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
Objectives/Hypothesis To further improve the quality of head and neck cancer (HNC) care, we developed a composite measure defined as "textbook outcome" (TO). Methods We analyzed a retrospective... Show moreObjectives/Hypothesis To further improve the quality of head and neck cancer (HNC) care, we developed a composite measure defined as "textbook outcome" (TO). Methods We analyzed a retrospective cohort of patients after curvative-intent primary surgery, radiotherapy (RT), or chemoradiation (CRT) for HNC between 2015 and 2018 at the Netherlands Cancer Institute. TO was defined as 1) the start of treatment within 30 days, 2a) satisfactory pathologic outcomes, without 30-day postoperative complications, for the surgically treated group, and 2b), for RT and CRT patients, no unexpected or prolonged hospitalization and toxicity after the completion of treatment as planned. Results In total, 392 patients with HNC were included. An overall TO was achieved in 9.6% of patients after surgery, 20.6% after RT, and 2.2% after CRT. Two indicators (margins >5 mm and start treatment <30 days) reduced TO radically for both groups. Conclusion TO can aid the evaluation of the quality of care for HNC patients and guide improvement processes. Level of Evidence 3 Laryngoscope, 2021 Show less
Bousema, J.E.; Hoeijmakers, F.; Dijkgraaf, M.G.W.; Annema, J.T.; Broek, F.J.C. van den; Akker-van Marle, M.E. van den; MEDIASTrial Study Grp 2021
Background: Variability in practice and ongoing debate on optimal invasive mediastinal staging of patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are widely described in the literature.... Show moreBackground: Variability in practice and ongoing debate on optimal invasive mediastinal staging of patients with resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are widely described in the literature. Patients' preferences on this topic have, however, been underexposed so far. Methods: An internet-based questionnaire was distributed among MEDIASTrial partici-pants (NTR6528, randomization of patients to mediastinoscopy or not in the case of negative endosonography). Literature, expert opinion and patient interviews resulted in five attributes: the risk of a futile lung resection (oncologically futile in case of unforeseen N2 disease), the length of the staging period, resection of the primary tumor, complications of staging procedures and the mediastinoscopy scar. The relative importance (RI) of each attribute was assessed by using adaptive conjoint analysis and hierarchical Bayes estimation. treatment trade-off was used to examine the acceptable proportion of avoided futile lung resections to cover the burden of confirmatory mediastinoscopy. Results: Ninety-seven patients completed the questionnaire (57%). The length of the staging period was significantly the most important attribute (RI 26.24; 95% CI: 25.05-27.43), followed by the risk of a futile surgical lung resection (RI 23.44; 95% CI: 22.28-24.60) and resection of the primary tumor (RI 22.21; 95% CI: 21.09-23.33). Avoidance of 7% (IQR 1- >14%) futile lung resections would cover the burden of confirmatory mediastinoscopy, with a dichotomy among patients always (39%) or never (38%) willing to undergo confirmatory mediastinoscopy after N2 and N3-negative endosonography. Conclusion: Although a strong dichotomy among patients always or never willing to undergo confirmatory mediastinoscopy was found, the length of the staging period was the most important attribute in invasive mediastinal staging according to patients with resectable NSCLC. Trial Not 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
OBJECTIVES: Good perioperative care is aimed at rapid recovery, without complications or readmissions. Length of stay (LOS) is influenced not only by perioperative care routines but also by patient... Show moreOBJECTIVES: Good perioperative care is aimed at rapid recovery, without complications or readmissions. Length of stay (LOS) is influenced not only by perioperative care routines but also by patient factors, tumour factors, treatment characteristics and complications. The present study examines variation in LOS between hospitals after minimally invasive lung resections for both complicated and uncomplicated patients to assess whether LOS is a hospital characteristic influenced by local perioperative routines or other factors.METHODS: Dutch Lung Cancer Audit (surgery) data were used. Median LOS was calculated on hospital level, stratified by the severity of complications. Lowest quartile (short) LOS per hospital, corrected for case-mix factors by multivariable logistic regression, was presented in funnel plots. We correlated short LOS in complicated versus uncomplicated patients to assess whether short LOS clustered in the same hospitals regardless of complications.RESULTS: Data from 6055 patients in 42 hospitals were included. Median LOS in uncomplicated patients varied from 3 to 8 days between hospitals and increased most markedly for patients with major complications. Considerable between-hospital variation persisted after case-mix correction, but more in uncomplicated than complicated patients. Short LOS in uncomplicated and complicated patients were significantly correlated (r = 0.53, P < 0.001). CCONCLUSIONS: LOS after minimally invasive anatomical lung resections varied between hospitals particularly in uncomplicated patients. The significant correlation between short LOS in uncomplicated and complicated patients suggests that LOS is a hospital characteristic potentially influenced by local processes. Standardizing and optimizing perioperative care could help limit practice variation with improved LOS and complication rates. Show less
ObjectivesOrganization and governance of national healthcare might play an important role in decision-making and outcomes in patients with lung cancer. Both Denmark and the Netherlands have a high... Show moreObjectivesOrganization and governance of national healthcare might play an important role in decision-making and outcomes in patients with lung cancer. Both Denmark and the Netherlands have a high level of healthcare but a different financial coverage, governance and level of centralization. By using both national databases we analyzed the consequences of these differences on patterns of care and outcomes with a focus on morbidity, mortality and clinical staging.Materials and methodsGeneral numbers on both healthcare systems were requested. All patients who had surgery for lung cancer from 2013 to 2016 were included. Mortality, morbidity and clinical staging were analyzed for patients with NSCLC without metastases, only one operation and no neo-adjuvant therapy.ResultsIn 2016 annual budget as share of gross national product was 10.4% for both countries. In Denmark 4 hospitals performed lung surgery in 2016, compared to 43 hospitals in the Netherlands. We included 4030 Danish and 8286 Dutch patients. In the subgroup 30-day mortality was 1.5% in Denmark compared to 1.9% in the Netherlands. The percentage of patients with a complicated course was 24.4% and 34.8% respectively (p < 0.05). Accuracy between cTNM and pTNM was 53.0% in Denmark and 52.9% in the Netherlands.ConclusionSurgery for lung cancer is at a high level in both countries, reflected by low mortality-rates. Centralization has been implemented successfully in Denmark, which might explain the lower rate of patients with a complicated post-operative course, although different definitions preclude firm conclusions. In both countries correct clinical staging of lung cancer remains a challenge. Show less
