Positive association of gastric cancer surgery outcome with surgeon specialization in a Shanghai high-volume general hospital.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4092-4092
Author(s):  
Zhenbin Shen ◽  
Yihong Sun ◽  
Cong Wang ◽  
Naiqing Zhao ◽  
Weidong Chen ◽  
...  

4092 Background: Numerous studies suggest positive relationship between hospital volume and cancer treatment outcomes, the surgeon’s experience and specialty training may also be important. This was examined in a high volume hospital in Shanghai among patients who underwent gastric cancer (GC) surgery. Methods: Data on consecutive patients (pts) undergoing R0 or R1 GC resection in Zhongshan hospital between January 2003 and June 2010 were collected and analyzed. Follow-up on pts who were non-Shanghai residents were less complete therefore excluded. Post-operative mortality, pathologic results and survival outcome for pts treated by surgical training, i.e., sub-specialized vs., non-specialized, were obtained. Survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and Log-rank test was used to determine statistical significance. To determine whether sub-specialty surgical training was an independent factor for overall survival (OS), univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: Total 5,046 pts underwent R0 or R1 GC resection were identified.1594 pts had complete covariate data, survival information and were included in the study. Of them, the sub-specialized group included 217 cases treated by 3 surgeons, while the non-specialized group included 1377 cases treated by 52 surgeons. 5-year cumulative OS was higher in the sub-specialized group (62.9% vs. 54.6%, p=0.032). Multivariate analysis showed that tumor stage(p<0.001), location of tumor (p=0.003), vascular invasion (p<0.001) and surgeon (HR=1.54, p=0.001) were all associated with OS. The incidence of positive margin was higher in non-specialized group (2.0% vs. 2.7%, p<0.001) and the probability of retrieved lymph nodes less than 15 was more in non-specialized group (25.9% vs. 7.3%, p<0.001). Postoperative mortality was also higher in non-specialized group than in specialized group(1.5% vs. 0.9%, p<0.001). Conclusions: In high volume general hospital, sub-specialty training is desirable in gastric cancer surgery, the quality of gastric cancer surgery can be further improved by sub-specialty training leading to better treatment outcome.

2012 ◽  
Vol 48 (7) ◽  
pp. 1004-1013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johan L. Dikken ◽  
Anneriet E. Dassen ◽  
Valery E.P. Lemmens ◽  
Hein Putter ◽  
Pieta Krijnen ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 122-122
Author(s):  
Christophe Mariette ◽  
Arnaud Pasquer ◽  
Florence Renaud ◽  
Flora Hec ◽  
Anne Gandon ◽  
...  

122 Background: More than age, patient comorbidity is increasingly considered as the prominent predictor of postoperative mortality (POM) in esophageal and gastric cancer surgery, leading a growing number of elderly to be operated on. However, the respective impact of age and comorbidity on POM remains to be elucidated. The study objective was to investigate the impact of age on POM according to patient comorbidity. Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent esophageal or gastric cancer surgery between 2010 and 2012 in France were included (n = 11,196). The 30-day POM was compared by age groups (20-39, 40-59, 60-79, ≥ 80) and stratified according to the Charlson score (0, 1-2, ≥ 3). The consistency across esophageal (n = 3286) and gastric (n = 7910) subgroups and variations between 30-day and 90-day POM were analyzed. Results: Patients ≥ 60 years represented 73.8% of cases. A linear increase in 30-day and 90-day POM was observed with increasing age, with rates of 0.9% and 2.1%, 2.4% and 5.4%, 4.8% and 8.8%, and 9.3% and 15.9% in 20-39, 40-59, 60-79, ≥ 80 years age groups, respectively ( P< 0.001). Comparing 20-39 and ≥ 80 years age groups, 30-day POM was 1.0% vs. 7.0% for Charlson 0 ( P< 0.001), 3.1% vs. 11.1% for Charlson1-2 ( P< 0.001) and 0% vs. 19.5% for Charlson ≥ 3 ( P= 0.020) patients. A similar linear increase of POM by growing age groups was observed for 90-day POM and in esophagus and stomach subgroups. By multivariable analysis age groups (OR 1.03 95%CI 1.02-1.04, p < 0.001) and Charlson score (OR 1.56 95%CI 1.43-1.70, p < 0.001) were independent predictors of POM. Conclusions: Age and patient comorbidity have a similar and cumulative impact on POM after esophageal and gastric cancer surgery.


2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 1569-1577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ji-Ho Park ◽  
Hyuk-Joon Lee ◽  
Seung-Young Oh ◽  
Shin-Hoo Park ◽  
Felix Berlth ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 439-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juul J. W. Tegels ◽  
M. F. G. de Maat ◽  
K. W. E. Hulsewé ◽  
A. G. M. Hoofwijk ◽  
J. H. M. B. Stoot

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 360-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Kubota ◽  
Katsutoshi Shoda ◽  
Hirotaka Konishi ◽  
Kazuma Okamoto ◽  
Eigo Otsuji

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. e033267
Author(s):  
Dengfeng Wang ◽  
Yang Yu ◽  
Pengxian Tao ◽  
Dan Wang ◽  
Yajing Chen ◽  
...  

IntroductionVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is a serious life-threatening complication in patients with gastric cancer. Abnormal coagulation function and tumour-related treatment may contribute to the occurrence of VTE. Many guidelines considered that surgical treatment would put patients with cancer at high risk of VTE, so positive prevention is needed. However, there are no studies that have systematically reviewed the postoperative risk and distribution of VTE in patients with gastric cancer. We thus conduct this systematic review to determine the risk of VTE in patients with gastric cancer undergoing surgery and provide some evidence for clinical decision-making.Methods and analysisStudies reporting the incidence of VTE after gastric cancer surgery will be included. Primary studies of randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, population-based surveys and cross-sectional studies are eligible for this review and only studies published in Chinese and English will be included. We will search the Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI and Wanfang data from their inception to November 2019. Two reviewers will independently select studies and extract data. The quality of each included study will be assessed with tools corresponding to their study design. Meta-analysis will be used to pool the incidence data from included studies. Heterogeneity of the estimates across studies will be assessed, if necessary, a subgroup analysis will be performed to explore the source of heterogeneity. The Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation method is applied to assess the level of evidence obtained from this systematic review.Ethics and disseminationThis proposed systematic review and meta-analysis is based on published data, and thus ethical approval is not required. The results of this review will be sought for publication.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019144562


2021 ◽  
pp. 135581962110089
Author(s):  
Roberto Grilli ◽  
Federica Violi ◽  
Maria Chiara Bassi ◽  
Massimiliano Marino

Objectives To review the evidence of the effects of centralization of cancer surgery on postoperative mortality. Methods We searched Medline, Embase, Cinahl, Cochrane and Scopus (up to November 2019) for studies that (i) assessed the effects of centralization of cancer surgery policies on in-hospital or 30-day mortality, or (ii) described changes in both postoperative mortality for a surgical intervention and degree of centralization using reduction in the number of hospitals or increases in the proportion of patients undergoing cancer surgery at high volume hospitals as proxy. PRISMA guidelines were followed. We estimated pooled odds ratios (OR) and conducted meta-regression to assess the relationship between degree of centralization and mortality. Results A total of 41 studies met our inclusion criteria of which 15 evaluated the effect of centralization policies on postoperative mortality after cancer surgery and 26 described concurrent changes in the degree of centralization and postoperative mortality. Policy evaluation studies mainly used before-after designs (n = 13) or interrupted time series analysis (n = 2), mainly focusing on pancreatic, oesophageal and gastric cancer. All but one showed some degree of reduction in postoperative mortality, with statistically significant effects demonstrated by six studies. The pooled odds ratio for centralization policy effect was 0.68 (95% Confidence interval: 0.54–0.85; I2 = 80%). Meta-regression analysis of the 26 descriptive studies found that an increase of the proportion of patients treated at high volume hospitals was associated with greater reduction in postoperative mortality. Conclusions Centralization of cancer surgery is associated with reduced postoperative mortality. However, existing evidence tends to be of low quality and estimates of the effect size are likely inflated. There is a need for prospective studies using more robust approaches, and for centralization efforts to be accompanied by well-designed evaluations of their effectiveness.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Johannes Asplund ◽  
Eivind Gottlieb-Vedi ◽  
Wilhelm Leijonmarck ◽  
Fredrik Mattsson ◽  
Jesper Lagergren

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document