RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Guidelines are inconclusive on whether contrast-enhanced MRI using gadoxetic acid and diffusion-weighted imaging should be added routinely to CT in the investigation of patients with colorectal liver metastases who are scheduled for curative liver resection or thermal ablation, or both. Although contrast-enhanced MRI is reportedly superior than contrast-enhanced CT in the detection and characterisation of colorectal liver metastases, its effect on clinical patient management is unknown. We aimed to assess the clinical effect of an additional liver contrast-enhanced MRI on local treatment plan in patients with colorectal liver metastases amenable to local treatment, based on contrast-enhanced CT. METHODS: We did an international, multicentre, prospective, incremental diagnostic accuracy trial in 14 liver surgery centres in the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, and Italy. Participants were aged 18 years or older with histological proof of colorectal cancer, a WHO performance status score of 0-4, and primary or recurrent colorectal liver metastases, who were scheduled for local therapy based on contrast-enhanced CT. All patients had contrast-enhanced CT and liver contrast-enhanced MRI including diffusion-weighted imaging and gadoxetic acid as a contrast agent before undergoing local therapy. The primary outcome was change in the local clinical treatment plan (decided by the individual clinics) on the basis of liver contrast-enhanced MRI findings, analysed in the intention-to-image population. The minimal clinically important difference in the proportion of patients who would have change in their local treatment plan due to an additional liver contrast-enhanced MRI was 10%. This study is closed and registered in the Netherlands Trial Register, NL8039. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2019, and July 31, 2021, 325 patients with colorectal liver metastases were assessed for eligibility. 298 patients were enrolled and included in the intention-to-treat population, including 177 males (59%) and 121 females (41%) with planned local therapy based on contrast-enhanced CT. A change in the local treatment plan based on liver contrast-enhanced MRI findings was observed in 92 (31%; 95% CI 26-36) of 298 patients. Changes were made for 40 patients (13%) requiring more extensive local therapy, 11 patients (4%) requiring less extensive local therapy, and 34 patients (11%) in whom the indication for curative-intent local therapy was revoked, including 26 patients (9%) with too extensive disease and eight patients (3%) with benign lesions on liver contrast-enhanced MRI (confirmed by a median follow-up of 21·0 months [IQR 17·5-24·0]). INTERPRETATION: Liver contrast-enhanced MRI should be considered in all patients scheduled for local treatment for colorectal liver metastases on the basis of contrast-enhanced CT imaging. FUNDING: The Dutch Cancer Society and Bayer AG - Pharmaceuticals.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Masculino , Femenino , Humanos , Medios de Contraste , Estudios Prospectivos , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Hepáticas/terapia , Neoplasias Hepáticas/patología , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Colorrectales/terapia , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) patients, combination of liver resection and ablation permit a more parenchymal-sparing approach. This study assessed trends in use of combined resection and ablation, outcomes, and overall survival (OS). METHODS: This population-based study included all CRLM patients who underwent liver resection between 2014 and 2022. To assess OS, data was linked to two databases containing date of death for patients treated between 2014 and 2018. Hospital variation in the use of combined minor liver resection and ablation versus major liver resection alone in patients with 2-3 CRLM and ≤3 cm was assessed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS: This study included 3593 patients, of whom 1336 (37.2%) underwent combined resection and ablation. Combined resection increased from 31.7% in 2014 to 47.9% in 2022. Significant hospital variation (range 5.9-53.8%) was observed in the use of combined minor liver resection and ablation. PSM resulted in 1005 patients in each group. Major morbidity was not different (11.6% vs. 5%, P = 1.00). Liver failure occurred less often after combined resection and ablation (1.9% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.017). Five-year OS rates were not different (39.3% vs. 33.9%, P = 0.145). CONCLUSION: Combined resection and ablation should be available and considered as an alternative to resection alone in any patient with multiple metastases.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Puntaje de Propensión , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Approximately 70% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) experiences intrahepatic recurrence after initial liver resection. This study assessed outcomes and hospital variation in repeat liver resections (R-LR). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2022 in the Netherlands. Overall survival (OS) was collected for patients operated on between 2014 and 2018 by linkage to the insurance database. RESULTS: Data of 7479 liver resections (1391 (18.6%) repeat and 6088 (81.4%) primary) were analysed. Major morbidity and mortality were not different. Factors associated with major morbidity included ASA 3+, major liver resection, extrahepatic disease, and open surgery. Five-year OS after repeat versus primary liver resection was 42.3% versus 44.8%, P = 0.37. Factors associated with worse OS included largest CRLM >5 cm (aHR 1.58, 95% CI: 1.07-2.34, P = 0.023), >3 CRLM (aHR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.00-1.75, P = 0.046), extrahepatic disease (aHR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.25-2.04, P = 0.001), positive tumour margins (aHR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.09-1.85, P = 0.009). Significant hospital variation in performance of R-LR was observed, median 18.9% (8.2% to 33.3%). CONCLUSION: Significant hospital variation was observed in performance of R-LR in the Netherlands reflecting different treatment decisions upon recurrence. On a population-based level R-LR leads to satisfactory survival.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Reoperación , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Neoplasias Colorrectales/mortalidad , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Masculino , Países Bajos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/mortalidad , Femenino , Hepatectomía/mortalidad , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estudios Retrospectivos , Hospitales/estadística & datos numéricos , Bases de Datos FactualesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Consensus on resectability criteria for colorectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) is lacking, resulting in differences in therapeutic strategies. This study evaluated variability of resectability assessments and local treatment plans for patients with initially unresectable CRLM by the liver expert panel from the randomised phase III CAIRO5 study. METHODS: The liver panel, comprising surgeons and radiologists, evaluated resectability by predefined criteria at baseline and 2-monthly thereafter. If surgeons judged CRLM as resectable, detailed local treatment plans were provided. The panel chair determined the conclusion of resectability status and local treatment advice, and forwarded it to local surgeons. RESULTS: A total of 1149 panel evaluations of 496 patients were included. Intersurgeon disagreement was observed in 50% of evaluations and was lower at baseline than follow-up (36% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). Among surgeons in general, votes for resectable CRLM at baseline and follow-up ranged between 0-12% and 27-62%, and for permanently unresectable CRLM between 3-40% and 6-47%, respectively. Surgeons proposed different local treatment plans in 77% of patients. The most pronounced intersurgeon differences concerned the advice to proceed with hemihepatectomy versus parenchymal-preserving approaches. Eighty-four percent of patients judged by the panel as having resectable CRLM indeed received local treatment. Local surgeons followed the technical plan proposed by the panel in 40% of patients. CONCLUSION: Considerable variability exists among expert liver surgeons in assessing resectability and local treatment planning of initially unresectable CRLM. This stresses the value of panel-based decisions, and the need for consensus guidelines on resectability criteria and technical approach to prevent unwarranted variability in clinical practice.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Neoplasias Hepáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Hepatectomía/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study investigates whether inequalities in the utilization of resection and/or ablation for synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCLM) between patients diagnosed in expert and non-expert hospitals changed since a multi-hospital network started. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with SCLM between 2009 and 2020 were included. The likelihood of receiving ablation and/or resection was analyzed in the prenetwork (2009-2012), startup (2013-2016), and matured-network (2017-2020) periods. RESULTS: Nationwide, 13.981patients were diagnosed between 2009 and 2020, of whom 1.624 were diagnosed in the network. Of patients diagnosed in the network's expert hospitals, 36.7% received ablation and/or resection versus 28.3% in nonexpert hospitals (p < 0.01). The odds ratio (OR) of receiving ablation and/or resection for patients diagnosed in expert versus nonexpert hospitals increased from 1.38 (p = 0.581, pre-network), to 1.66 (p = 0.108, startup), to 2.48 (p = 0.090, matured-network). Nationwide, the same trend occurred (respectively OR 1.41, p = 0.011; OR 2.23, p < 0.001; OR 3.20, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients diagnosed in expert hospitals were more likely to receive ablation and/or resection for SCLM than patients diagnosed in non-expert hospitals. This difference increased over time despite the startup of a multi-hospital network. Establishing a multi-hospital network did not have an effect on reducing the existing unequal odds of receiving specialized treatment. SYNOPSIS: Specialized oncology treatments are increasingly provided through multi-hospital networks. However, scant empirical evidence on the effectiveness of these networks exists. This study analyzes whether a regional multi-hospital network was able to improve equal access to specialized oncology treatments.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Hepatectomía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Hospitales , Probabilidad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: In 2017, the Southampton guideline stated that minimally invasive liver resections (MILR) should considered standard practice for minor liver resections. This study aimed to assess recent implementation rates of minor MILR, factors associated with performing MILR, hospital variation, and outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent minor liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2021. Factors associated with MILR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Propensity-score matching (PSM) was applied to compare outcomes between minor MILR and minor open liver resections. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan-Meier analysis on patients operated until 2018. RESULTS: Of 4,488 patients included, 1,695 (37.8%) underwent MILR. PSM resulted in 1,338 patients in each group. Implementation of MILR increased to 51.2% in 2021. Factors associated with not performing MILR included treatment with preoperative chemotherapy (aOR 0.61 CI:0.50-0.75, p < 0.001), treatment in a tertiary referral hospital (aOR 0.57 CI:0.50-0.67, p < 0.001), and larger diameter and number of CRLM. Significant hospital variation was observed in use of MILR (7.5% to 93.0%). After case-mix correction, six hospitals performed fewer, and six hospitals performed more MILRs than expected. In the PSM cohort, MILR was associated with a decrease in blood loss (aOR 0.99 CI:0.99-0.99, p < 0.01), cardiac complications (aOR 0.29, CI:0.10-0.70, p = 0.009), IC admissions (aOR 0.66, CI:0.50-0.89, p = 0.005), and shorter hospital stay (aOR CI:0.94-0.99, p < 0.01). Five-year OS rates for MILR and OLR were 53.7% versus 48.6%, p = 0.21. CONCLUSION: Although uptake of MILR is increasing in the Netherlands, significant hospital variation remains. MILR benefits short-term outcomes, while overall survival is comparable to open liver surgery.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Humanos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Hepatectomía/métodos , Tiempo de Internación , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing implementation of selective histopathologic policies for post-cholecystectomy evaluation of gallbladder specimens in low-incidence countries, the fear of missing incidental gallbladder cancer (GBC) persists. This study aimed to develop a diagnostic prediction model for selecting gallbladders that require additional histopathological examination after cholecystectomy. METHODS: A registration-based retrospective cohort study of nine Dutch hospitals was conducted between January 2004 and December 2014. Data were collected using a secure linkage of three patient databases, and potential clinical predictors of gallbladder cancer were selected. The prediction model was validated internally by using bootstrapping. Its discriminative capacity and accuracy were tested by assessing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Nagelkerke's pseudo-R2, and Brier score. RESULTS: Using a cohort of 22,025 gallbladders, including 75 GBC cases, a prediction model with the following variables was developed: age, sex, urgency, type of surgery, and indication for surgery. After correction for optimism, Nagelkerke's R2 and Brier score were 0.32 and 88%, respectively, indicating a moderate model fit. The AUC was 90.3% (95% confidence interval, 86.2%-94.4%), indicating good discriminative ability. CONCLUSION: We developed a good clinical prediction model for selecting gallbladder specimens for histopathologic examination after cholecystectomy to rule out GBC.
Asunto(s)
Colelitiasis , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar , Humanos , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/diagnóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Modelos Estadísticos , Hallazgos Incidentales , Pronóstico , Colecistectomía/efectos adversos , Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Colelitiasis/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment sequence for patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) remains uncertain. This study aimed to assess factors associated with the use of simultaneous resections and impact on hospital variation. METHOD: This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver surgery for synchronous colorectal liver metastases between 2014 and 2019 in the Netherlands. Factors associated with simultaneous resection were identified. Short-term surgical outcomes of simultaneous resections and factors associated with 30-day major morbidity were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 2146 patients included, 589 (27%) underwent simultaneous resection in 28 hospitals. Simultaneous resection was associated with age, sex, BMI, number, size and bilobar distribution of CRLM, and administration of preoperative chemotherapy. More minimally invasive and minor resections were performed in the simultaneous group. Hospital variation was present (range 2.4%-83.3%) with several hospitals performing simultaneous procedures more and less frequently than expected. Simultaneous resection resulted in 13% 30-day major morbidity, and 1% mortality. ASA classification ≥3 was independently associated with higher 30-day major morbidity after simultaneous resection (aOR 1.97, CI 1.10-3.42, p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: Distinctive patient and tumour characteristics influence the choice for simultaneous resection. Remarkable hospital variation is present in the Netherlands.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Neoplasias Colorrectales/patología , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Hepatectomía/métodos , Hospitales , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/secundario , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: As result of bariatric surgery, patients are susceptible to protein deficiency which can result in undesirable lean body mass (LBM) loss. Consumption of high-protein diets or supplements could counteract this, but evidence about the effect is scarce. This paper systematically reviewed the literature to determine the effect of additional protein intake (≥60 g/day) on LBM preservation in post-bariatric patients. METHODS: An electronic search of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library was conducted. Studies were included if patients received a high-protein diet or protein supplements for at least one month, and LBM was assessed. The primary outcome was difference in mean LBM loss between the experimental (protein) and control group. Secondary outcomes were differences in body fat mass, total body water, body mass index and resting metabolic rate. RESULTS: Two of the five included studies (n = 223) showed that consumption of proteins resulted in significant LBM preservation. Only one study reported a significant difference in the reduction of body fat mass and resting metabolic rate in favour of a high-protein diet, but none of the studies showed a significant difference in total body water loss or body mass index change between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This paper showed inconclusive evidence for LBM preservation due to protein supplementation or a high-protein diet in post-bariatric patients. This outcome might be subjected to certain limitations, including a lack of blinding and a low compliance rate reported in the included studies. More specific and personalized recommendations regarding protein intake may need to be established by high quality research. Studies investigating the quantity (g/day) and quality (whey, casein or soy) of proteins are also needed.
Asunto(s)
Cirugía Bariátrica , Composición Corporal , Metabolismo Basal , Índice de Masa Corporal , Suplementos Dietéticos , HumanosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Liver resection is high-risk surgery in particular in elderly patients. The aim of this study was to explore postoperative outcomes after liver resection in elderly patients. METHODS: In this nationwide study, all patients who underwent liver resection for primary and secondary liver tumours in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2019 were included. Age groups were composed as younger than 70 (70-), between 70 and 80 (septuagenarians), and 80 years or older (octogenarians). Proportion of liver resections per age group and 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 6587 patients were included of whom 4023 (58.9%) were younger than 70, 2135 (32.4%) were septuagenarians and 429 (6.5%) were octogenarians. The proportion of septuagenarians increased during the study period (aOR:1.06, CI:1.02-1.09, p < 0.001). Thirty-day major morbidity was higher in septuagenarians (11%) and octogenarians (12%) compared to younger patients (9%, p = 0.049). Thirty-day mortality was higher in septuagenarians (4%) and octogenarians (4%) compared to younger patients (2%, p < 0.001). Cardiopulmonary complications occurred more frequently with higher age, liver-specific complications did not. Higher age was associated with higher 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality in multivariable logistic regression. CONCLUSION: Thirty-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality are higher after liver resection in elderly patients, attributed mainly to non-surgical cardiopulmonary complications.
Asunto(s)
Hígado , Octogenarios , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Humanos , Países Bajos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Data on surgical outcomes of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) versus open liver resection (OLR) of benign liver tumour (BLT) are scarce. This study aimed to provide a nationwide overview of postoperative outcomes after LLR and OLR of BLT. METHODS: This was a nationwide retrospective study including all patients who underwent liver resection for hepatocellular adenoma, haemangioma and focal nodular hyperplasia in the Netherlands from 2014 to 2019. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to compare 30-day overall and major morbidity and 30-day mortality after OLR and LLR. RESULTS: In total, 415 patients underwent BLT resection of whom 230 (55.4%) underwent LLR. PSM for OLR and LLR resulted in 250 matched patients. Median (IQR) length of stay was shorter after LLR than OLR (4 versus 6 days, 5.0-8.0, p < 0.001). Postoperative 30-day overall morbidity was lower after LLR than OLR (12.0% vs. 22.4%, p = 0.043). LLR was associated with reduced 30-day overall morbidity in multivariable analysis (aOR:0.46, CI:0.22-0.95, p = 0.043). Both 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality were not different. CONCLUSIONS: LLR for BLT is associated with shorter hospital stay and reduced overall morbidity and is preferred if technically feasible.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Hepatocelular , Laparoscopía , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Carcinoma Hepatocelular/cirugía , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Humanos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Tiempo de Internación , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Países Bajos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Failure to rescue (FTR) is defined as postoperative complications leading to mortality. This nationwide study aimed to assess factors associated with FTR and hospital variation in FTR after liver surgery. METHODS: All patients who underwent liver resection between 2014 and 2017 in the Netherlands were included. FTR was defined as in-hospital or 30-day mortality after complications Dindo grade ≥3a. Variables associated with FTR and nationwide hospital variation were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 4961 patients included, 3707 (74.4%) underwent liver resection for colorectal liver metastases, 379 (7.6%) for other metastases, 526 (10.6%) for hepatocellular carcinoma and 349 (7.0%) for biliary cancer. Thirty-day major morbidity was 11.5%. Overall mortality was 2.3%. FTR was 19.1%. Age 65-80 (aOR: 2.86, CI:1.01-12.0, p = 0.049), ASA 3+ (aOR:2.59, CI: 1.66-4.02, p < 0.001), liver cirrhosis (aOR:4.15, CI:1.81-9.22, p < 0.001), biliary cancer (aOR:3.47, CI: 1.73-6.96, p < 0.001), and major resection (aOR:6.46, CI: 3.91-10.9, p < 0.001) were associated with FTR. Postoperative liver failure (aOR: 26.9, CI: 14.6-51.2, p < 0.001), cardiac (aOR: 2.62, CI: 1.27-5.29, p = 0.008) and thromboembolic complications (aOR: 2.49, CI: 1.16-5.22, p = 0.017) were associated with FTR. After case-mix correction, no hospital variation in FTR was observed. CONCLUSION: FTR is influenced by patient demographics, disease and procedural burden. Prevention of postoperative liver failure, cardiac and thromboembolic complications could decrease FTR.
Asunto(s)
Fracaso de Rescate en Atención a la Salud , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitales , Humanos , Hígado , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Combining resection and thermal ablation can improve short-term postoperative outcomes in patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). This study assessed nationwide hospital variation and short-term postoperative outcomes after combined resection and ablation. METHODS: In this population-based study, all CRLM patients who underwent resection in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2018 were included. After propensity score matching for age, ASA-score, Charlson-score, diameter of largest CRLM, number of CRLM and earlier resection, postoperative outcomes were compared. Postoperative complicated course (PCC) was defined as discharge after 14 days or a major complication or death within 30 days of surgery. RESULTS: Of 4639 included patients, 3697 (80%) underwent resection and 942 (20%) resection and ablation. Unadjusted percentage of patients who underwent resection and ablation per hospital ranged between 4 and 44%. Hospital variation persisted after case-mix correction. After matching, 734 patients remained in each group. Hospital stay (median 6 vs. 7 days, p = 0.011), PCC (11% vs. 14.7%, p = 0.043) and 30-day mortality (0.7% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.018) were lower in the resection and ablation group. Differences faded in multivariable logistic regression due to inclusion of major hepatectomy. CONCLUSION: Significant hospital variation was observed in the Netherlands. Short-term postoperative outcomes were better after combined resection and ablation, attributed to avoiding complications associated with major hepatectomy.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Colorrectales , Neoplasias Hepáticas , Neoplasias Colorrectales/cirugía , Hepatectomía/efectos adversos , Hospitales , Humanos , Neoplasias Hepáticas/cirugía , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Recent data support the use of bariatric surgery in adolescents with severe obesity following unsuccessful non-surgical treatments. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) have demonstrated reasonably similar weight loss and reduction of obesity related comorbidities in randomized trials in adults. SG has internationally become the most commonly used procedure in adolescents, yet long-term outcome data are lacking. No randomized controlled trial comparing SG and RYGB has been performed in adolescents. OBJECTIVE: Determine whether SG is non-inferior to RYGB in terms of total body weight (TBW) loss in adolescents with severe obesity. METHODS: A multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial. Two hundred sixty-four adolescents aged 13-17 (Tanner stage ≥IV) with severe obesity (corrected for age and sex) will be included. Adolescents agreeing to participate will be randomized to either RYGB or SG. The primary outcome is the proportion of participants achieving 20% TBW loss at 3 years postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include (i) change in body weight, body mass index (BMI) and BMI standard deviation score, (ii) incidence of adverse health events and need for additional surgical intervention, (iii) resolution of obesity-related comorbidities, (iv) prevalence of cardio metabolic risk factor measures, (v) bone health measures and incidence of bone fractures, (vi) quality of life including psychosocial health, patient satisfaction and educational attainment and (vii) body composition. Follow-up will extend into the long term. RESULTS: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: This study will, to our knowledge, be the first randomized controlled trial comparing SG and RYGB in adolescents with severe obesity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the Netherlands Trial Register on July 26th, 2018 - NTR7191 - https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/7191 (protocol version 5.0 - February 3th 2020).
Asunto(s)
Gastrectomía/métodos , Derivación Gástrica/métodos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Obesidad Mórbida/cirugía , Adolescente , Índice de Masa Corporal , Humanos , Países Bajos , Satisfacción del Paciente , Calidad de Vida , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
Background: Weight loss failure or weight regain occurs in up to 25% of patients with a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Post-operative anatomical changes, like pouch or stoma dilatation, might contribute. Aim of this study is to assess reliability and usefulness of upper gastro intestinal (UGI) contrast studies to detect pouch dilatation.Methods: Retrospective case-control study of patients with weight loss failure between 2010 and 2015 (failure group, n = 101) and a control group (n = 101) with adequate weight loss. Pouch dilatation was systematically reassessed. Clinical parameters were extracted from the electronic patient records.Results: Systematic reassessment showed 23/101 (23%) pouch dilatation in the failure group, compared to 11/101 (11%) in the control group (p = .024). Revision surgery was performed in 43/101 patients in the failure group. After this surgery, only 8% of patients with pouch dilatation achieved adequate weight loss, whereas 39% of patients without pouch dilatation achieved adequate weight loss (p = .07). There was no difference in return to adequate weight loss between patients treated surgically and conservatively (30% vs 28%).Conclusion: Systematic reassessment of UGI contrast studies showed 23% pouch dilatation in patients with weight loss failure after RYGB. However, low interobserver agreement and discrepancy in success rate of revision surgery greatly questions the reliability and usefulness of this diagnostic modality.
Asunto(s)
Derivación Gástrica/efectos adversos , Obesidad Mórbida/diagnóstico por imagen , Obesidad Mórbida/cirugía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/diagnóstico por imagen , Tracto Gastrointestinal Superior/diagnóstico por imagen , Adulto , Anciano , Medios de Contraste , Dilatación Patológica , Femenino , Fluoroscopía , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Estudios Retrospectivos , Insuficiencia del Tratamiento , Pérdida de Peso , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is no clear guideline nor protocol for macroscopic examination of the gallbladder, leaving surgeons extemporaneous in regard of gallbladder examination in selective histopathologic policy. The purpose of this article is to describe a surgical approach for adequate macroscopic inspection of the gallbladder. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The described practical method was developed in collaboration between surgeons and pathologists. This method was introduced in 2011 and implemented in 2012. We retrospectively reviewed the number of cholecystectomies and number of histopathologic examinations between 2006 and 2017, using our own patient database. We used the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR) to examine the incidence of gallbladder cancer patients before and after implementation of the selective policy in our hospital. In addition to the method, we depict several frequent macroscopic abnormalities in order to provide some examples for surgical colleagues. RESULTS: Since implementation of the selective policy, 2271 surgical macroscopic gallbladder examinations were performed. As a result, we observed a significant decrease from 83% in 2012 to 38% in 2017, in histopathologic examination of the gallbladder following cholecystectomy. We observed a stable trend of gallbladder carcinoma in the same period (0.17%, n = 4 during 2006-2011 and 0.26%, n = 6 during 2012-2017). CONCLUSION: A simple, valid and easy method is described for future macroscopic analysis by the surgeon following a cholecystectomy.
Asunto(s)
Colecistectomía , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/patología , Neoplasias de la Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Vesícula Biliar/patología , Bases de Datos Factuales , Vesícula Biliar/cirugía , Humanos , Países Bajos , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this trial was to identify a superior method for umbilical and epigastric hernia repair in terms of complications. Complications such as an extended operation duration, additional use of painkillers, reoperation, infection, seroma, extended wound care, extended hospitalization, and early recurrence were reported according to the Clavien-Dindo grading system. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Over the years mesh repair is proven the gold standard for umbilical and epigastric hernias. The question remains, which mesh should be used? METHODS: In this randomized controlled, multicenter trial, all patients ≥ 18 years with a single, symptomatic, and primary small umbilical or epigastric hernia qualified for inclusion. Flat preperitoneal polypropylene mesh repair was compared with patch repair (PROCEED Ventral Patch) (PVP). RESULTS: A total of 352 patients were randomized; 348 patients received the intervention (n = 177 PVP vs n = 171 mesh). One out of 4 suffered from any kind of complication within 2 years postoperative (27.6%). A significant difference in complications was seen, in favor of polypropylene mesh repair (P = 0.044, 22.1% mesh vs 32.5% PVP). Reoperation was performed in 19 PVP operated patients (10.7%) versus 7 patients with polypropylene mesh repair (4.0%, P = 0.021).No significant differences were seen in recurrences (n = 13, 8.4% PVP vs n = 6, 4.1% mesh, P = 0.127). CONCLUSIONS: In small epigastric and small umbilical hernia repair a flat polypropylene mesh repair was associated with a lower complication rate than PVP repair. No differences in recurrence rates were seen. Combining all complications, the preperitoneal positioned flat polypropylene mesh performed better.
Asunto(s)
Hernia Abdominal/cirugía , Herniorrafia/instrumentación , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Mallas Quirúrgicas , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Hernia Umbilical/cirugía , Herniorrafia/métodos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Polipropilenos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Recurrencia , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Método Simple Ciego , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Instructing and guiding patients after surgery is essential for successful recovery. However, the time that health-care professionals can spend with their patients postoperatively has been reduced because of efficiency-driven, shortened hospital stays. We evaluated the effect of a personalised e-health-care programme on return to normal activities after surgery. METHODS: A multicentre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial was done at seven teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients aged 18-75 years who were scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy, inguinal hernia surgery, or laparoscopic adnexal surgery for a benign indication were recruited. An independent researcher randomly allocated participants to either the intervention or control group using computer-based randomisation lists, with stratification by sex, type of surgery, and hospital. Participants in the intervention group had access to a perioperative, personalised, e-health-care programme, which managed recovery expectations and provided postoperative guidance tailored to the patient. The control group received usual care and access to a placebo website containing standard general recovery advice. Participants were unaware of the study hypothesis and were asked to complete questionnaires at five timepoints during the 6-month period after surgery. The primary outcome was time between surgery and return to normal activities, measured using personalised patient-reported outcome measures. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were done. This trial is registered in the Netherlands National Trial Register, number NTR4699. FINDINGS: Between Aug 24, 2015, and Aug 12, 2016, 344 participants were enrolled and randomly allocated to either the intervention (n=173) or control (n=171) group. 14 participants (4%) were lost to follow-up, with 330 participants included in the primary outcome analysis. Median time until return to normal activities was 21 days (95% CI 17-25) in the intervention group and 26 days (20-32) in the control group (hazard ratio 1·38, 95% CI 1·09-1·73; p=0·007). Complications did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION: A personalised e-health intervention after abdominal surgery speeds up the return to normal activities compared with usual care. Implementation of this e-health programme is recommended in patients undergoing intermediate-grade abdominal, gynaecological, or general surgical procedures. FUNDING: ZonMw.
Asunto(s)
Abdomen/cirugía , Internet , Atención Perioperativa/métodos , Medicina de Precisión/métodos , Telemedicina/métodos , Actividades Cotidianas/clasificación , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Educación del Paciente como Asunto/métodos , Método Simple Ciego , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: While most of the evidence on minimally invasive liver surgery (MILS) is derived from expert centers, nationwide outcomes remain underreported. This study aimed to evaluate the implementation and outcome of MILS on a nationwide scale. METHODS: Electronic patient files were reviewed in all Dutch liver surgery centers and all patients undergoing MILS between 2011 and 2016 were selected. Operative outcomes were stratified based on extent of the resection and annual MILS volume. RESULTS: Overall, 6951 liver resections were included, with a median annual volume of 50 resections per center. The overall use of MILS was 13% (n = 916), which varied from 3% to 36% (P < 0.001) between centers. The nationwide use of MILS increased from 6% in 2011 to 23% in 2016 (P < 0.001). Outcomes of minor MILS were comparable with international studies (conversion 0-13%, mortality <1%). In centers which performed ≥20 MILS annually, major MILS was associated with less conversions (14 (11%) versus 41 (30%), P < 0.001), shorter operating time (184 (117-239) versus 200 (139-308) minutes, P = 0.010), and less overall complications (37 (30%) versus 58 (42%), P = 0.040). CONCLUSION: The nationwide use of MILS is increasing, although large variation remains between centers. Outcomes of major MILS are better in centers with higher volumes.