1
|
de Graaff MR, Klaase JM, den Dulk M, Te Riele WW, Hagendoorn J, van Heek NT, Vermaas M, Belt EJT, Bosscha K, Slooter GD, Leclercq WKG, Liem MSL, Mieog JSD, Swijnenburg RJ, van Dam RM, Verhoef C, Kuhlmann K, van Duijvendijk P, Gerhards MF, Gobardhan P, van den Boezem P, Manusama ER, Grünhagen DJ, Kok NFM. Hospital variation and outcomes after repeat hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases: a nationwide cohort study. HPB (Oxford) 2024:S1365-182X(24)00051-0. [PMID: 38461070 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2024.02.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/03/2023] [Revised: 12/27/2023] [Accepted: 02/25/2024] [Indexed: 03/11/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Approximately 70% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) experiences intrahepatic recurrence after initial liver resection. This study assessed outcomes and hospital variation in repeat liver resections (R-LR). METHODS This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2022 in the Netherlands. Overall survival (OS) was collected for patients operated on between 2014 and 2018 by linkage to the insurance database. RESULTS Data of 7479 liver resections (1391 (18.6%) repeat and 6088 (81.4%) primary) were analysed. Major morbidity and mortality were not different. Factors associated with major morbidity included ASA 3+, major liver resection, extrahepatic disease, and open surgery. Five-year OS after repeat versus primary liver resection was 42.3% versus 44.8%, P = 0.37. Factors associated with worse OS included largest CRLM >5 cm (aHR 1.58, 95% CI: 1.07-2.34, P = 0.023), >3 CRLM (aHR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.00-1.75, P = 0.046), extrahepatic disease (aHR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.25-2.04, P = 0.001), positive tumour margins (aHR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.09-1.85, P = 0.009). Significant hospital variation in performance of R-LR was observed, median 18.9% (8.2% to 33.3%). CONCLUSION Significant hospital variation was observed in performance of R-LR in the Netherlands reflecting different treatment decisions upon recurrence. On a population-based level R-LR leads to satisfactory survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michelle R de Graaff
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands; NUTRIM-School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - M Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, Ijsselland Hospital, Capelle aan de Ijssel, the Netherlands
| | - Eric J Th Belt
- Department of Surgery, Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Gerrit D Slooter
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands; NUTRIM-School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Cees Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Koert Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek - Dutch Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Peter van Duijvendijk
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Gelre Ziekenhuizen, Apeldoorn en Zutphen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Paul Gobardhan
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Medical Centre, Breda, the Netherlands
| | | | - Eric R Manusama
- Department of Surgery, Medical Centre Leeuwarden, Leeuwarden, the Netherlands
| | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek - Dutch Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Görgec B, Zwart M, Nota CL, Bijlstra OD, Bosscha K, de Boer MT, de Wilde RF, Draaisma WA, Gerhards MF, Liem MS, Lips DJ, Marsman HA, Mieog JSD, Molenaar QI, Nijkamp M, Te Riele WW, Terkivatan T, Vahrmeijer AL, Besselink MG, Swijnenburg RJ, Hagendoorn J. Implementation and Outcome of Robotic Liver Surgery in the Netherlands: A Nationwide Analysis. Ann Surg 2023; 277:e1269-e1277. [PMID: 35848742 PMCID: PMC10174096 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005600] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To determine the nationwide implementation and surgical outcome of minor and major robotic liver surgery (RLS) and assess the first phase of implementation of RLS during the learning curve. BACKGROUND RLS may be a valuable alternative to laparoscopic liver surgery. Nationwide population-based studies with data on implementation and outcome of RLS are lacking. METHODS Multicenter retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients who underwent RLS for all indications in 9 Dutch centers (August 2014-March 2021). Data on all liver resections were obtained from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit (DHBA) including data from all 27 centers for liver surgery in the Netherlands. Outcomes were stratified for minor, technically major, and anatomically major RLS. Learning curve effect was assessed using cumulative sum analysis for blood loss. RESULTS Of 9437 liver resections, 400 were RLS (4.2%) procedures including 207 minor (52.2%), 141 technically major (35.3%), and 52 anatomically major (13%). The nationwide use of RLS increased from 0.2% in 2014 to 11.9% in 2020. The proportion of RLS among all minimally invasive liver resections increased from 2% to 28%. Median blood loss was 150 mL (interquartile range 50-350 mL] and the conversion rate 6.3% (n=25). The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications was 7.0% (n=27), median length of hospital stay 4 days (interquartile range 2-5) and 30-day/in-hospital mortality 0.8% (n=3). The R0 resection rate was 83.2% (n=263). Cumulative sum analysis for blood loss found a learning curve of at least 33 major RLS procedures. CONCLUSIONS The nationwide use of RLS in the Netherlands has increased rapidly with currently one-tenth of all liver resections and one-fourth of all minimally invasive liver resections being performed robotically. Although surgical outcomes of RLS in selected patient seem favorable, future prospective studies should determine its added value.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Burak Görgec
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Maurice Zwart
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Carolijn L. Nota
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Okker D. Bijlstra
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Marieke T. de Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Roeland F. de Wilde
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Werner A. Draaisma
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, ‘s-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S. Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J. Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - J. Sven D. Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Quintus I. Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Maarten Nijkamp
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W. Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Türkan Terkivatan
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marc G. Besselink
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Amsterdam UMC, location University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zwart MJW, Nota CLM, de Rooij T, van Hilst J, Te Riele WW, van Santvoort HC, Hagendoorn J, Borei Rinkes IHM, van Dam JL, Latenstein AEJ, Takagi K, Tran KTC, Schreinemakers J, van der Schelling GP, Wijsman JH, Festen S, Daams F, Luyer MD, de Hingh IHJT, Mieog JSD, Bonsing BA, Lips DJ, Hilal MA, Busch OR, Saint-Marc O, Zehl HJ, Zureikat AH, Hogg ME, Molenaar IQ, Besselink MG, Koerkamp BG. Outcomes of a Multicenter Training Program in Robotic Pancreatoduodenectomy (LAELAPS-3). Ann Surg 2022; 276:e886-e895. [PMID: 33534227 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004783] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 22.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To assess feasibility and safety of a multicenter training program in robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) adhering to the IDEAL framework for implementation of surgical innovation. BACKGROUND Good results for RPD have been reported from single center studies. However, data on feasibility and safety of implementation through a multicenter training program in RPD are lacking. METHODS A multicenter training program in RPD was designed together with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, including an online video bank, robot simulation exercises, biotissue drills, and on-site proctoring. Benchmark patients were based on the criteria of Clavien. Outcomes were collected prospectively (March 2016-October 2019). Cumulative sum analysis of operative time was performed to distinguish the first and second phase of the learning curve. Outcomes were compared between both phases of the learning curve. Trends in nationwide use of robotic and laparoscopic PD were assessed in the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. RESULTS Overall, 275 RPD procedures were performed in seven centers by 15 trained surgeons. The recent benchmark criteria for low-risk PD were met by 125 (45.5%) patients. The conversion rate was 6.5% (n = 18) and median blood loss 250ml [interquartile range (IQR) 150-500]. The rate of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications was 44.4% (n = 122), postoperative pancreatic fistula (grade B/C) rate 23.6% (n = 65), 90-day complication-related mortality 2.5% (n = 7) and 90-day cancer-related mortality 2.2.% (n = 6). Median postoperative hospital stay was 12 days (IQR 8-20). In the subgroup of patients with pancreatic cancer (n = 80), the major complication rate was 31.3% and POPF rate was 10%. Cumulative sum analysis for operative time found a learning curve inflection point at 22 RPDs (IQR 10-35) with similar rates of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III complications in the first and second phase (43.4% vs 43.8%, P = 0.956, respectively). During the study period the nationwide use of laparoscopic PD reduced from 15% to 1%, whereas the use of RPD increased from 0% to 25%. CONCLUSIONS This multicenter RPD training program in centers with sufficient surgical volume was found to be feasible without a negative impact of the learning curve on clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurice J W Zwart
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Carolijn L M Nota
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jony van Hilst
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar 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
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Inne H M Borei Rinkes
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Jacob L van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Anouk E J Latenstein
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Kosei Takagi
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Khé T C Tran
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Jan H Wijsman
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Ziekenhuis, Breda, the Netherlands
| | | | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | - Jan S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Mohammed Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
- Department of Surgery, Istituto Fondazione Poliambulanza, Brescia, Italy
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier Saint-Marc
- Department of Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Regional Orleans, Orleans, France
| | - Herbert J Zehl
- Department of Surgery, University of Texas, Southwestern, Dallas, Texas
| | - Amer H Zureikat
- Department of Surgery, Hillman Cancer Center, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Melissa E Hogg
- Department of Surgery, Northshore University HealthSystem, Chicago, Illinois
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, UMC Utrecht Cancer Center and St Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Smits FJ, Henry AC, Besselink MG, Busch OR, van Eijck CH, Arntz M, Bollen TL, van Delden OM, van den Heuvel D, van der Leij C, van Lienden KP, Moelker A, Bonsing BA, Borel Rinkes IH, Bosscha K, van Dam RM, Derksen WJM, den Dulk M, Festen S, Groot Koerkamp B, de Haas RJ, Hagendoorn J, van der Harst E, de Hingh IH, Kazemier G, van der Kolk M, Liem M, Lips DJ, Luyer MD, de Meijer VE, Mieog JS, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Patijn GA, Te Riele WW, Roos D, Schreinemakers JM, Stommel MWJ, Wit F, Zonderhuis BA, Daamen LA, van Werkhoven CH, Molenaar IQ, van Santvoort HC. Algorithm-based care versus usual care for the early recognition and management of complications after pancreatic resection in the Netherlands: an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 2022; 399:1867-1875. [PMID: 35490691 DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(22)00182-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 47] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2021] [Revised: 12/09/2021] [Accepted: 12/16/2021] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Early recognition and management of postoperative complications, before they become clinically relevant, can improve postoperative outcomes for patients, especially for high-risk procedures such as pancreatic resection. METHODS We did an open-label, nationwide, stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial that included all patients having pancreatic resection during a 22-month period in the Netherlands. In this trial design, all 17 centres that did pancreatic surgery were randomly allocated for the timing of the crossover from usual care (the control group) to treatment given in accordance with a multimodal, multidisciplinary algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of postoperative complications (the intervention group). Randomisation was done by an independent statistician using a computer-generated scheme, stratified to ensure that low-medium-volume centres alternated with high-volume centres. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment. A smartphone app was designed that incorporated the algorithm and included the daily evaluation of clinical and biochemical markers. The algorithm determined when to do abdominal CT, radiological drainage, start antibiotic treatment, and remove abdominal drains. After crossover, clinicians were trained in how to use the algorithm during a 4-week wash-in period; analyses comparing outcomes between the control group and the intervention group included all patients other than those having pancreatic resection during this wash-in period. The primary outcome was a composite of bleeding that required invasive intervention, organ failure, and 90-day mortality, and was assessed by a masked adjudication committee. This trial was registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL6671. FINDINGS From Jan 8, 2018, to Nov 9, 2019, all 1805 patients who had pancreatic resection in the Netherlands were eligible for and included in this study. 57 patients who underwent resection during the wash-in phase were excluded from the primary analysis. 1748 patients (885 receiving usual care and 863 receiving algorithm-centred care) were included. The primary outcome occurred in fewer patients in the algorithm-centred care group than in the usual care group (73 [8%] of 863 patients vs 124 [14%] of 885 patients; adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0·48, 95% CI 0·38-0·61; p<0·0001). Among patients treated according to the algorithm, compared with patients who received usual care there was a decrease in bleeding that required intervention (47 [5%] patients vs 51 [6%] patients; RR 0·65, 0·42-0·99; p=0·046), organ failure (39 [5%] patients vs 92 [10%] patients; 0·35, 0·20-0·60; p=0·0001), and 90-day mortality (23 [3%] patients vs 44 [5%] patients; 0·42, 0·19-0·92; p=0·029). INTERPRETATION The algorithm for the early recognition and minimally invasive management of complications after pancreatic resection considerably improved clinical outcomes compared with usual care. This difference included an approximate 50% reduction in mortality at 90 days. FUNDING The Dutch Cancer Society and UMC Utrecht.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- F Jasmijn Smits
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Anne Claire Henry
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Casper H van Eijck
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Mark Arntz
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Thomas L Bollen
- Department of Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Otto M van Delden
- Department of Radiology, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Daniel van den Heuvel
- Department of Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | - Krijn P van Lienden
- Department of Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Adriaan Moelker
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Bert A Bonsing
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | - Inne H Borel Rinkes
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, Netherlands
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Wouter J M Derksen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Sebastiaan Festen
- Department of Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Bas Groot Koerkamp
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Robbert J de Haas
- Department of Radiology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | | | - Ignace H de Hingh
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven and GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Marion van der Kolk
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Mike Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, Netherlands
| | - Misha D Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven and GROW-School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| | - J Sven Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
| | | | | | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Daphne Roos
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, Netherlands
| | | | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
| | - Fennie Wit
- Department of Surgery, Tjongerschans Hospital, Heerenveen, Netherlands
| | - Babs A Zonderhuis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands
| | - Lois A Daamen
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - C Henri van Werkhoven
- Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein and University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Henry AC, Smits FJ, van Lienden K, van den Heuvel DAF, Hofman L, Busch OR, van Delden OM, Zijlstra IJA, Schreuder SM, Lamers AB, van Leersum M, van Strijen MJL, Vos JA, Te Riele WW, Molenaar IQ, Besselink MG, van Santvoort HC. Biliopancreatic and biliary leak after pancreatoduodenectomy treated by percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage. HPB (Oxford) 2022; 24:489-497. [PMID: 34556407 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.08.941] [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] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/07/2021] [Revised: 07/02/2021] [Accepted: 08/16/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Complementary to percutaneous intra-abdominal drainage, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) might ameliorate healing of pancreatic fistula and biliary leakage after pancreatoduodenectomy by diversion of bile from the site of leakage. This study evaluated technical and clinical outcomes of PTBD for this indication. METHODS All patients undergoing PTBD for leakage after pancreatoduodenectomy were retrospectively evaluated in two tertiary pancreatic centers (2014-2019). Technical success was defined as external biliary drainage. Clinical success was defined as discharge with a resolved leak, without additional surgical interventions for anastomotic leakage other than percutaneous intra-abdominal drainage. RESULTS Following 822 pancreatoduodenectomies, 65 patients (8%) underwent PTBD. Indications were leakage of the pancreaticojejunostomy (n = 25; 38%), hepaticojejunostomy (n = 15; 23%) and of both (n = 25; 38%). PTBD was technically successful in 64 patients (98%) with drain revision in 40 patients (63%). Clinical success occurred in 60 patients (94%). Leakage resolved after median 33 days (IQR 21-60). PTBD related complications occurred in 23 patients (35%), including cholangitis (n = 14; 21%), hemobilia (n = 7; 11%) and PTBD related bleeding requiring re-intervention (n = 4; 6%). In hospital mortality was 3% (n = 2). CONCLUSION Although drain revisions and complications are common, PTBD is highly feasible and appears to be effective in the treatment of biliopancreatic leakage after pancreatoduodenectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anne Claire Henry
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - F Jasmijn Smits
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Krijn van Lienden
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Daniel A F van den Heuvel
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Lieke Hofman
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Otto M van Delden
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - IJsbrand A Zijlstra
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Sanne M Schreuder
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Armand B Lamers
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marc van Leersum
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Marco J L van Strijen
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Jan A Vos
- Department of Interventional Radiology, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Department of Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein and University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Biesma NC, Te Riele WW, Van Santvoort HC, Molenaar IQ. Pancreatoduodenectomy for distal cholangiocarcinoma 13 years after oesophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction: report of a case. BMJ Case Rep 2022; 15:e246852. [PMID: 35135799 PMCID: PMC8830154 DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2021-246852] [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] [Accepted: 12/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/03/2022] Open
Abstract
Advancements in cancer management have led to improved survival in patients with oesophageal cancer. This has resulted in an increased incidence of second primary malignancies with the pancreas as a common secondary cancer site. Resectable pancreatic and periampullary cancers are treated by pancreatoduodenectomy, including resection of the gastroduodenal artery which provides the blood supply to the gastric conduit in patients who underwent oesophagectomy. A 77-year-old man with a history of distal oesophageal cancer, for which an oesophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction was performed, presented in the emergency department. Extensive workup showed a lesion suspected for a distal cholangiocarcinoma. Pancreatoduodenectomy was deemed feasible after arterial angiography revealed that the gastric conduit was dominantly vascularised by the right gastric artery. Adequate imaging of the blood supply is essential to determine eligibility for pancreatoduodenectomy in patients with a second primary malignancy in the pancreas or periampullary region after oesophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nanske C Biesma
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C Van Santvoort
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - I Quintus Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht, University Medical Center Utrecht Cancer Center & St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Krul MF, Elfrink AKE, Buis CI, Swijnenburg RJ, Te Riele WW, Verhoef C, Gobardhan PD, Dulk MD, Liem MSL, Tanis PJ, Mieog JSD, van den Boezem PB, Leclercq WKG, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Gerhards MF, Klaase JM, Grünhagen DJ, Kok NFM, Kuhlmann KFD. Hospital variation and outcomes of simultaneous resection of primary colorectal tumour and liver metastases: a population-based study. HPB (Oxford) 2022; 24:255-266. [PMID: 34305003 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2021.06.422] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2021] [Revised: 06/01/2021] [Accepted: 06/28/2021] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal treatment sequence for patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains uncertain. This study aimed to assess factors associated with the use of simultaneous resections and impact on hospital variation. METHOD This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver surgery for synchronous colorectal liver metastases between 2014 and 2019 in the Netherlands. Factors associated with simultaneous resection were identified. Short-term surgical outcomes of simultaneous resections and factors associated with 30-day major morbidity were evaluated. RESULTS Of 2146 patients included, 589 (27%) underwent simultaneous resection in 28 hospitals. Simultaneous resection was associated with age, sex, BMI, number, size and bilobar distribution of CRLM, and administration of preoperative chemotherapy. More minimally invasive and minor resections were performed in the simultaneous group. Hospital variation was present (range 2.4%-83.3%) with several hospitals performing simultaneous procedures more and less frequently than expected. Simultaneous resection resulted in 13% 30-day major morbidity, and 1% mortality. ASA classification ≥3 was independently associated with higher 30-day major morbidity after simultaneous resection (aOR 1.97, CI 1.10-3.42, p = 0.018). CONCLUSION Distinctive patient and tumour characteristics influence the choice for simultaneous resection. Remarkable hospital variation is present in the Netherlands.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Myrtle F Krul
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| | - Arthur K E Elfrink
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Carlijn I Buis
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht, UMC Utrecht, Utrecht and St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Mike S L Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - J S D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | | | - Wouter K G Leclercq
- Department of Surgery, Maxima Medical Centre, Eindhoven, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Koert F D Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Elfrink AKE, Haring MPD, de Meijer VE, Ijzermans JNM, Swijnenburg RJ, Braat AE, Erdmann JI, Terkivatan T, Te Riele WW, van den Boezem PB, Coolsen MME, Leclercq WKG, Lips DJ, de Wilde RF, Kok NFM, Grünhagen DJ, Klaase JM. Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic and open resection of benign liver tumours in the Netherlands: a nationwide analysis. HPB (Oxford) 2021; 23:1230-1243. [PMID: 33478819 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.12.003] [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] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2020] [Revised: 11/18/2020] [Accepted: 12/11/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Data on surgical outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) of benign liver tumour (BLT) are scarce. This study aimed to provide a nationwide overview of postoperative outcomes after LLR and OLR of BLT. METHODS This was a nationwide retrospective study including all patients who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular adenoma, haemangioma and focal nodular hyperplasia in the Netherlands from 2014 to 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to compare 30-day overall and major morbidity and 30-day mortality after OLR and LLR. RESULTS In total, 415 patients underwent BLT resection of whom 230 (55.4%) underwent LLR. PSM for OLR and LLR resulted in 250 matched patients. Median (IQR) length of stay was shorter after LLR than OLR (4 versus 6 days, 5.0-8.0, p < 0.001). Postoperative 30-day overall morbidity was lower after LLR than OLR (12.0% vs. 22.4%, p = 0.043). LLR was associated with reduced 30-day overall morbidity in multivariable analysis (aOR:0.46, CI:0.22-0.95, p = 0.043). Both 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality were not different. CONCLUSIONS LLR for BLT is associated with shorter hospital stay and reduced overall morbidity and is preferred if technically feasible.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arthur K E Elfrink
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden; Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen.
| | - Martijn P D Haring
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Dutch Benign Liver Tumour Group
| | - Vincent E de Meijer
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen; Dutch Benign Liver Tumour Group
| | - Jan N M Ijzermans
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam; Dutch Benign Liver Tumour Group
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam
| | - Andries E Braat
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden; Dutch Benign Liver Tumour Group
| | - Joris I Erdmann
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam; Dutch Benign Liver Tumour Group
| | | | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht; Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle; St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marielle M E Coolsen
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht; Dutch Benign Liver Tumour Group
| | | | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede
| | | | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek - Dutch Cancer Institute, Amsterdam
| | | | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University of Groningen and University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Nota CL, Molenaar IQ, Te Riele WW, van Santvoort HC, Hagendoorn J, Borel Rinkes IHM. Stepwise implementation of robotic surgery in a high volume HPB practice in the Netherlands. HPB (Oxford) 2020; 22:1596-1603. [PMID: 32093965 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2020.01.018] [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] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2019] [Revised: 01/26/2020] [Accepted: 01/28/2020] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Aims of this study were to describe the stepwise implementation and expansion of robotic HPB surgery in a high volume HPB unit in the Netherlands and to analyze clinical outcomes of all robotic liver resections and robotic pancreatoduodenectomies performed within this program. METHODS After proctoring by expert international surgeons, HPB surgeons were introduced to robotic liver resection and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy in a stepwise fashion. Data from two prospective databases containing all consecutive patients who underwent robotic liver resection or robotic pancreatoduodenectomy between August 1st, 2015 and March 1st, 2019 were analyzed post hoc. RESULTS In total, 77 consecutive robotic liver resections and 68 consecutive robotic pancreatoduodenectomies were performed. Five surgeons were consecutively introduced to robotic HPB surgery. Mean operative time for robotic liver resection was 160 ± 78 min. Mean operative time for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was 420 ± 67 min. Operative times remained stable over time and were not affected by the introduction of new surgeons. CONCLUSION Stepwise implementation and expansion of robotic HPB surgery within one unit over a three-and-half year period is feasible and associated with good clinical outcomes. Despite introducing new surgeons to the technique, operative times, an indicator of the learning process, remained stable over time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carolijn L Nota
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, G.04.228, the Netherlands
| | - I Q Molenaar
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, G.04.228, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, G.04.228, the Netherlands
| | - Hjalmar C van Santvoort
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, G.04.228, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, G.04.228, the Netherlands
| | - Inne H M Borel Rinkes
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU), UMC Utrecht Cancer Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, G.04.228, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Elfrink AKE, Kok NFM, van der Werf LR, Krul MF, Marra E, Wouters MWJM, Verhoef C, Kuhlmann KFD, den Dulk M, Swijnenburg RJ, Te Riele WW, van den Boezem PB, Leclercq WKG, Lips DJ, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Gobardhan PD, Hartgrink HH, Buis CI, Grünhagen DJ, Klaase JM. Population-based study on practice variation regarding preoperative systemic chemotherapy in patients with colorectal liver metastases and impact on short-term outcomes. Eur J Surg Oncol 2020; 46:1742-1755. [PMID: 32303416 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.03.221] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [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: 11/20/2019] [Revised: 03/09/2020] [Accepted: 03/25/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Definitions regarding resectability and hence indications for preoperative chemotherapy vary. Use of preoperative chemotherapy may influence postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to assess the variation in use of preoperative chemotherapy for CRLM and related postoperative outcomes in the Netherlands. MATERIALS AND METHODS All patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2018 were included from a national database. Case-mix factors contributing to the use of preoperative chemotherapy, hospital variation and postoperative outcomes were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Postoperative outcomes were postoperative complicated course (PCC), 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality. RESULTS In total, 4469 patients were included of whom 1314 patients received preoperative chemotherapy and 3155 patients did not. Patients receiving chemotherapy were significantly younger (mean age (+SD) 66.3 (10.4) versus 63.2 (10.2) p < 0.001) and had less comorbidity (Charlson scores 2+ (24% versus 29%, p = 0.010). Unadjusted hospital variation concerning administration of preoperative chemotherapy ranged between 2% and 55%. After adjusting for case-mix factors, three hospitals administered significantly more preoperative chemotherapy than expected and six administered significantly less preoperative chemotherapy than expected. PCC was 12.1%, 30-day morbidity was 8.8% and 30-day mortality was 1.5%. No association between preoperative chemotherapy and PCC (OR 1.24, 0.98-1.55, p = 0.065), 30-day morbidity (OR 1.05, 0.81-1.39, p = 0.703) or with 30-day mortality (OR 1.22, 0.75-2.09, p = 0.467) was found. CONCLUSION Significant hospital variation in the use of preoperative chemotherapy for CRLM was present in the Netherlands. No association between postoperative outcomes and use of preoperative chemotherapy was found.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arthur K E Elfrink
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
| | - Niels F M Kok
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Leonie R van der Werf
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands; Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Myrtle F Krul
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Elske Marra
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Michel W J M Wouters
- Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing, Scientific Bureau, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis Verhoef
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Koert F D Kuhlmann
- Department of Surgery, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Marcel den Dulk
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | | | - Wouter K G Leclercq
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Centre, Eindhoven / Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Henk H Hartgrink
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Carlijn I Buis
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Dirk J Grünhagen
- Department of Surgical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joost M Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
van der Poel MJ, Fichtinger RS, Bemelmans M, Bosscha K, Braat AE, de Boer MT, Dejong CHC, Doornebosch PG, Draaisma WA, Gerhards MF, Gobardhan PD, Gorgec B, Hagendoorn J, Kazemier G, Klaase J, Leclercq WKG, Liem MS, Lips DJ, Marsman HA, Mieog JSD, Molenaar QI, Nieuwenhuijs VB, Nota CL, Patijn GA, Rijken AM, Slooter GD, Stommel MWJ, Swijnenburg RJ, Tanis PJ, Te Riele WW, Terkivatan T, van den Tol PM, van den Boezem PB, van der Hoeven JA, Vermaas M, Abu Hilal M, van Dam RM, Besselink MG. Implementation and outcome of minor and major minimally invasive liver surgery in the Netherlands. HPB (Oxford) 2019; 21:1734-1743. [PMID: 31235430 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.05.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2019] [Revised: 04/25/2019] [Accepted: 05/07/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While most of the evidence on minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is derived from expert centers, nationwide outcomes remain underreported. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation and outcome of MILS on a nationwide scale. METHODS Electronic patient files were reviewed in all Dutch liver surgery centers and all patients undergoing MILS between 2011 and 2016 were selected. Operative outcomes were stratified based on extent of the resection and annual MILS volume. RESULTS Overall, 6951 liver resections were included, with a median annual volume of 50 resections per center. The overall use of MILS was 13% (n = 916), which varied from 3% to 36% (P < 0.001) between centers. The nationwide use of MILS increased from 6% in 2011 to 23% in 2016 (P < 0.001). Outcomes of minor MILS were comparable with international studies (conversion 0-13%, mortality <1%). In centers which performed ≥20 MILS annually, major MILS was associated with less conversions (14 (11%) versus 41 (30%), P < 0.001), shorter operating time (184 (117-239) versus 200 (139-308) minutes, P = 0.010), and less overall complications (37 (30%) versus 58 (42%), P = 0.040). CONCLUSION The nationwide use of MILS is increasing, although large variation remains between centers. Outcomes of major MILS are better in centers with higher volumes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marcel J van der Poel
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Robert S Fichtinger
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - Marc Bemelmans
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - Koop Bosscha
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands
| | - Andries E Braat
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Marieke T de Boer
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Cornelis H C Dejong
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - Pascal G Doornebosch
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - Werner A Draaisma
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Meander Medical Center, Amersfoort, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Burak Gorgec
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Hagendoorn
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Geert Kazemier
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Joost Klaase
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - Mike S Liem
- Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | - Daan J Lips
- Department of Surgery, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Medical Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands
| | | | - J Sven D Mieog
- Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Quintus I Molenaar
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | | | - Carolijn L Nota
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Gijs A Patijn
- Department of Surgery, Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands
| | - Arjen M Rijken
- Department of Surgery, Amphia Hospital, Breda, the Netherlands
| | - Gerrit D Slooter
- Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Center, Veldhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Martijn W J Stommel
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands
| | - Türkan Terkivatan
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Petrousjka M van den Tol
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | | | - Maarten Vermaas
- Department of Surgery, IJsselland Hospital, Capelle aan den IJssel, the Netherlands
| | - Moh'd Abu Hilal
- Department of Surgery, University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
| | - Ronald M van Dam
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands; RWTH Aachen, Germany
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Nota CLMA, Hagendoorn J, Borel Rinkes IHM, van der Harst E, Te Riele WW, van Santvoort HC, Tran T, Coene PLO, Groot Koerkamp B, Molenaar IQ. [Robot-assisted Whipple resection; results of the first 100 procedures in the Netherlands]. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2019; 163:D3682. [PMID: 31283118] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Investigation into the results of robot-assisted Whipple resection in the Netherlands. These results were compared with those of open Whipple procedures on the basis of recent large case series of patients. DESIGN Case series of patients and systematic literature review. METHOD We carried out a post hoc analysis of prospectively collected data on the first 100 consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted Whipple procedures in the period from March 2016 until March 2018 at the Erasmus MC, the Maasstad hospital or the Regional Academic Cancer Centre Utrecht. We were mainly interested in surgery characteristics and postoperative outcomes. We compared our results with those of case series of patients with more than 500 open Whipple procedures carried out in a single hospital, published in the last 5 years. RESULTS There were one or more serious complications in 22 patients (22%) and 2 patients (2%) developed multiple organ failure. 7 patients (7%) underwent reoperation. There was no postoperative mortality. In 14 case series (n = 12,708), complications occurred in 38% of patients and 7% of patients underwent reoperation. Mean mortality rate was 3%. CONCLUSION Our findings show that robotic Whipple procedures can be carried out safely in the Netherlands. The number of complications and mortality rates are comparable with results of large case series of patients who underwent open Whipple procedures in a centre of expertise.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | - T Tran
- Dept. of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam
| | | | | | - I Q Molenaar
- Dept. of Surgery, Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht (RAKU)
- Contact: I.Q. Molenaar
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Solaini L, de Rooij T, Marsman EM, Te Riele WW, Tanis PJ, van Gulik TM, Gouma DJ, Bhayani NH, Hackert T, Busch OR, Besselink MG. Pancreatoduodenectomy with colon resection for pancreatic cancer: a systematic review. HPB (Oxford) 2018; 20:881-887. [PMID: 29705346 DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2018.03.017] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2018] [Revised: 03/25/2018] [Accepted: 03/28/2018] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radical resection of advanced pancreatic cancer may occasionally require a simultaneous colon resection. The risks and benefits of this combined procedure are largely unknown. This systematic review aimed to assess short and long term outcome after pancreatoduodenectomy with colon resection (PD-colon) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies published between 1994 and 2017 concerning PD-colon for PDAC. RESULTS After screening 2038 articles, 5 articles with a total of 181 patients undergoing PD-colon were eligible for inclusion. Included studies showed a relatively low risk of bias. The pooled complication rate was 73% (95% CI 61-84) including a pooled colonic anastomotic leak rate of 5.5%. Pooled mortality was 10% (95% CI 6-15). Pooled mean survival (data from 86 patients) was 18 months (95% CI 13-23) with pooled 3- and 5-year survival of 31% (95% CI 20-72) and 19% (95% CI 6-38). CONCLUSION Based on the available data, PD-colon for PDAC seems to be associated with an increased morbidity and mortality but with survival comparable with standard PD in selected patients. Future large series are needed to allow for better patient selection for PD-colon.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Leonardo Solaini
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Dept of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy
| | - Thijs de Rooij
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - E Madelief Marsman
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Dept of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Pieter J Tanis
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Thomas M van Gulik
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Dirk J Gouma
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Neal H Bhayani
- Program for Liver, Pancreas, and Foregut Tumors, Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Penn State Cancer Institute, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, PA, USA
| | - Thilo Hackert
- Dept of General, Visceral, and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Olivier R Busch
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc G Besselink
- Dept of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
van Tuil T, Dhaif AA, Te Riele WW, van Ramshorst B, van Santvoort HC. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Liver Resection for Colorectal Metastases in Elderly Patients. Dig Surg 2018; 36:111-123. [PMID: 29502126 DOI: 10.1159/000487274] [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] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/08/2017] [Accepted: 01/28/2018] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the short- and long-term outcomes of liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) in elderly patients. METHODS A PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library search was performed from January 1995 to April 2017, for studies comparing both short- and long-term outcomes in younger and elderly patients undergoing liver resection for CRLM. RESULTS Eleven studies comparing patients aged <70 years with patients aged >70 years and 4 studies comparing patients aged <75 years with patients aged >75 years were included. Postoperative morbidity was similar in patients aged >70 years (27 vs. 30%; p = 0.35) but higher in patients aged >75 years (21 vs. 32%; p = 0.001). Postoperative mortality was higher in both patients aged >70 years (2 vs. 4%; p = 0.01) and in patients aged >75 years (1 vs. 6%; p = 0.02). Mean 5-year overall survival was lower in patients aged >70 years (40 vs. 32%; p < 0.001) but equal in patients aged >75 years (42 vs. 32%; p = 0.06). CONCLUSION Although postoperative morbidity and mortality were increased with higher age, liver resection for CRLM seems justified in selected elderly patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tim van Tuil
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Ali A Dhaif
- Department of Surgery, Salmaniya Medical Complex, Ministry of Health, Manama, Bahrain
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Bert van Ramshorst
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Wiggers JK, Te Riele WW, van Dongen TH, Verheij J, Busch ORC, van Gulik TM. Combined liver and extrahepatic bile duct resection for biliary invasion of colorectal metastasis: a case-cohort analysis and systematic review. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 2016; 5:350-7. [PMID: 27500147 DOI: 10.21037/hbsn.2016.05.01] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs) with biliary invasion can be treated with a combined liver and extrahepatic bile duct resection. The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes of this procedure in a case-cohort analysis and systematic review. METHODS Consecutive patients who underwent a major liver resection for CRLM between 2003 and 2013 were selected from a single center prospective database, comparing patients with and without biliary invasion. A specific and a general search strategy were used to identify relevant articles in the systematic review. RESULTS Ten patients (13.2%) underwent combined liver and extrahepatic bile duct resection for CLRM with biliary invasion, among 76 patients included. An R0 resection was achieved in five of ten patients (50%); one of ten patients died postoperatively. Median overall survival was 19 months among patients with biliary invasion, versus 106 months among patients without biliary invasion (P=0.12). The systematic review yielded a large variability in 5-year survival after resection of CLRM with biliary invasion, ranging between 33-80%. CONCLUSIONS Surgical resection of CLRM with central biliary invasion is feasible, but survival in these patients tends to be lower due to a high rate of non-radical resections.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jimme K Wiggers
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Joanne Verheij
- Department of Pathology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Olivier R C Busch
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Thomas M van Gulik
- Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Visser WS, Te Riele WW, Boerma D, van Ramshorst B, van Westreenen HL. Pelvic floor rehabilitation to improve functional outcome after a low anterior resection: a systematic review. Ann Coloproctol 2014; 30:109-14. [PMID: 24999460 PMCID: PMC4079807 DOI: 10.3393/ac.2014.30.3.109] [Citation(s) in RCA: 79] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2014] [Accepted: 05/21/2014] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Impaired functional outcome is common after a low anterior resection (LAR). Pelvic floor rehabilitation (PFR) might improve functional outcome after a LAR. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the effectiveness of PFR in improving functional outcome. METHODS PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched using the terms fecal incontinence, colorectal neoplasm/surgery, LAR, rectal cancer, anterior resection syndrome, bowel habit, pelvic floor, training, therapy, physical therapy, rehabilitation and biofeedback. Of the 125 identified records, 5 articles were included. RESULTS The 5 included studies reported on 321 patients, of which 286 patients (89%) underwent pelvic floor training. Three studies included patients with anterior resection syndrome after a LAR while the remaining studies included a series of patients after a LAR. Functional outcome was mostly assessed by using the Wexner incontinence scale. Quality of life was assessed in one study, and in three studies, rectal manometry was performed. After PFR, the functional outcome was improved in four studies, as was the quality of life. CONCLUSION This systematic review demonstrated that PFR is useful for improving the functional outcome after a LAR. The data are extracted from studies of limited quality, but the available evidence points to the effectiveness of the procedure.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Wouter W Te Riele
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Djamila Boerma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - Bert van Ramshorst
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|