 years of age undergoing abdominal surgery in 12 hospitals. Standard postoperative care (control group) was compared with chewing gum three times a day for 30 min in addition to standard postoperative care. Randomization was computer-generated; allocation was concealed. The primary outcome was postoperative LOS. Secondary outcomes were time to bowel recovery and 30-day complications.
Results
Between 2011 to 2015, 1000 patients were assigned to chewing gum and 1000 to the control arm. Median LOS did not differ: 7 days in both arms (P = 0·364). Neither was any difference found in time to flatus (24 h in control group versus 23 h with chewing gum; P = 0·873) or time to defaecation (60 versus 52 h respectively; P = 0·562). The rate of 30-day complications was not significantly different either.
Conclusion
The addition of chewing gum to an ERAS postoperative care pathway after elective abdominal surgery does not reduce the LOS, time to bowel recovery or the rate of postoperative complications. Registration number: NTR2594 (Netherlands Trial Register).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E M de Leede
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - N J van Leersum
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - H M Kroon
- Department of Surgery, Alrijne Hospital, Leiderdorp, The Netherlands
| | - V van Weel
- Department of Surgery, Medical Centre Haaglanden, The Hague, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Meander Medisch Centrum, Amersfoort, The Netherlands
| | - J R M van der Sijp
- Department of Surgery, Medical Centre Haaglanden, The Hague, The Netherlands
| | - B A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - S Woltz
- Department of Surgery, Medical Centre Haaglanden, The Hague
| | - M Tromp
- Department of Surgery, Groene Hart Hospital, Gouda
| | | | | | - W H Steup
- Department of Surgery, Haga Hospital, The Hague
| | - A Schepers
- Department of Surgery, Haga Hospital, The Hague
| | | | | | - T M Karsten
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Group, Delft
| | | | - D Boerma
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda
| | - J P Deroose
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda
| | - M Beek
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda
| | - J H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein
| | - W J M Derksen
- Department of Surgery, Sint Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam
| | - L C F de Nes
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam
| |
Collapse
|
24
|
Borstlap WAA, Musters GD, Stassen LPS, van Westreenen HL, Hess D, van Dieren S, Festen S, van der Zaag EJ, Tanis PJ, Bemelman WA. Vacuum-assisted early transanal closure of leaking low colorectal anastomoses: the CLEAN study. Surg Endosc 2017; 32:315-327. [PMID: 28664443 PMCID: PMC5770507 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-017-5679-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [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: 03/16/2017] [Accepted: 06/19/2017] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Introduction Non-healing of anastomotic leakage can be observed in up to 50% after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. This study investigates the efficacy of early transanal closure of anastomotic leakage after pre-treatment with the Endosponge® therapy. Methods In this prospective, multicentre, feasibility study, transanal suturing of the anastomotic defect was performed after vacuum-assisted cleaning of the presacral cavity. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a healed anastomosis at 6 months after transanal closure. Secondary, healing at last follow-up, continuity, direct medical costs, functionality and quality of life were analysed. Results Between July 2013 and July 2015, 30 rectal cancer patients with a leaking low colorectal anastomosis were included, of whom 22 underwent neoadjuvant radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 14 (7–29) months. At 6 months, the anastomosis had healed in 16 (53%) patients. At last follow-up, anastomotic integrity was found in 21 (70%) and continuity was restored in 20 (67%) patients. Non-healing at 12 months was observed in 10/29 (34%) patients overall, and in 3/14 (21%) when therapy started within three weeks following the index operation. Major LARS was reported in 12/15 (80%) patients. The direct medical costs were €8933 (95% CI 7268–10,707) per patient. Conclusion Vacuum-assisted early transanal closure of a leaking anastomosis after total mesorectal excision with 73% preoperative radiotherapy showed that acceptable anastomotic healing rates and stoma reversal rates can be achieved. Early diagnosis and start of treatment seems crucial.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- W A A Borstlap
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | - G D Musters
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - L P S Stassen
- Department of Surgery, Academic Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - D Hess
- Department of Surgery, Antonius Zorggroep, Sneek, The Netherlands
| | - S van Dieren
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E J van der Zaag
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Ziekenhuis, Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
| | - P J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - W A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Bruns ERJ, van den Heuvel B, Buskens CJ, van Duijvendijk P, Festen S, Wassenaar EB, van der Zaag ES, Bemelman WA, van Munster BC. The effects of physical prehabilitation in elderly patients undergoing colorectal surgery: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis 2016; 18:O267-77. [PMID: 27332897 DOI: 10.1111/codi.13429] [Citation(s) in RCA: 125] [Impact Index Per Article: 15.6] [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: 11/09/2015] [Accepted: 04/28/2016] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM Prehabilitation, defined as enhancement of the preoperative condition of a patient, is a possible strategy for improving postoperative outcome. Lack of muscle strength and poor physical condition, increasingly prevalent in older patients, are risk factors for postoperative complications. Eighty-five per cent of patients with colorectal cancer are aged over 60 years. Since surgery is the cornerstone of their treatment, this review systemically examined the literature on the effect of physical prehabilitation in older patients undergoing colorectal surgery. METHOD Trials and case-control studies investigating the effect of physical prehabilitation in patients over 60 years undergoing colorectal surgery were retrieved from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane library. Patient characteristics, the type of intervention and outcome measurements were recorded. The risk of bias and heterogeneity was assessed. RESULTS Five studies including 353 patients were identified. They were small, containing an average of 77 patients and were of moderate methodological quality. Compliance rates of the prehabilitation programme varied from 16 to 97%. None of the studies could identify a significant reduction of postoperative complications or length of hospital stay. Four studies showed physical improvement (walking distance, respiratory endurance) in the prehabilitation group. Clinical heterogeneity precluded a meta-analysis. CONCLUSION Prehabilitation is a possible means of enhancing the physical condition of patients preoperatively. The quality of studies in older patients undergoing colorectal surgery is poor, despite the increase in elderly people with colorectal cancer. Defining specific patient groups at risk and standardizing the outcome are essential for improving the results of treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E R J Bruns
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.,Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospitals, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
| | - B van den Heuvel
- Department of Surgery, VU Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - C J Buskens
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - S Festen
- Department of Medicine, University Medical Centre, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - E B Wassenaar
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospitals, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
| | - E S van der Zaag
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospitals, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
| | - W A Bemelman
- Department of Surgery, Gelre Hospitals, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
| | - B C van Munster
- Department of Medicine, University Medical Centre, Groningen, the Netherlands.,Department of Geriatrics, Gelre Hospitals, Apeldoorn, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
26
|
Abstract
AIM The procedure for prolapse and haemorrhoids (PPH) is an effective surgical therapy for symptomatic haemorrhoids. Compared with haemorrhoidectomy, meta-analysis has shown PPH to be less painful, with higher patient satisfaction and a quicker return to work, but at the cost of higher prolapse recurrence rates. This is the first report describing predictors of prolapse recurrence after PPH. METHOD A cohort of patients with symptomatic haemorrhoids, treated with PPH in our hospital between 2002 and 2009, was retrospectively analysed. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify patient-related and perioperative predictors associated with persisting prolapse and prolapse recurrence. RESULTS In total, 159 consecutively enrolled patients were analysed. Persistence and recurrence of prolapse was observed in 16% of the patients. Increased surgical experience showed a trend towards lower recurrence rates. Multivariate analysis identified female gender, long duration of PPH surgery and the absence of muscle tissue in the resected specimen as independent predictors of postoperative persistence of prolapse of haemorrhoids. The absence of prior treatment with rubber band ligation (RBL) as well as increased PPH experience at the hospital showed a trend towards a higher rate of prolapse recurrence. CONCLUSION In order to reduce recurrence of prolapse, PPH should be performed by a surgeon with adequate PPH experience, patients should be treated with RBL prior to PPH and a resection of mucosa with underlying muscle fibres should be strived for.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Groep, Delft Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Festen S, Gisbertz SS, van Schaagen F, Gerhards MF. Blinded randomized clinical trial of botulinum toxin versus isosorbide dinitrate ointment for treatment of anal fissure. Br J Surg 2009; 96:1393-9. [PMID: 19918859 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.6747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 34] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Nitric oxide donors such as isosorbide dinitrate (ISDN) are considered the first choice of treatment for anal fissure. After reports of the successful treatment of such fissures with botulinum toxin, this randomized blinded trial compared botulinum toxin with ISDN in the treatment of chronic anal fissure. METHODS Patients were randomized to receive an injection of botulinum in the internal anal sphincter and a placebo ointment, or a placebo injection and ISDN ointment. The primary endpoint was macroscopic fissure healing after 4 months. RESULTS After 4 months macroscopic healing of the fissures was noted in 14 of 37 patients in the botulinum group and 21 of 36 in the ISDN group. Pain scores were lower among patients who received ISDN, although the difference was not significant. Side-effects were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION In contrast with previous reports on botulinum toxin as a therapeutic agent for anal fissure, this study found no advantage over treatment with a nitric oxide donor as regards fissure healing and fissure-related pain.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Oosterpark 9, 1091 AC Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Festen S, van Geloven AAW, Gerhards MF. Redo procedure for prolapse and haemorrhoids (PPH) for persistent and recurrent prolapse after PPH. Dig Surg 2009; 26:418-21. [PMID: 19923831 DOI: 10.1159/000236011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [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: 06/26/2009] [Accepted: 08/01/2009] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS Procedures for haemorrhoidal prolapse that maintain functional haemorrhoidal anatomy are progressively used. The procedure for prolapse and haemorrhoids (PPH) has advantages over conventional haemorrhoidectomy, but is associated with a higher recurrence rate. The feasibility and efficiency of a second PPH instead of haemorrhoidectomy in case of recurrent symptoms were studied. METHODS A retrospective chart review was conducted of all patients that were treated with PPH for haemorrhoidal prolapse in our hospital between May 2002 and November 2008. All patients in need for a second PPH because of persistent or recurrent symptoms of prolapse were identified and analyzed. RESULTS Out of 137 patients who underwent a PPH, 22 patients (16%) were in need of a reoperation for symptoms of prolapse. Of these, 12 (55%) were treated with a second PPH. Successful prolapse reduction was achieved in 11 out of 12 patients. No postoperative complications were encountered during a median follow-up of 35 months. CONCLUSION Redo PPH, in case of persisting or recurrent symptoms of haemorrhoidal prolapse after PPH, is feasible and is a good alternative for excisional haemorrhoidectomy. It possesses the same advantages over haemorrhoidectomy as the initial PPH and does not lead to more morbidity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. s.festen @ olvg.nl
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Cornette J, Festen S, van den Hoonaard TL, Steegers EAP. Mesenchymal hamartoma of the liver: a benign tumor with deceptive prognosis in the perinatal period. Case report and review of the literature. Fetal Diagn Ther 2009; 25:196-202. [PMID: 19365132 DOI: 10.1159/000212057] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2008] [Accepted: 07/10/2008] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
This article reports a case of perinatal mesenchymal hepatic hamartoma and reviews the literature on the subject. A fetus presented with polyhydramnios and a large multiloculated cystic abdominal mass at 33 weeks of gestation. The ultrasound appearance was most consistent with a mesenteric cyst. Prenatal drainage was considered, due to the size of the lesion. However, a conservative management was opted for. A female infant was born at 35 weeks by classical cesarean section. The immediate postnatal period was characterized by hemodynamic instability. Laparotomy revealed a pedunculated mesenchymal hamartoma of the liver, which could not completely be resected. The infant had an uneventful postoperative recovery and is doing well at 6 months of age. Hepatic mesenchymal hamartoma are rare benign tumors. Most cases are detected in early childhood. They usually present as a cystic rapidly growing abdominal mass. Prenatal diagnosis remains challenging. In children diagnosed in the perinatal period, the outcome seems worse and determined by the compressive effect of the mass.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- J Cornette
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Obstetrics and Prenatal Medicine, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Festen S, Brevoord JC, Goldhoorn GA, Festen C, Hazebroek FW, van Heurn LW, de Langen ZJ, van Der Zee DC, Aronson DC. Excellent long-term outcome for survivors of apple peel atresia. J Pediatr Surg 2002; 37:61-5. [PMID: 11781988 DOI: 10.1053/jpsu.2002.29428] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [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: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Apple peel atresia is the rarest type of small bowel atresia. Because of its rare occurrence and high mortality rate, little is known about the long-term outcome of these children. METHODS The patient charts, operative reports, and office notes of 15 children with apple peel atresia from 6 pediatric surgical centers in the Netherlands were reviewed. Long-term follow-up was assessed through review of office notes and through questionnaires. RESULTS The median age at the time of operation was 1.5 days. Postoperatively, 53% suffered from cholestasis, and 40% were septic. Three patients died (20%). At follow-up at a median age of 24 months, 1 child showed growth retardation and 2 children suffered from short bowel syndrome. At the time of the questionnaire, all children showed normal growth and development. CONCLUSIONS Even though children with apple peel atresia often suffer serious morbidity like short bowel syndrome and sepsis during the postoperative course, late morbidity turned out to be low. If the patients survive the operative and direct postoperative period, and survive the morbidity associated with malnutrition and the long-term use of total parenteral nutrition, they have a good chance of having normal bowel function with normal growth and development.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S Festen
- Amsterdam, Nijmegen, Rotterdam, Maastricht, Groningen, and Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|