BackgroundAs the survival of patients with rectal cancer has improved in recent decades, more and more patients have to live with the consequences of rectal cancer surgery. An influential factor in... Show moreBackgroundAs the survival of patients with rectal cancer has improved in recent decades, more and more patients have to live with the consequences of rectal cancer surgery. An influential factor in long-term Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL) is the presence of a stoma. This study aimed to better understand the long-term consequences of a stoma and poor functional outcomes.MethodsPatients who underwent curative surgery for a primary tumor located in the rectosigmoid and rectum between 2013 and 2020 were identified from the nationwide Prospective Dutch Colorectal Cancer (PLCRC) cohort study. Patients received the following questionnaires: EORTC-QLQ-CR29, EORTC-QLQ-C30, and the LARS-score at 12 months, 24 months and 36 months after surgery.ResultsA total of 1,170 patients were included of whom 751 (64.2%) had no stoma, 122 (10.4%) had a stoma at primary surgery, 45 (3.8%) had a stoma at secondary surgery and 252 (21.5%) patients that underwent abdominoperineal resection (APR). Of all patients without a stoma, 41.4% reported major low-anterior resection syndrome (LARS). Patients without a stoma reported significantly better HRQoL. Moreover, patients without a stoma significantly reported an overall better HRQoL.ConclusionThe presence of a stoma and poor functional outcomes were both associated with reduced HRQoL. Patients with poor functional outcomes, defined as major LARS, reported a similar level of HRQoL compared to patients with a stoma. In addition, the HRQoL after rectal cancer surgery does not change significantly after the first year after surgery. Show less
BackgroundColorectal cancer is diagnosed in approximately 500,000 patients each year in Europe, leading to a high number of patients having to cope with the consequences of resection for colorectal... Show moreBackgroundColorectal cancer is diagnosed in approximately 500,000 patients each year in Europe, leading to a high number of patients having to cope with the consequences of resection for colorectal cancer. As treatment options tend to grow, more information on the effects of these treatments is needed to engage in shared decision-making. This study aims to explore the impact of resection for colorectal cancer on patients' daily life.MethodsPatients (≥18 years of age) who underwent an oncological colorectal resection between 2018 and 2021 were selected. Purposeful sampling was used to include patients who differed in age, comorbidity conditions, types of (neo)adjuvant therapy, postoperative complications and the presence/absence of a stoma. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, guided by a topic guide. Interviews were fully transcribed and subsequently thematically analysed using the framework approach. Analyses were carried out using the following predefined themes: (1) daily life and activities; (2) psychological functioning; (3) social functioning; (4) sexual functioning; and (5) healthcare experiences.ResultsSixteen patients with a follow-up period of between 0.6 and 4.4 years after surgery were included in this study. Participants reported several challenges experienced because of poor bowel function, a stoma, chemotherapy-induced neuropathy, fear of recurrence and sexual dysfunction. However, they reported these as not interfering much with daily life.ConclusionColorectal cancer treatment leads to several challenges and treatment-related health deficits. This is often not recognized by generic patient-reported outcome measures, but the findings on treatment-related health deficits presented in this study contain valuable insights which might contribute to improving colorectal cancer care, shared decision making and value-based health care. Show less
Background: Oncological sigmoid and rectal resections are accompanied with substantial risk of anastomotic leakage. Preoperative risk assessment and patient selection remain difficult, highlighting... Show moreBackground: Oncological sigmoid and rectal resections are accompanied with substantial risk of anastomotic leakage. Preoperative risk assessment and patient selection remain difficult, highlighting the importance of finding easy-to-use parameters. This study evaluates the prognostic value of contrast-enhanced (CE) computed tomography (CT)-based muscle measurements for predicting anastomotic leakage. Methods: Patients that underwent oncological sigmoid and rectal resections in the LUMC between 2016 and 2020 were included. Preoperative CE-CT scans, were analyzed using Vitrea software to measure total abdominal muscle area (TAMA) and total psoas area (TPA). Muscle areas were standardized using patient's height into: psoas muscle index (PMI) and skeletal muscle index (SMI) (cm(2)/m(2)). Results: In total 46 patients were included, of which 13 (8.9%) suffered from anastomotic leakage. Patients with anastomotic leakage had a significantly lower PMI (22.1 vs. 25.1, p < 0.01) and SMI (41.8 vs. 46.6, p < 0.01). After adjusting for confounders (age and comorbidity), lower PMI (odds ratio [OR]: 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-0.99, p = 0.03) and SMI (OR: 0.93, 95%CI 0.86-0.99, p = 0.02) were both associated with anastomotic leakage. Conclusion: This study showed that lower PMI and SMI were associated with anastomotic leakage. These results indicate that preoperative CT-based muscle measurements can be used as prognostic factor for risk stratification for anastomotic leakage. Show less
This study focuses on the impact of complications after rectal cancer surgery on the short-and long-term Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL). The results show that. short-term HRQoL was affected... Show moreThis study focuses on the impact of complications after rectal cancer surgery on the short-and long-term Health-related Quality of Life (HRQoL). The results show that. short-term HRQoL was affected by complications. Twelve months postoperative HRQoL had returned to the preoperative level regardless of complications. In patients that survived 14-years, there was no effect of complications on HRQoL detected.Background: Survival for rectal cancer patients has improved over the past decades. In parallel, long-term health -related quality of life (HRQoL) is gaining interest. This study focuses on the effect of complications following rectal cancer surgery on HRQoL and survival. Methods: The TME-trial (1996-1999) randomized patients with operable rectal cancer between surgery with preoperative short-course radiotherapy and surgery. Questionnaires including the Rotter-dam Symptom Checklist were sent at 6 time points within the first 24 months and after 14 years the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-CR29 questionnaires. Differences in HRQoL and survival between patients with and without compli-cations were analyzed. Results: A total of 1207 patients were included, of which 482 (39.9%) patients experienced complications, surgical complications occurred in 177 (14.6%) patients, non-surgical complications in 197 (16.3%) and 108 patients (8.9%) had a combination of both types of complications. Three months after surgery, patients with a combination of surgical-and non-surgical complications, especially patients with anastomotic leakage, had the worst HRQoL. Twelve months postoperative HRQoL returned to a similar level as before surgery, regardless of complications. In patients who survived 14 years, no significant differences in HRQoL were seen between patients with and without complications. However, patients with complications did have lower overall survival. Conclusion: This study shows that survival and short-term HRQoL are negatively affected by complications. Twelve months after surgery HRQoL had returned to the preoperative level regardless, of complications. Also, in patients that survived 14 years, there was no effect of complications on HRQoL detected. Show less
Background Surgical resection is the mainstay of curative treatment for rectal cancer. Post-operative complications, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), and the presence of a stoma may... Show moreBackground Surgical resection is the mainstay of curative treatment for rectal cancer. Post-operative complications, low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), and the presence of a stoma may influence the quality of life after surgery. This study aimed to gain more insights into the long-term trade-off between stoma and anastomosis. Methods All patients who underwent sphincter-sparing surgical resection for rectal cancer in the Leiden University Medical Center and the Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis between January 2012 and January 2016 were included. Patients received the following questionnaires: EORTC-QLQ-CR29, EORTC-QLQ-C30, EQ-5D-5L, and the LARS score. A comparison was made between patients with a stoma and without a stoma after follow-up. Results Some 210 patients were included of which 149 returned the questionnaires (70.9%), after a mean follow-up of 3.69 years. Overall quality of life was not significantly different in patients with and without stoma after follow-up using the EORTC-QLQ-C30 (p = 0.15) or EQ-5D-5L (p = 0.28). However, after multivariate analysis, a significant difference was found for the presence of a stoma on global health status (p = 0.01) and physical functioning (p < 0.01). Additionally, there was no difference detected in the quality of life between patients with major LARS or a stoma. Conclusion This study shows that after correction for possible confounders, a stoma is associated with lower global health status and physical functioning. However, no differences were found in health-related quality of life between patients with major LARS and patients with a stoma. This suggests that the choice between stoma and anastomosis is mainly preferential and that shared decision-making is required. Show less
Background and Objectives: With the current advanced data-driven approach to health care, machine learning is gaining more interest. The current study investigates the added value of machine... Show moreBackground and Objectives: With the current advanced data-driven approach to health care, machine learning is gaining more interest. The current study investigates the added value of machine learning to linear regression in predicting anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications after upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery. Methods: All patients in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit undergoing curatively intended esophageal or gastric cancer surgeries from 2011 to 2017 were included. Anastomotic leakage was defined as any clinically or radiologically proven anastomotic leakage. Pulmonary complications entailed: pneumonia, pleural effusion, respiratory failure, pneumothorax, and/or acute respiratory distress syndrome. Different machine learning models were tested. Nomograms were constructed using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator. Results: Between 2011 and 2017, 4228 patients underwent surgical resection for esophageal cancer, of which 18% developed anastomotic leakage and 30% a pulmonary complication. Of the 2199 patients with surgical resection for gastric cancer, 7% developed anastomotic leakage and 15% a pulmonary complication. In all cases, linear regression had the highest predictive value with the area under the curves varying between 61.9 and 68.0, but the difference with machine learning models did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: Machine learning models can predict postoperative complications in upper gastrointestinal cancer surgery, but they do not outperform the current gold standard, linear regression Show less
OBJECTIVES: Persistent air leak (PAL; >5days after surgery) is the most common complication after pulmonary resection and associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased morbidity.... Show moreOBJECTIVES: Persistent air leak (PAL; >5days after surgery) is the most common complication after pulmonary resection and associated with prolonged hospital stay and increased morbidity. Literature is contradictory about the prevention and treatment of PAL. Variation is therefore hypothesized. The aim of this study is to understand the variation in the incidence, preventive management and treatment of PAL.METHODS: Data from the Dutch Lung Cancer Audit for Surgery were combined with results of an online survey among Dutch thoracic surgeons. The national incidence of PAL and case-mix corrected between-hospital variation were calculated in patients who underwent an oncological (bi)lobectomy or segmentectomy between January 2012 and December 2018. By multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with PAL were assessed. A survey was designed to assess variation in (preventive) management and analysed using descriptive statistics. Hospital-level associations between management strategies and PAL were assessed by univariable linear regression.RESULTS: Of 12382 included patients, 9.0% had PAL, with a between-hospital range of 2.6-19.3%. Factors associated with PAL were male sex, poor lung function, low body mass index, high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, pulmonary comorbidity, upper lobe resection, (bi)lobectomy (vs segmentectomy), right-sided tumour and robotic-assisted thoracic surgery. Perioperative (preventive) management of PAL differed widely between hospitals. When using water seal compared to suction drainage, the average incidence of PAL decreased 2.9%.CONCLUSIONS: In the Netherlands, incidence and perioperative (preventive) management of PAL vary widely. Using water seal instead of suction drainage and increasing awareness are potential measures to reduce this variation. Show less
Patients undergoing complex gastrointestinal surgery are at high risk of major postoperative complications (e.g., anastomotic leakage, sepsis), classified as Clavien-Dindo (CD) >= IIIa.... Show morePatients undergoing complex gastrointestinal surgery are at high risk of major postoperative complications (e.g., anastomotic leakage, sepsis), classified as Clavien-Dindo (CD) >= IIIa. Identification of preoperative risk factors can lead to the identification of high-risk patients. These risk factors can also be used to design personalized perioperative care. This systematic review focuses on the identification of these factors. The Medline and Embase databases were searched for prospective, retrospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of risk factors on the occurrence of major postoperative complications and/or mortality after complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery. Risk of bias was assessed using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. The level of evidence was graded based on the number of studies reporting a significant association between risk factors and major complications. A total of 207 eligible studies were retrieved, identifying 33 risk factors for major postoperative complications and 13 preoperative laboratory results associated with postoperative complications. The present systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of preoperative risk factors associated with major postoperative complications. A wide range of risk factors are amenable to actions in perioperative care and prehabilitation programs, which may lead to improved outcomes for high-risk patients. Additionally, the knowledge of this study is important for benchmarking surgical outcomes. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
Objective The aim of this study is to identify preoperative patient-related prognostic factors for anastomotic leakage, mortality, and major complications in patients undergoing oncological... Show moreObjective The aim of this study is to identify preoperative patient-related prognostic factors for anastomotic leakage, mortality, and major complications in patients undergoing oncological esophagectomy. Background Esophagectomy is a high-risk procedure with an incidence of major complications around 25% and short-term mortality around 4%. Methods We systematically searched the Medline and Embase databases for studies investigating the associations between patient-related prognostic factors and anastomotic leakage, major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo >= IIIa), and/or 30-day/in-hospital mortality after esophagectomy for cancer. Results Thirty-nine eligible studies identifying 37 prognostic factors were included. Cardiac comorbidity was associated with anastomotic leakage, major complications, and mortality. Male sex and diabetes were prognostic factors for anastomotic leakage and major complications. Additionally, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score > III and renal disease were associated with anastomotic leakage and mortality. Pulmonary comorbidity, vascular comorbidity, hypertension, and adenocarcinoma tumor histology were identified as prognostic factors for anastomotic leakage. Age > 70 years, habitual alcohol usage, and body mass index (BMI) 18.5-25 kg/m(2) were associated with increased risk for mortality. Conclusions Various patient-related prognostic factors are associated with anastomotic leakage, major postoperative complications, and postoperative mortality following oncological esophagectomy. This knowledge may define case-mix adjustment models used in benchmarking or auditing and may assist in selection of patients eligible for surgery or tailored perioperative care. Show less
Bosch, T. van den; Warps, A.L.K.; Babberich, M.P.M.D.T.; Stamm, C.; Geerts, B.F.; Vermeulen, L.; ... ; Dutch ColoRectal Audit 2021
Question Can big-data analysis of clinical audits help to find new risk factors and predict adverse events associated with colorectal cancer surgery? Findings This cohort study found that machine... Show moreQuestion Can big-data analysis of clinical audits help to find new risk factors and predict adverse events associated with colorectal cancer surgery? Findings This cohort study found that machine learning applied to a clinical audit containing 62 501 records and 103 preoperative variables of surgically treated patients with colorectal cancer outperformed conventional scores in predicting 30-day postoperative mortality but with similar performance as a preexisting case-mix model. New risk factors for several other adverse events may be identified. Meaning This study suggests that machine learning methods may be of additional value in analyzing quality indicators in colorectal cancer surgery, thereby providing directions to optimize case-mix corrections for benchmarking in clinical auditing.Importance Quality improvement programs for colorectal cancer surgery have been introduced with benchmarking based on quality indicators, such as mortality. Detailed (pre)operative characteristics may offer relevant information for proper case-mix correction. Objective To investigate the added value of machine learning to predict quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery and identify previously unrecognized predictors of 30-day mortality based on a large, nationwide colorectal cancer registry that collected extensive data on comorbidities. Design, Setting, and Participants All patients who underwent resection for primary colorectal cancer registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2016, were included. Multiple machine learning models (multivariable logistic regression, elastic net regression, support vector machine, random forest, and gradient boosting) were made to predict quality indicators. Model performance was compared with conventionally used scores. Risk factors were identified by logistic regression analyses and Shapley additive explanations (ie, SHAP values). Statistical analysis was performed between March 1 and September 30, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome of this cohort study was 30-day mortality. Prediction models were trained on a training set by performing 5-fold cross-validation, and outcomes were measured by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve on the test set. Machine learning was further used to identify risk factors, measured by odds ratios and SHAP values. Results This cohort study included 62 501 records, most patients were male (35 116 [56.2%]), were aged 61 to 80 years (41 560 [66.5%]), and had an American Society of Anesthesiology score of II (35 679 [57.1%]). A 30-day mortality rate of 2.7% (n = 1693) was found. The area under the curve of the best machine learning model for 30-day mortality (0.82; 95% CI, 0.79-0.85) was significantly higher than the American Society of Anesthesiology score (0.74; 95% CI, 0.71-0.77; P < .001), Charlson Comorbidity Index (0.66; 95% CI, 0.63-0.70; P < .001), and preoperative score to predict postoperative mortality (0.73; 95% CI, 0.70-0.77; P < .001). Hypertension, myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and asthma were comorbidities with a high risk for increased mortality. Machine learning identified specific risk factors for a complicated course, intensive care unit admission, prolonged hospital stay, and readmission. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with a decreased risk for all adverse outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance This study found that machine learning methods outperformed conventional scores to predict 30-day mortality after colorectal cancer surgery, identified specific patient groups at risk for adverse outcomes, and provided directions to optimize benchmarking in clinical audits.This cohort study investigates the ability of machine learning to predict quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery and identify previously unrecognized predictors of 30-day mortality based on a large nationwide colorectal cancer registry that collected extensive data on comorbidities. Show less
Purpose Interhospital referral is a consequence of centralization of complex oncological care but might negatively impact waiting time, a quality indicator in the Netherlands. This study aims to... Show morePurpose Interhospital referral is a consequence of centralization of complex oncological care but might negatively impact waiting time, a quality indicator in the Netherlands. This study aims to evaluate characteristics and waiting times of patients with primary colorectal cancer who are referred between hospitals. Methods Data were extracted from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (2015-2019). Waiting time between first tumor-positive biopsy until first treatment was compared between subgroups stratified for referral status, disease stage, and type of hospital. Results In total, 46,561 patients were included. Patients treated for colon or rectal cancer in secondary care hospitals were referred in 12.2% and 14.7%, respectively. In tertiary care hospitals, corresponding referral rates were 43.8% and 66.4%. Referred patients in tertiary care hospitals were younger, but had a more advanced disease stage, and underwent more often multivisceral resection and simultaneous metastasectomy than non-referred patients in secondary care hospitals (p<0.001). Referred patients were more often treated within national quality standards for waiting time compared to non-referred patients (p<0.001). For referred patients, longer waiting times prior to MDT were observed compared to non-referred patients within each hospital type, although most time was spent post-MDT. Conclusion A large proportion of colorectal cancer patients that are treated in tertiary care hospitals are referred from another hospital but mostly treated within standards for waiting time. These patients are younger but often have a more advanced disease. This suggests that these patients are willing to travel more but also reflects successful centralization of complex oncological patients in the Netherlands. Show less
BACKGROUND: Accurate diagnosis and staging are crucial to ensure uniform allocation to the optimal treatment methods for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, but may differ among... Show moreBACKGROUND: Accurate diagnosis and staging are crucial to ensure uniform allocation to the optimal treatment methods for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, but may differ among multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTs). Discordance between clinical and pathologic TNM stage is particularly important for patients with locally advanced NSCLC (stage IIIA) because it may influence their chance of allocation to curative-intent treatment. We therefore aimed to study agreement on staging and treatment to gain insight into MDT decision-making.RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the level of agreement on clinical staging and treatment recommendations among MDTs in stage IIIA NSCLC patients?STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Eleven MDTs each evaluated the same 10 pathologic stage IIIA NSCLC patients in their weekly meeting (n = 110). Patients were selected purposively for their challenging nature. All MDTs received exactly the same clinical information and images per patient. We tested agreement in cT stage, cN stage, cM stage (TNM 8th edition), and treatment proposal among MDTs using Randolph's free-marginal multirater kappa.RESULTS: Considerable variation among the MDTs was seen in T staging (K, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.34-0.75]), N staging (K, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.35-0.83]), overall TNM staging (K, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.35-0.72]), and treatment recommendations (K, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.32-0.56]). Most variation in T stage was seen in patients with suspicion of invasion of surrounding structures, which influenced such treatment recommendations as induction therapy and type. For N stage, distinction between Ni and N2 disease was an important source of discordance among MDTs. Variation occurred between 2 patients even regarding M stage. A wide range of additional diagnostics was proposed by the MDTs.INTERPRETATION: This study demonstrated high variation in staging and treatment of patients with stage IIIA NSCLC among MDTs in different hospitals. Although some variation may be unavoidable in these challenging patients, we should strive for more uniformity. Show less
Groningen, J.T. van; Ceyisakar, I.E.; Gietelink, L.; Henneman, D.; Harst, E. van der; Westerterp, M.; ... ; Dutch Surg Colorectal Audit Grp 2020
Background: Comparing outcomes across hospitals to learn from best performing hospitals can be valuable. However, reliably identifying best performance is challenging. This study assesses the... Show moreBackground: Comparing outcomes across hospitals to learn from best performing hospitals can be valuable. However, reliably identifying best performance is challenging. This study assesses the possibility to distinguish best performing hospitals on single outcomes and consistency of performance on different outcomes.Methods: Data were derived from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit 2013-2015. Outcomes considered were textbook outcome (colon), (circumferential) resection margins, (serious) complications, mortality, and 'failure to rescue'. To include uncertainty in rankings, random effect logistic regression models were used to calculate expected ranks (ERs), for each hospital and outcome. Rankability was calculated for each outcome, as a measure of reliability of ranking. Furthermore, correlation between ERs on different outcomes was assessed. Correlation was considered weak <0.40, moderate between 0.40 - 0.59 and strong >0.60.Results: The study included 32 143 patients; of whom 11 373 were treated in 2015 across 84 hospitals, 8181 colon and 3192 rectal cancer patients. In this one-year period 'Postoperative complications' had the highest rankability for colon (57%) and rectal (41%) surgery. No (group of) hospital(s) had the highest ER(s) on all outcomes. Correlation between ERs of outcomes was moderate in 2 (of 25) and strong in 4 (of 25) combinations. Rankability of colorectal mortality increased from 14% in 2015 to 35% when data over 2013-2015 were used.Conclusion: The highest reliability of identifying best performance based on an outcome was 57%. However, the balance between reliability and relevance of outcomes is vulnerable. No (group of) hospital(s) could be identified as best performer on all outcomes. Performance was not consistent on outcomes. (C) 2020 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Show less
