Background: The Mayo protocol for liver transplantation in patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is based on strict selection and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The role of... Show moreBackground: The Mayo protocol for liver transplantation in patients with unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma is based on strict selection and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The role of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in this scenario remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma using strict selection criteria, either with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Methods: This was an international, multicentre, retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent transplantation between 2011 and 2020 for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma using the Mayo selection criteria and receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or not receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Endpoints were post-transplant survival, post-transplant morbidity rate, and time to recurrence. Results: Of 49 patients who underwent liver transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, 27 received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 22 did not. Overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year post-transplantation survival rates were 65 per cent, 51 per cent and 41 per cent respectively in the group receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and 91 per cent, 68 per cent and 53 per cent respectively in the group not receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (1-year hazards ratio (HR) 4.55 (95 per cent c.i. 0.98 to 21.13), P = 0.053; 3-year HR 2.07 (95 per cent c.i. 0.78 to 5.54), P = 0.146; 5-year HR 1.71 (95 per cent c.i. 0.71 to 4.09), P = 0.229). Hepatic vascular complications were more frequent in the group receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with the group not receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nine of 27 versus two of 22, P = 0.045). In multivariable analysis, tumour recurrence occurred less frequently in the group receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (HR 0.30 (95 per cent c.i. 0.09 to 0.97), P = 0.044). Conclusion: In selected patients undergoing liver transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy resulted in a lower risk of tumour recurrence, but was associated with a higher rate of early hepatic vascular complications. Adjustments in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy reducing the risk of hepatic vascular complications, such as omitting radiotherapy, may further improve the outcome in patients undergoing liver transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.This international, multicentre study presents for the first time, to the best of our knowledge, a comparison of two cohorts of patients who underwent transplantation for unresectable perihilar cholangiocarcinoma using the Mayo Clinic selection criteria and either received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or did not receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy resulted in a lower risk of tumour recurrence, but was associated with a higher rate of early hepatic vascular complications. Adjustments in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy reducing the risk of hepatic vascular complications may further improve the outcome in patients undergoing liver transplantation for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. Show less
Background The causal pathway between complications after pancreatic cancer resection and impaired long-term survival remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of... Show moreBackground The causal pathway between complications after pancreatic cancer resection and impaired long-term survival remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of complications after pancreatic cancer resection on disease-free interval and overall survival, with adjuvant chemotherapy as a mediator. Methods This observational study included all patients undergoing pancreatic cancer resection in the Netherlands (2014-2017). Clinical data were extracted from the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Recurrence and survival data were collected additionally. In causal mediation analysis, direct and indirect effect estimates via adjuvant chemotherapy were calculated. Results In total, 1071 patients were included. Major complications (hazards ratio 1.22 (95 per cent c.i. 1.04 to 1.43); P = 0.015 and hazards ratio 1.25 (95 per cent c.i. 1.08 to 1.46); P = 0.003) and organ failure (hazards ratio 1.86 (95 per cent c.i. 1.32 to 2.62); P < 0.001 and hazards ratio 1.89 (95 per cent c.i. 1.36 to 2.63); P < 0.001) were associated with shorter disease-free interval and overall survival respectively. The effects of major complications and organ failure on disease-free interval (-1.71 (95 per cent c.i. -2.27 to -1.05) and -3.05 (95 per cent c.i. -4.03 to -1.80) respectively) and overall survival (-1.92 (95 per cent c.i. -2.60 to -1.16) and -3.49 (95 per cent c.i. -4.84 to -2.03) respectively) were mediated by adjuvant chemotherapy. Additionally, organ failure directly affected disease-free interval (-5.38 (95 per cent c.i. -9.27 to -1.94)) and overall survival (-6.32 (95 per cent c.i. -10.43 to -1.99)). In subgroup analyses, the association was found in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, but not in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy. Conclusion Major complications, including organ failure, negatively impact survival in patients after pancreatic cancer resection, largely mediated by adjuvant chemotherapy. Prevention or adequate treatment of complications and use of neoadjuvant treatment may improve oncological outcomes.This nationwide observational cohort study included 1052 patients and showed that major complications, including organ failure, have a negative impact on disease-free interval and overall survival after resection of pancreatic cancer. This effect was largely mediated by the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. Show less
Background Postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of major gastrointestinal surgery with an impact on short- and long-term survival. No validated system for risk... Show moreBackground Postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication of major gastrointestinal surgery with an impact on short- and long-term survival. No validated system for risk stratification exists for this patient group. This study aimed to validate externally a prognostic model for AKI after major gastrointestinal surgery in two multicentre cohort studies.Methods The Outcomes After Kidney injury in Surgery (OAKS) prognostic model was developed to predict risk of AKI in the 7 days after surgery using six routine datapoints (age, sex, ASA grade, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, planned open surgery and preoperative use of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker). Validation was performed within two independent cohorts: a prospective multicentre, international study ('IMAGINE') of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery (2018); and a retrospective regional cohort study ('Tayside') in major abdominal surgery (2011-2015). Multivariable logistic regression was used to predict risk of AKI, with multiple imputation used to account for data missing at random. Prognostic accuracy was assessed for patients at high risk (greater than 20 per cent) of postoperative AKI.Results In the validation cohorts, 12.9 per cent of patients (661 of 5106) in IMAGINE and 14.7 per cent (106 of 719 patients) in Tayside developed 7-day postoperative AKI. Using the OAKS model, 558 patients (9.6 per cent) were classified as high risk. Less than 10 per cent of patients classified as low-risk developed AKI in either cohort (negative predictive value greater than 0.9). Upon external validation, the OAKS model retained an area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve of range 0.655-0.681 (Tayside 95 per cent c.i. 0.596 to 0.714; IMAGINE 95 per cent c.i. 0.659 to 0.703), sensitivity values range 0.323-0.352 (IMAGINE 95 per cent c.i. 0.281 to 0.368; Tayside 95 per cent c.i. 0.253 to 0.461), and specificity range 0.881-0.890 (Tayside 95 per cent c.i. 0.853 to 0.905; IMAGINE 95 per cent c.i. 0.881 to 0.899).Conclusion The OAKS prognostic model can identify patients who are not at high risk of postoperative AKI after gastrointestinal surgery with high specificity.Presented to Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) International Conference 2018 (Edinburgh, UK), European Society of Coloproctology (ESCP) International Conference 2018 (Nice, France), SARS (Society of Academic and Research Surgery) 2020 (Virtual, UK). Show less
Background: Increased use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and reduced open surgical repair (OSR), has decreased postoperative mortality after elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms ... Show moreBackground: Increased use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and reduced open surgical repair (OSR), has decreased postoperative mortality after elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The choice between EVAR or OSR depends on aneurysm anatomy, and the experience and preference of the vascular surgeon, and therefore differs between hospitals. The aim of this study was to investigate the current mortality risk difference (RD) between EVAR and OSR, and the effect of hospital preference for EVAR on overall mortality.Methods: Primary elective infrarenal or juxtarenal aneurysm repairs registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (2013-2017) were analysed. First, mortality in hospitals with a higher preference for EVAR (high-EVAR group) was compared with that in hospitals with a lower EVAR preference (low-EVAR group), divided by the median percentage of EVAR. Second, the mortality RD between EVAR and OSR was determined by unadjusted and adjusted linear regression and propensity-score (PS) analysis and then by instrumental-variable (IV) analysis, adjusting for unobserved confounders; percentage EVAR by hospital was used as the IV.Results: A total of 11 997 patients were included. The median hospital rate of EVAR was 76.6 per cent. The overall mortality RD between high- and low-EVAR hospitals was 0.1 (95 per cent -0.5 to 0.4) per cent. The OSR mortality rate was significantly higher among high-EVAR hospitals than low-EVAR hospitals: 7.3 versus 4.0 per cent (RD 3.3 (1.4 to 5.3) per cent). The EVAR mortality rate was also higher in high-EVAR hospitals: 0.9 versus 0.7 per cent (RD 0.2 (-0.0 to 0.6) per cent). The RD following unadjusted, adjusted, and PS analysis was 4.2 (3.7 to 4.8), 4.4 (3.8 to 5.0), and 4.7 (4.1 to 5.3) per cent in favour of EVAR over OSR. However, the RD after IV analysis was not significant: 1.3 (-0.9 to 3.6) per cent.Conclusion: Even though EVAR has a lower mortality rate than OSR, the overall effect is offset by the high mortality rate after OSR in hospitals with a strong focus on EVAR. Show less
Background: The management of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is fully dictated by AAA size, but there are no uniform measurement guidelines, and systematic differences exist between ultrasound-... Show moreBackground: The management of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is fully dictated by AAA size, but there are no uniform measurement guidelines, and systematic differences exist between ultrasound- and CT-based size estimation. The aim of this study was to devise a uniform ultrasound acquisition and measurement protocol, and to test whether harmonization of ultrasound and CT readings is feasible.Methods: A literature review was undertaken to evaluate evidence for ultrasound-based measurement of AAA. A protocol for measuring AAA was then developed, and intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility was tested. Finally, agreement between ultrasound readings and CT-based AAA diameters was evaluated. This was an observational study of patients with a small AAA who participated in two pharmaceutical intervention trials.Results: Based on a literature review, an ultrasound acquisition and reading protocol was devised. Evaluation of the protocol showed an intraobserver repeatability of 1.6 mm (2s.d.) and an interobserver intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.97. Comparison of protocolled ultrasound readings and local CT readings indicated a good correlation (r=0.81), but a systematic +4.1-mm difference for CT. Harmonized size readings for ultrasound imaging and CT increased the correlation (r=0.91) and reduced the systematic difference to +1.8 mm by CT. Interobserver reproducibility of protocolized CT measurements showed an ICC of 0.94 for the inner-to-inner method and 0.96 for the outer-to-outer method.Conclusion: The absence of harmonized size acquisition and reading guidelines results in overtreatment and undertreatment of patients with AAA. This can be avoided by the implementation of standardized ultrasound acquisition and a harmonized reading protocol for ultrasound- and CT-based readings. Show less
Elfrink, A.K.E.; Pool, M.; Werf, L.R. van der; Marra, E.; Burgmans, M.C.; Meijerink, M.R.; ... ; Dutch Hepatobiliary Audit Grp 2020
Background In patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) preoperative imaging may include contrast-enhanced (ce) MRI and [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose (F-18-FDG) PET-CT. This study assessed trends... Show moreBackground In patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) preoperative imaging may include contrast-enhanced (ce) MRI and [F-18]fluorodeoxyglucose (F-18-FDG) PET-CT. This study assessed trends and variation between hospitals and oncological networks in the use of preoperative imaging in the Netherlands.Methods Data for all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2018 were retrieved from a nationwide auditing database. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess use of ceMRI, F-18-FDG PET-CT and combined ceMRI and F-18-FDG PET-CT, and trends in preoperative imaging and hospital and oncological network variation.Results A total of 4510 patients were included, of whom 1562 had ceMRI, 872 had F-18-FDG PET-CT, and 1293 had combined ceMRI and F-18-FDG PET-CT. Use of ceMRI increased over time (from 9.6 to 26.2 per cent; P < 0.001), use of F-18-FDG PET-CT decreased (from 28.6 to 6.0 per cent; P < 0.001), and use of both ceMRI and F-18-FDG PET-CT 16.9 per cent) remained stable. Unadjusted variation in the use of ceMRI, F-18-FDG PET-CT, and combined ceMRI and F-18-FDG PET-CT ranged from 5.6 to 100 per cent between hospitals. After case-mix correction, hospital and oncological network variation was found for all imaging modalities.Discussion Significant variation exists concerning the use of preoperative imaging for CRLM between hospitals and oncological networks in the Netherlands. The use of MRI is increasing, whereas that of F-18-FDG PET-CT is decreasing. Show less
BackgroundClinical auditing is an emerging instrument for quality assessment and improvement. Moreover, clinical registries facilitate medical research as they provide ‘real world’ data. It is... Show moreBackgroundClinical auditing is an emerging instrument for quality assessment and improvement. Moreover, clinical registries facilitate medical research as they provide ‘real world’ data. It is important that entered data are robust and reliable. The aim of this study was to describe the evolving procedure and results of data verification within the Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing (DICA).MethodsData verification performed on several (disease-specific) clinical registries between 2013 and 2015 was evaluated. Sign-up, sample size and process of verification were described. For each procedure, hospitals were visited by external data managers to verify registered data. Outcomes of data verification were completeness and accuracy. An assessment of the quality of data was given per registry, for each participating hospital. Using descriptive statistics, analyses were performed for different sections within the individual registries.ResultsSeven of the 21 registries were verified, involving 174 visits to hospital departments. A step-by-step description of the data verification process was provided. Completeness of data in the registries varied from 97·2 to 99·4 per cent. Accuracy of data ranged from 88·2 to 100 per cent. Most discrepancies were observed for postoperative complications (0·7–7·5 per cent) and ASA classification (8·5–11·4 per cent). Data quality was assessed as ‘sufficient’ for 145 of the 174 hospital departments (83·3 per cent).ConclusionData verification revealed that the data entered in the observed DICA registries were complete and accurate. Show less
Background A multicentre cohort study was performed to analyse the motivations for surgical referral of patients with benign colorectal lesions, and to evaluate the endoscopic and pathological... Show moreBackground A multicentre cohort study was performed to analyse the motivations for surgical referral of patients with benign colorectal lesions, and to evaluate the endoscopic and pathological characteristics of these lesions as well as short-term surgical outcomes. Methods Patients who underwent surgery for a benign colorectal lesion in 15 Dutch hospitals between January 2014 and December 2017 were selected from the pathology registry. Lesions were defined as complex when at least one of the following features was present: size at least 40 mm, difficult location according to the endoscopist, previous failed attempt at resection, or non-lifting sign. Results A total of 358 patients were included (322 colonic and 36 rectal lesions). The main reasons for surgical referral of lesions in the colon and rectum were large size (33 center dot 5 and 47 per cent respectively) and suspicion of invasive growth (31 center dot 1 and 58 per cent). Benign lesions could be categorized as complex in 80 center dot 6 per cent for colonic and 80 per cent for rectal locations. Surgery consisted of local excision in 5 center dot 9 and 64 per cent of colonic and rectal lesions respectively, and complicated postoperative course rates were noted in 11 center dot 2 and 3 per cent. In the majority of patients, no attempt was made to resect the lesion endoscopically (77 center dot 0 per cent of colonic and 83 per cent of rectal lesions). Conclusion The vast majority of the benign lesions referred for surgical resection could be classified as complex. Considering the substantial morbidity of surgery for benign colonic lesions, reassessment for endoscopic resection by another advanced endoscopy centre seems to be underused and should be encouraged. Show less
Background: The decision to perform surgery for patients with T1 colorectal cancer hinges on the estimated risk of lymph node metastasis, residual tumour and risks of surgery. The aim of this... Show moreBackground: The decision to perform surgery for patients with T1 colorectal cancer hinges on the estimated risk of lymph node metastasis, residual tumour and risks of surgery. The aim of this observational study was to compare surgical outcomes for T1 colorectal cancer with those for more advanced colorectal cancer.Methods: This was a population-based cohort study of patients treated surgically for pT1 -3 colorectal cancer between 2009 and 2016, using data from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit. Postoperative complications (overall, surgical, severe complications and mortality) were compared using multivariable logistic regression. A risk stratification table was developed based on factors independently associated with severe complications (reintervention and/or mortality) after elective surgery.Results: Of 39 813 patients, 5170 had pT1 colorectal cancer. No statistically significant differences were observed between patients with pT1 and pT2-3 disease in the rate of severe complications (8.3 versus 9.5 per cent respectively; odds ratio (OR) 0.89, 95 per cent c.i. 0.80 to 1.01, P=0.061), surgical complications (12.6 versus 13.5 per cent; OR 0.93, 0.84 to 1.02, P = 0.119) or mortality (1.7 versus 2.5 per cent; OR 0.94, 0.74 to 1.19, P=0.604). Male sex, higher ASA grade, previous abdominal surgery, open approach and type of procedure were associated with a higher severe complication rate in patients with pT1 colorectal cancer.Conclusion: Elective bowel resection was associated with similar morbidity and mortality rates in patients with pT1 and those with pT2-3 colorectal carcinoma. Show less
Claassen, Y.H.M.; Bastiaannet, E.; Hartgrink, H.H.; Dikken, J.L.; Steur, W.O. de; Slingerland, M.; ... ; Velde, C.J.H. van de 2019
