Background: Venous resection of the superior mesenteric or portal vein is increasingly performed in pancreatic cancer surgery, whereas results of studies on short- and long-term outcomes are... Show moreBackground: Venous resection of the superior mesenteric or portal vein is increasingly performed in pancreatic cancer surgery, whereas results of studies on short- and long-term outcomes are contradictory. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the type of venous resection in pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer on postoperative morbidity and overall survival.Methods: This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in 18 centres (2013-2017).Results: A total of 1311 patients were included, of whom 17 per cent underwent wedge resection and 10 per cent segmental resection. Patients with segmental resection had higher rates of major morbidity (39 versus 20 versus 23 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and portal or superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (18 versus 5 versus 1 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and worse overall survival (median 12 versus 16 versus 20months, respectively; P < 0.001), compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection. Multivariable analysis showed patients with segmental resection, but not those who had wedge resection, had higher rates of major morbidity (odds ratio = 1.93, 95 per cent c.i. 1.20 to 3.11) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.40, 95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 1.78), compared to patients without venous resection. Among patients who received neoadjuvant therapy, there was no difference in overall survival among patients with segmental and wedge resection and those without venous resection (median 32 versus 25 versus 33months, respectively; P = 0.470), although there was a difference in majormorbidity rates (52 versus 19 versus 21 per cent, respectively; P = 0.012).Conclusion: In pancreatic surgery, the short- and long-term outcomes are worse in patients with venous segmental resection, compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection. Show less
Background: Young-onset rectal cancer, in patients less than 50 years, is expected to increase in the coming years. A watch-and-wait strategy is nowadays increasingly practised in patients with a... Show moreBackground: Young-onset rectal cancer, in patients less than 50 years, is expected to increase in the coming years. A watch-and-wait strategy is nowadays increasingly practised in patients with a clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant treatment. Nevertheless, there may be reluctance to offer organ preservation treatment to young patients owing to a potentially higher oncological risk. This study compared patients aged less than 50 years with those aged 50 years or more to identify possible differences in oncological outcomes of watch and wait.Methods: The study analysed data from patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant therapy in whom surgery was omitted, registered in the retrospective-prospective, multicentre International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD).Results: In the IWWD, 1552 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 199 (12.8 per cent) were aged less than 50 years. Patients younger than 50 years had a higher T category of disease at diagnosis (P = 0.011). The disease-specific survival rate at 3 years was 98 (95 per cent c.i. 93 to 99) per cent in this group, compared with 97 (95 to 98) per cent in patients aged over 50 years (hazard ratio (HR) 1.67, 95 per cent c.i. 0.76 to 3.64; P = 0.199). The cumulative probability of local regrowth at 3 years was 24 (95 per cent c.i. 18 to 31) per cent in patients less than 50 years and 26 (23 to 29) per cent among those aged 50 years or more (HR 1.09, 0.79 to 1.49; P = 0.603). Both groups had a cumulative probability of distant metastases of 10 per cent at 3 years (HR 1.00, 0.62 to 1.62; P = 0.998).Conclusion: There is no additional oncological risk in young patients compared with their older counterparts when following a watch-and-wait strategy after a cCR. In light of a shared decision-making process, watch and wait should be also be discussed with young patients who have a cCR after neoadjuvant treatment. Show less
Background Young-onset rectal cancer, in patients less than 50 years, is expected to increase in the coming years. A watch-and-wait strategy is nowadays increasingly practised in patients with a... Show moreBackground Young-onset rectal cancer, in patients less than 50 years, is expected to increase in the coming years. A watch-and-wait strategy is nowadays increasingly practised in patients with a clinical complete response (cCR) after neoadjuvant treatment. Nevertheless, there may be reluctance to offer organ preservation treatment to young patients owing to a potentially higher oncological risk. This study compared patients aged less than 50 years with those aged 50 years or more to identify possible differences in oncological outcomes of watch and wait. Methods The study analysed data from patients with a cCR after neoadjuvant therapy in whom surgery was omitted, registered in the retrospective-prospective, multicentre International Watch & Wait Database (IWWD). Results In the IWWD, 1552 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 199 (12.8 per cent) were aged less than 50 years. Patients younger than 50 years had a higher T category of disease at diagnosis (P = 0.011). The disease-specific survival rate at 3 years was 98 (95 per cent c.i. 93 to 99) per cent in this group, compared with 97 (95 to 98) per cent in patients aged over 50 years (hazard ratio (HR) 1.67, 95 per cent c.i. 0.76 to 3.64; P = 0.199). The cumulative probability of local regrowth at 3 years was 24 (95 per cent c.i. 18 to 31) per cent in patients less than 50 years and 26 (23 to 29) per cent among those aged 50 years or more (HR 1.09, 0.79 to 1.49; P = 0.603). Both groups had a cumulative probability of distant metastases of 10 per cent at 3 years (HR 1.00, 0.62 to 1.62; P = 0.998). Conclusion There is no additional oncological risk in young patients compared with their older counterparts when following a watch-and-wait strategy after a cCR. In light of a shared decision-making process, watch and wait should be also be discussed with young patients who have a cCR after neoadjuvant treatment.Data from the International Watch and Wait Database have been analysed. There is no additional oncological risk in patients younger than 50 years compared with their older counterparts when following watch and wait after the achievement of a clinical complete response following neoadjuvant treatment for rectal cancer. Show less
Background Venous resection of the superior mesenteric or portal vein is increasingly performed in pancreatic cancer surgery, whereas results of studies on short- and long-term outcomes are... Show moreBackground Venous resection of the superior mesenteric or portal vein is increasingly performed in pancreatic cancer surgery, whereas results of studies on short- and long-term outcomes are contradictory. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the type of venous resection in pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer on postoperative morbidity and overall survival. Methods This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer in 18 centres (2013-2017). Results A total of 1311 patients were included, of whom 17 per cent underwent wedge resection and 10 per cent segmental resection. Patients with segmental resection had higher rates of major morbidity (39 versus 20 versus 23 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and portal or superior mesenteric vein thrombosis (18 versus 5 versus 1 per cent, respectively; P < 0.001) and worse overall survival (median 12 versus 16 versus 20 months, respectively; P < 0.001), compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection. Multivariable analysis showed patients with segmental resection, but not those who had wedge resection, had higher rates of major morbidity (odds ratio = 1.93, 95 per cent c.i. 1.20 to 3.11) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.40, 95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 1.78), compared to patients without venous resection. Among patients who received neoadjuvant therapy, there was no difference in overall survival among patients with segmental and wedge resection and those without venous resection (median 32 versus 25 versus 33 months, respectively; P = 0.470), although there was a difference in major morbidity rates (52 versus 19 versus 21 per cent, respectively; P = 0.012). Conclusion In pancreatic surgery, the short- and long-term outcomes are worse in patients with venous segmental resection, compared to patients with wedge resection and those without venous resection.Of 1311 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy, 17 per cent underwent venous wedge resection and 10 per cent underwent venous segmental resection. Venous segmental, but not venous wedge, resection was associated with higher major morbidity rates (odds ratio = 1.93, 95 per cent c.i. 1.20 to 3.11) and worse overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.40, 95 per cent c.i. 1.10 to 1.78), compared to no venous resection. This nationwide study found worse short- and long-term outcomes in patients who had venous segmental resection. The results of this study urge the need for improving outcomes in patients who require venous segmental resection. Show less
Background: Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a... Show moreBackground: Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a relaparotomy. The aim of this study was to compare completion pancreatectomy with a pancreas-preserving procedure in patients undergoing relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.Methods: This retrospective cohort study of nine institutions included patients who underwent relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy from 2005-2018. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines.Results: From 4877 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 786 (16 per cent) developed a pancreatic fistula grade B/C and 162 (3 per cent) underwent a relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula. Of these patients, 36 (22 per cent) underwent a completion pancreatectomy and 126 (78 per cent) a pancreas-preserving procedure. Mortality was higher after completion pancreatectomy (20 (56 per cent) versus 40 patients (32 per cent); P=0.009), which remained after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous reintervention, and organ failure in the 24h before relaparotomy (adjusted odds ratio 2.55, 95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 6.08). The proportion of additional reinterventions was not different between groups (23 (64 per cent) versus 84 patients (67 per cent); P=0.756). The meta-analysis including 33 studies evaluating 745 patients, confirmed the association between completion pancreatectomy and mortality (Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model: odds ratio 1.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 3.84).Conclusion: Based on the current data, a pancreas-preserving procedure seems preferable to completion pancreatectomy in patients in whom a relaparotomy is deemed necessary for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. Show less
Background: Based on excellent outcomes from high-volume centres, laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly being adopted into nationwide practice which typically includes low-medium volume... Show moreBackground: Based on excellent outcomes from high-volume centres, laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly being adopted into nationwide practice which typically includes low-medium volume centres. It is unknown how the use and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection compare between high-volume centres and low-medium volume centres. This study aimed to compare use and outcome of laparoscopic liver resection in three leading European high-volume centres and nationwide practice in the Netherlands.Method: An international, retrospective multicentre cohort study including data from three European high-volume centres (Oslo, Southampton and Milan) and all 20 centres in the Netherlands performing laparoscopic liver resection (low-medium volume practice) from January 2011 to December 2016. A high-volume centre is defined as a centre performing >50 laparoscopic liver resections per year. Patients were retrospectively stratified into low, moderate- and high-risk Southampton difficulty score groups.Results: A total of 2425 patients were included (1540 high-volume; 885 low-medium volume). The median annual proportion of laparoscopic liver resection was 42.9 per cent in high-volume centres and 7.2 per cent in low-medium volume centres. Patients in the high-volume centres had a lower conversion rate (7.4 versus 13.1 per cent; P<0.001) with less intraoperative incidents (9.3 versus 14.6 per cent; P=0.002) as compared to low-medium volume centres. Whereas postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were similar in the two groups, a lower reintervention rate (5.1 versus 7.2 per cent; P=0.034) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (3 versus 5 days; P<0.001) were observed in the high-volume centres as compared to the low-medium volume centres. In each Southampton difficulty score group, the conversion rate was lower and hospital stay shorter in high-volume centres. The rate of intraoperative incidents did not differ in the low-risk group, whilst in the moderate-risk and high-risk groups this rate was lower in high-volume centres (absolute difference 6.7 and 14.2 per cent; all P<0.004).Conclusion: High-volume expert centres had a sixfold higher use of laparoscopic liver resection, less conversions, and shorter hospital stay, as compared to a nationwide low-medium volume practice. Stratification into Southampton difficulty score risk groups identified some differences but largely outcomes appeared better for high-volume centres in each risk group. Show less
Background: There is no consensus regarding the impact of oncoplastic surgery (OPS) on rates of re-excision and conversion to mastectomy following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Here these two... Show moreBackground: There is no consensus regarding the impact of oncoplastic surgery (OPS) on rates of re-excision and conversion to mastectomy following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Here these two outcomes after BCS and OPS were compared in a nationwide population-based setting.Methods: In Denmark, all OPS is registered and categorized into volume displacement, volume reduction or volume replacement. Patients who underwent BCS or OPS between 2012 and 2018 were selected from the Danish Breast Cancer Group database. Multivariable analyses were performed to adjust for confounders, and propensity score matching to limit potential confounding by indication bias.Results: A total of 13 185 patients (72·5 per cent) underwent BCS and 5003 (27·5 per cent) OPS. Volume displacement was used in 4171 patients (83·4 per cent), volume reduction in 679 (13·6 per cent) and volume replacement in 153 (3·1 per cent). Re-excision rates were 15·6 and 14·1 per cent after BCS and OPS respectively. After adjusting for confounders, patients were less likely to have a re-excision following OPS than BCS (odds ratio (OR) 0·80, 95 per cent c.i. 0·72 to 0·88), specifically after volume displacement and reduction. The rate of conversion to mastectomy was similar after OPS and BCS (3·2 versus 3·7 per cent; P = 0·105), but with a lower risk in adjusted analysis (OR 0·69, 0·58 to 0·84), specifically after volume displacement and reduction procedures. Findings were similar after propensity score matching.Conclusion: A modest decrease in re-excision rate and less frequent conversion to mastectomy were observed after OPS compared with BCS. Show less
Background There is no consensus regarding the impact of oncoplastic surgery (OPS) on rates of re-excision and conversion to mastectomy following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Here these two... Show moreBackground There is no consensus regarding the impact of oncoplastic surgery (OPS) on rates of re-excision and conversion to mastectomy following breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Here these two outcomes after BCS and OPS were compared in a nationwide population-based setting. Methods In Denmark, all OPS is registered and categorized into volume displacement, volume reduction or volume replacement. Patients who underwent BCS or OPS between 2012 and 2018 were selected from the Danish Breast Cancer Group database. Multivariable analyses were performed to adjust for confounders, and propensity score matching to limit potential confounding by indication bias. Results A total of 13 185 patients (72 center dot 5 per cent) underwent BCS and 5003 (27 center dot 5 per cent) OPS. Volume displacement was used in 4171 patients (83 center dot 4 per cent), volume reduction in 679 (13 center dot 6 per cent) and volume replacement in 153 (3 center dot 1 per cent). Re-excision rates were 15 center dot 6 and 14 center dot 1 per cent after BCS and OPS respectively. After adjusting for confounders, patients were less likely to have a re-excision following OPS than BCS (odds ratio (OR) 0 center dot 80, 95 per cent c.i. 0 center dot 72 to 0 center dot 88), specifically after volume displacement and reduction. The rate of conversion to mastectomy was similar after OPS and BCS (3 center dot 2versus3 center dot 7 per cent;P = 0 center dot 105), but with a lower risk in adjusted analysis (OR 0 center dot 69, 0 center dot 58 to 0 center dot 84), specifically after volume displacement and reduction procedures. Findings were similar after propensity score matching. Conclusion A modest decrease in re-excision rate and less frequent conversion to mastectomy were observed after OPS compared with BCS. Show less
Background Evidence for an association between hospital volume and outcomes for liver surgery is abundant. The current Dutch guideline requires a minimum volume of 20 annual procedures per centre.... Show moreBackground Evidence for an association between hospital volume and outcomes for liver surgery is abundant. The current Dutch guideline requires a minimum volume of 20 annual procedures per centre. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between hospital volume and postoperative outcomes using data from the nationwide Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit. Methods This was a nationwide study in the Netherlands. All liver resections reported in the Dutch Hepato Biliary Audit between 2014 and 2017 were included. Annual centre volume was calculated and classified in categories of 20 procedures per year. Main outcomes were major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade IIIA or higher) and 30-day or in-hospital mortality. Results A total of 5590 liver resections were done across 34 centres with a median annual centre volume of 35 (i.q.r. 20-69) procedures. Overall major morbidity and mortality rates were 11 center dot 2 and 2 center dot 0 per cent respectively. The mortality rate was 1 center dot 9 per cent after resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLMs), 1 center dot 2 per cent for non-CRLMs, 0 center dot 4 per cent for benign tumours, 4 center dot 9 per cent for hepatocellular carcinoma and 10 center dot 3 per cent for biliary tumours. Higher-volume centres performed more major liver resections, and more resections for hepatocellular carcinoma and biliary cancer. There was no association between hospital volume and either major morbidity or mortality in multivariable analysis, after adjustment for known risk factors for adverse events. Conclusion Hospital volume and postoperative outcomes were not associated. Show less
Boer, A.Z. de; Glas, N.A. de; Marang-van De Mheen, P.J.; Dekkers, O.M.; Siesling, S.; Munck, L. de; ... ; Bastiaannet, E. 2020
Background Surgery is increasingly being omitted in older patients with operable breast cancer in the Netherlands. Although omission of surgery can be considered in frail older patients, it may... Show moreBackground Surgery is increasingly being omitted in older patients with operable breast cancer in the Netherlands. Although omission of surgery can be considered in frail older patients, it may lead to inferior outcomes in non-frail patients. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of omission of surgery on relative and overall survival in older patients with operable breast cancer.Methods Patients aged 80 years or older diagnosed with stage I-II hormone receptor-positive breast cancer between 2003 and 2009 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. An instrumental variable approach was applied to minimize confounding, using hospital variation in rate of primary surgery. Relative and overall survival was compared between patients treated in hospitals with different rates of surgery.Results Overall, 6464 patients were included. Relative survival was lower for patients treated in hospitals with lower compared with higher surgical rates (90 center dot 2 versus 92 center dot 4 per cent respectively after 5 years; 71 center dot 6 versus 88 center dot 2 per cent after 10 years). The relative excess risk for patients treated in hospitals with lower surgical rates was 2 center dot 00 (95 per cent c.i. 1 center dot 17 to 3 center dot 40). Overall survival rates were also lower among patients treated in hospitals with lower compared with higher surgical rates (48 center dot 3 versus 51 center dot 3 per cent after 5 years; 15 center dot 0 versus 19 center dot 7 per cent after 10 years respectively; adjusted hazard ratio 1 center dot 07, 95 per cent c.i. 1 center dot 00 to 1 center dot 14).Conclusion Omission of surgery is associated with worse relative and overall survival in patients aged 80 years or more with stage I-II hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Future research should focus on the effect on quality of life and physical functioning. Show less
Background The optimal treatment sequence for patients with rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness... Show moreBackground The optimal treatment sequence for patients with rectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of short-course pelvic radiotherapy (5 x 5 Gy) followed by systemic therapy and local treatment of all tumour sites in patients with potentially curable stage IV rectal cancer in daily practice.Methods This was a retrospective study performed in eight tertiary referral centres in the Netherlands. Patients aged 18 years or above with rectal cancer and potentially resectable liver +/- extrahepatic metastases, treated between 2010 and 2015, were eligible. Main outcomes included full completion of treatment schedule, symptom control and survival.Results In total, 169 patients were included with a median follow-up of 49 center dot 5 (95 pr cent c.i. 43 center dot 6 to 55 center dot 6) months. The completion rate for the entire treatment schedule was 65 center dot 7 per cent. Three-year progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) rates were 24 center dot 2 (95 per cent c.i. 16 center dot 6 to 31 center dot 6) and 48 center dot 8 (40 center dot 4 to 57 center dot 2) per cent respectively. Median OS of patients who responded well and completed the treatment schedule was 51 center dot 5 months, compared with 15 center dot 1 months for patients who did not complete the treatment (P < 0 center dot 001). Adequate symptom control of the primary tumour was achieved in 87 center dot 0 per cent of all patients.Conclusion Multimodal treatment is palliative in most patients, and associated with good survival rates in those able to complete the schedule. Show less
Background Ileus is common after colorectal surgery and is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications. Identifying features of normal bowel recovery and the appropriateness... Show moreBackground Ileus is common after colorectal surgery and is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications. Identifying features of normal bowel recovery and the appropriateness for hospital discharge is challenging. This study explored the safety of hospital discharge before the return of bowel function. Methods A prospective, multicentre cohort study was undertaken across an international collaborative network. Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection between January and April 2018 were included. The main outcome of interest was readmission to hospital within 30 days of surgery. The impact of discharge timing according to the return of bowel function was explored using multivariable regression analysis. Other outcomes were postoperative complications within 30 days of surgery, measured using the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Results A total of 3288 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 301 (9 center dot 2 per cent) were discharged before the return of bowel function. The median duration of hospital stay for patients discharged before and after return of bowel function was 5 (i.q.r. 4-7) and 7 (6-8) days respectively (P < 0 center dot 001). There were no significant differences in rates of readmission between these groups (6 center dot 6 versus 8 center dot 0 per cent; P = 0 center dot 499), and this remained the case after multivariable adjustment for baseline differences (odds ratio 0 center dot 90, 95 per cent c.i. 0 center dot 55 to 1 center dot 46; P = 0 center dot 659). Rates of postoperative complications were also similar in those discharged before versus after return of bowel function (minor: 34 center dot 7 versus 39 center dot 5 per cent; major 3 center dot 3 versus 3 center dot 4 per cent; P = 0 center dot 110). Conclusion Discharge before return of bowel function after elective colorectal surgery appears to be safe in appropriately selected patients. Show less
This multicentre pilot study investigated the role of peroperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-specific fluorescence imaging during cytoreductive surgery-hyperthermic intraperitoneal... Show moreThis multicentre pilot study investigated the role of peroperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-specific fluorescence imaging during cytoreductive surgery-hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy surgery in peritoneal metastasized colorectal cancer. A correct change in peritoneal carcinomatosis index (PCI) owing to fluorescence imaging was seen in four of the 14 included patients. The use of SGM-101 in patients with peritoneally metastasized colorectal carcinoma is feasible, and allows intraoperative detection of tumour deposits and alteration of the PCI. Augmented reality guidance Show less
Simons, J.M.; Pelt, M.L.M.A. van; Marinelli, A.W.K.S.; Straver, M.E.; Zeillemaker, A.M.; Arias-Bouda, L.M.P.; ... ; Pol, C.C. van der 2019
Background: Marking the axilla with radioactive iodine seed and sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy have been proposed for axillary staging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy in clinically node... Show moreBackground: Marking the axilla with radioactive iodine seed and sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy have been proposed for axillary staging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy in clinically node-positive breast cancer. This study evaluated the identification rate and detection of residual disease with combined excision of pretreatment-positive marked lymph nodes (MLNs) together with SLNs.Methods: This was a multicentre retrospective analysis of patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer undergoing neoadjuvant systemic therapy and the combination procedure (with or without axillary lymph node dissection). The identification rate and detection of axillary residual disease were calculated for the combination procedure, and for MLNs and SLNs separately.Results: At least one MLN and/or SLN(s) were identified by the combination procedure in 138 of 139 patients (identification rate 99.3 per cent). The identification rate was 92.8 per cent for MLNs alone and 87.8 per cent for SLNs alone. In 88 of 139 patients (63.3 per cent) residual axillary disease was detected by the combination procedure. Residual disease was shown only in the MLN in 20 of 88 patients (23 per cent) and only in the SLN in ten of 88 (11 per cent), whereas both the MLN and SLN contained residual disease in the remainder (58 of 88, 66 per cent).Conclusion: Excision of the pretreatment-positive MLN together with SLNs after neoadjuvant systemic therapy in patients with clinically node-positive disease resulted in a higher identification rate and improved detection of residual axillary disease. Show less
Background Ileus is common after elective colorectal surgery, and is associated with increased adverse events and prolonged hospital stay. The aim was to assess the role of non-steroidal anti... Show moreBackground Ileus is common after elective colorectal surgery, and is associated with increased adverse events and prolonged hospital stay. The aim was to assess the role of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for reducing ileus after surgery. Methods A prospective multicentre cohort study was delivered by an international, student- and trainee-led collaborative group. Adult patients undergoing elective colorectal resection between January and April 2018 were included. The primary outcome was time to gastrointestinal recovery, measured using a composite measure of bowel function and tolerance to oral intake. The impact of NSAIDs was explored using Cox regression analyses, including the results of a centre-specific survey of compliance to enhanced recovery principles. Secondary safety outcomes included anastomotic leak rate and acute kidney injury. Results A total of 4164 patients were included, with a median age of 68 (i.q.r. 57-75) years (54 center dot 9 per cent men). Some 1153 (27 center dot 7 per cent) received NSAIDs on postoperative days 1-3, of whom 1061 (92 center dot 0 per cent) received non-selective cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors. After adjustment for baseline differences, the mean time to gastrointestinal recovery did not differ significantly between patients who received NSAIDs and those who did not (4 center dot 6 versus 4 center dot 8 days; hazard ratio 1 center dot 04, 95 per cent c.i. 0 center dot 96 to 1 center dot 12; P = 0 center dot 360). There were no significant differences in anastomotic leak rate (5 center dot 4 versus 4 center dot 6 per cent; P = 0 center dot 349) or acute kidney injury (14 center dot 3 versus 13 center dot 8 per cent; P = 0 center dot 666) between the groups. Significantly fewer patients receiving NSAIDs required strong opioid analgesia (35 center dot 3 versus 56 center dot 7 per cent; P < 0 center dot 001). Conclusion NSAIDs did not reduce the time for gastrointestinal recovery after colorectal surgery, but they were safe and associated with reduced postoperative opioid requirement. Show less
Background Initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy within 6-12 weeks after mastectomy is recommended by guidelines. The aim of this population-based study was to investigate whether immediate breast... Show moreBackground Initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy within 6-12 weeks after mastectomy is recommended by guidelines. The aim of this population-based study was to investigate whether immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy reduces the likelihood of timely initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy. Methods All patients with breast cancer who had undergone mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy between 2012 and 2016 in the Netherlands were identified. Time from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy was categorized as within 6 weeks or after more than 6 weeks, within 9 weeks or after more than 9 weeks, and within 12 weeks or after more than 12 weeks. The impact of IBR on the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy for these three scenarios was estimated using propensity score matching to adjust for treatment by indication bias. Results A total of 6300 patients had undergone primary mastectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy, of whom 1700 (27 center dot 0 per cent) had received IBR. Multivariable analysis revealed that IBR reduced the likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 weeks (odds ratio (OR) 0 center dot 76, 95 per cent c.i. 0 center dot 66 to 0 center dot 87) and 9 weeks (0 center dot 69, 0 center dot 54 to 0 center dot 87), but not within 12 weeks (OR 0 center dot 75, 0 center dot 48 to 1 center dot 17). Following propensity score matching, IBR only reduced the likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 weeks (OR 0 center dot 95, 0 center dot 90 to 0 center dot 99), but not within 9 weeks (OR 0 center dot 97, 0 center dot 95 to 1 center dot 00) or 12 weeks (OR 1 center dot 00, 0 center dot 99 to 1 center dot 01). Conclusion Postmastectomy IBR marginally reduced the likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy within 6 weeks, but not within 9 or 12 weeks. Thus, IBR is not contraindicated in patients who need adjuvant chemotherapy after mastectomy. Show less
Background Identifying patients with sentinel node-negative melanoma at high risk of recurrence or death is important. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)... Show moreBackground Identifying patients with sentinel node-negative melanoma at high risk of recurrence or death is important. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) recently developed a prognostic model including Breslow thickness, ulceration and site of the primary tumour. The aims of the present study were to validate this prognostic model externally and to assess whether it could be improved by adding other prognostic factors. Methods Patients with sentinel node-negative cutaneous melanoma were included in this retrospective single-institution study. The beta values of the EORTC prognostic model were used to predict recurrence-free survival and melanoma-specific survival. The predictive performance was assessed by discrimination (c-index) and calibration. Seeking to improve the performance of the model, additional variables were added to a Cox proportional hazards model. Results Some 4235 patients with sentinel node-negative cutaneous melanoma were included. The median follow-up time was 50 (i.q.r. 18 center dot 5-81 center dot 5) months. Recurrences and deaths from melanoma numbered 793 (18 center dot 7 per cent) and 456 (10 center dot 8 per cent) respectively. Validation of the EORTC model showed good calibration for both outcomes, and a c-index of 0 center dot 69. The c-index was only marginally improved to 0 center dot 71 when other significant prognostic factors (sex, age, tumour type, mitotic rate) were added. Conclusion This study validated the EORTC prognostic model for recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival of patients with negative sentinel nodes. The addition of other prognostic factors only improved the model marginally. The validated EORTC model could be used for personalizing follow-up and selecting high-risk patients for trials of adjuvant systemic therapy. Show less
