Background Laparoscopic gastrectomy could reduce pain and opioid consumption, compared to open gastrectomy. However, it is difficult to judge the clinical relevance of this reduction, since these... Show moreBackground Laparoscopic gastrectomy could reduce pain and opioid consumption, compared to open gastrectomy. However, it is difficult to judge the clinical relevance of this reduction, since these outcomes are reported in few randomized trials and in limited detail.Methods This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial compared laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0). Postoperative pain was analyzed by opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME, mg/day) at postoperative day (POD) 1-5, WHO analgesic steps, and Numeric Rating Scales (NRS, 0-10) at POD 1-10 and discharge. Regression and mixed model analyses were performed, with and without correction for epidural analgesia.Results Between 2015 and 2018, 115 patients in the laparoscopic group and 110 in the open group underwent surgery. Some 16 patients (14%) in the laparoscopic group and 73 patients (66%) in the open group received epidural analgesia. At POD 1-3, mean opioid consumption was 131, 118, and 53 mg OME lower in the laparoscopic group, compared to the open group, respectively (all p < 0.001). After correcting for epidural analgesia, these differences remained significant at POD 1-2 (47 mg OME, p = 0.002 and 69 mg OME, p < 0.001, respectively). At discharge, 27% of patients in the laparoscopic group and 43% patients in the open group used oral opioids (p = 0.006). Mean highest daily pain scores were between 2 and 4 at all PODs, < 2 at discharge, and did not relevantly differ between treatment arms.Conclusion In this multicenter randomized trial, postoperative pain was comparable between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. After laparoscopic gastrectomy, this was generally achieved without epidural analgesia and with fewer opioids. Show less
Veen, A. van der; Meulen, M.P. van der; Seesing, M.F.J.; Brenkman, H.J.F.; Haverkamp, L.; Luyer, M.D.P.; ... ; Laparoscopic Vs Open Gastrectomy G 2022
IMPORTANCE Laparoscopic gastrectomy is rapidly being adopted worldwide as an alternative to open gastrectomy to treat gastric cancer. However, laparoscopic gastrectomy might be more expensive as a... Show moreIMPORTANCE Laparoscopic gastrectomy is rapidly being adopted worldwide as an alternative to open gastrectomy to treat gastric cancer. However, laparoscopic gastrectomy might be more expensive as a result of longer operating times and more expensive surgical materials. To date, the cost-effectiveness of both procedures has not been prospectively evaluated in a randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic compared with open gastrectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this multicenter randomized clinical trial of patients undergoing total or distal gastrectomy in 10 Dutch tertiary referral centers, cost-effectiveness data were collected alongside a multicenter randomized clinical trial on laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0). A modified societal perspective and 1-year time horizon were used. Costs were calculated on the individual patient level by using hospital registry data and medical consumption and productivity loss questionnaires. The unit costs of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy were calculated bottom-up. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated with the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire, in which a value of 0 indicates death and 1 indicates perfect health. Missing questionnaire data were imputed with multiple imputation. Bootstrapping was performed to estimate the uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness. The study was conducted from March 17, 2015, to August 20, 2018. Data analyses were performed between September 1, 2020, and November 17, 2021. INTERVENTIONS Laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Evaluations in this cost-effectiveness analysis included total costs and QALYs. RESULTS Between 2015 and 2018, 227 patients were included. Mean (SD) age was 67.5 (11.7) years, and 140 were male (61.7%). Unit costs for initial surgery were calculated to be euro8124 (US $8087) for laparoscopic total gastrectomy, euro7353 (US $7320) for laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, euro6584 (US $6554) for open total gastrectomy, and euro5893 (US $5866) for open distal gastrectomy. Mean total costs after 1-year follow-up were euro26 084 (US $25 965) in the laparoscopic group and euro25 332 (US $25 216) in the open group (difference, euro752 [US $749; 3.0%]). Mean (SD) QALY contributions during 1 year were 0.665 (0.298) in the laparoscopic group and 0.686 (0.288) in the open group (difference, -0.021). Bootstrapping showed that these differences between treatment groups were relatively small compared with the uncertainty of the analysis. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Although the laparoscopic gastrectomy itself was more expensive, after 1-year follow-up, results suggest that differences in both total costs and effectiveness were limited between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. These results support centers' choosing, based on their own preference, whether to (de)implement laparoscopic gastrectomy as an alternative to open gastrectomy. Show less
Background: Centralization of surgery has been shown to improve outcomes for oesophageal and pancreatic cancer, and has been implemented for gastric cancer since 2012 in theNetherlands. This study... Show moreBackground: Centralization of surgery has been shown to improve outcomes for oesophageal and pancreatic cancer, and has been implemented for gastric cancer since 2012 in theNetherlands. This study evaluated the impact of centralizing gastric cancer surgery on outcomes for all patients with gastric cancer.Methods: Patients diagnosed with non-cardia gastric adenocarcinoma in the intervals 2009-2011 and 2013-2015 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Clinicopathological data, treatment characteristics and mortality were assessed for the periods before (2009-2011) and after (2013-2015) centralization. Cox regression analyses were used to assess differences in overall survival between these intervals.Results: A total of 7204 patients were included. Resection rates increased slightly from 37.6 per cent before to 39.6 per cent after centralization (P= 0.023). Before centralization, 50.1 per cent of surgically treated patients underwent gastrectomy in hospitals that performed fewer than ten procedures annually, compared with 9.2 per cent after centralization. Patients who had gastrectomy in the second interval were younger and more often underwent total gastrectomy (29.3 per cent before versus 41.2 per cent after centralization). Thirty-day postoperative mortality rates dropped from 6.5 to 4.1 per cent (P= 0.004), and 90-day mortality rates decreased from 10.6 to 7.2 per cent (P= 0.002). Two-year overall survival rates increased from 55.4 to 58.5 per cent among patients who had gastrectomy (P= 0.031) and from 27.1 to 29.6 per cent for all patients (P= 0.003). Improvements remained after adjustment for case mix; however, adjustment for hospital volume attenuated this association for surgically treated patients.Conclusion: Centralization of gastric cancer surgery was associated with reduced postoperative mortality and improved survival. Show less
Brenkman, H.J.F.; Gertsen, E.C.; Vegt, E.; Hillegersberg, R. van; Henegouwen, M.I.V.B.; Gisbertz, S.S.; ... ; PLASTIC Study Grp 2018
Background: Initial staging of gastric cancer consists of computed tomography (CT) and gastroscopy. In locally advanced (cT3-4) gastric cancer, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with... Show moreBackground: Initial staging of gastric cancer consists of computed tomography (CT) and gastroscopy. In locally advanced (cT3-4) gastric cancer, fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with CT (FDG-PET/CT or PET) and staging laparoscopy (SL) may have a role in staging, but evidence is scarce. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact and cost-effectiveness of PET and SL in addition to initial staging in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.Methods: This prospective observational cohort study will include all patients with a surgically resectable, advanced gastric adenocarcinoma (cT3-4b, N0-3, M0), that are scheduled for treatment with curative intent after initial staging with gastroscopy and CT. The modalities to be investigated in this study is the addition of PET and SL. The primary outcome of this study is the proportion of patients in whom the PET or SL lead to a change in treatment strategy. Secondary outcome parameters are: diagnostic performance, morbidity and mortality, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness of these additional diagnostic modalities. The study recently started in August 2017 with a duration of 36 months. At least 239 patients need to be included in this study to demonstrate that the diagnostic modalities are break-even. Based on the annual number of gastrectomies in the participating centers, it is estimated that approximately 543 patients are included in this study.Discussion: In this study, it is hypothesized that performing PET and SL for locally advanced gastric adenocarcinomas results in a change of treatment strategy in 27% of patients and an annual cost-reduction in the Netherlands of (sic)916.438 in this patient group by reducing futile treatment. The results of this study may be applicable to all countries with comparable treatment algorithms and health care systems. Show less
