The Role of the Multiparametric MRI LiverMultiScanTM in the Quantitative Assessment of the Liver and Its Predicted Clinical Applications in Patients Undergoing Major Hepatic Resection for Colorectal Liver Metastasis.

Liver biopsy remains the gold standard for the histological assessment of the liver. With clear disadvantages and the rise in the incidences of liver disease, the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal liver metastasis (CRLM) and an explosion of surgical management options available, non-invasive serological and imaging markers of liver histopathology have never been more pertinent in order to assess liver health and stratify patients considered for surgical intervention. Liver MRI is a leading modality in the assessment of hepatic malignancy. Recent technological advancements in multiparametric MRI software such as the LiverMultiScanTM offers an attractive non-invasive assay of anatomy and histopathology in the pre-operative setting, especially in the context of CRLM. This narrative review examines the evidence for the LiverMultiScanTM in the assessment of hepatic fibrosis, steatosis/steatohepatitis, and potential applications for chemotherapy-associated hepatic changes. We postulate its future role and the hurdles it must surpass in order to be implemented in the pre-operative management of patients undergoing hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastasis. Such a role likely extends to other hepatic malignancies planned for resection.

Quality of life in the first 6 weeks following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence of how health-related quality of life (HRQOL) changes following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery in the first 6 weeks of postoperative recovery is needed to inform cost-effectiveness evaluations. METHODS: Pragmatic prospective cohort study design. Consecutive patients requiring elective colorectal surgery were allocated to either laparoscopic or open surgery by administrative staff in a district general hospital in England, 2006-2007. Patients completed two validated, generic measures of HRQOL at baseline (preoperatively) and on multiple occasions in the first 6 weeks postsurgery using diaries (EuroQol five-dimensional [EQ-5D] questionnaire: 16 times; short-form 36 health survey [SF-36]: 4 times; HRQOL was compared between groups at each time point, and overall using repeated-measures analysis. RESULTS: Of 201 consecutive patients recruited, 32 (15.1%) were unable to complete diaries. Of the remaining 169 patients, 120 (71%) returned completed diaries at 28 days and 105 (62.1%) at 42 days. There was no difference in preoperative HRQOL scores between surgical groups, but the postoperative EQ-5D questionnaire and SF-36 scores were significantly higher in the laparoscopic group (EQ-5D questionnaire P = 0.005, SF-36 P = 0.007). Subgroup analysis showed that patients with a stoma have worse HRQOL than those without. HRQOL did not differ between the laparoscopic and open stoma patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents unique prospective data demonstrating that laparoscopic surgery confers HRQOL benefits for patients in the early recovery period following colorectal surgery, compared with open surgery. Consideration of these data in the context of a cost-effectiveness analysis will be reported separately.

Is competency assessment at the specialist level achievable? A study for the national training programme in laparoscopic colorectal surgery in England.

OBJECTIVES: To develop, validate, and implement a competency assessment tool (CAT) for technical surgical performance in the context of a summative assessment process for the National Training Programme in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery (NTP). BACKGROUND: The NTP is an educational initiative by the National Cancer Action Team in England to safely increase the uptake of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. It is the first competency-based national educational initiative for specialist surgeons (consultants), and performance assessment is an integral part of the program. METHODS: Content validity was sought using expert opinion by semistructured interviews and the Delphi method. For validity and reliability studies, NTP apprentices and experts were asked to submit video-recorded cases. Construct validity was established between delegates who passed the assessment and those who failed. Concurrent validity was tested by comparing scores with error counts as identified by observational clinical human reliability analysis. A fully crossed design, using generalizability theory methods and D-studies, was used for reliability. FINDINGS: Interviews and the Delphi method revealed a list of characteristics for assessment. A hybrid structure combining task-specific and generic items was used to include important characteristics into the assessment format. Fifty-four cases were submitted. Overall reliability reached G(ACI) = 0.803 when using 2 cases and 2 assessors. Experts scored significantly better than apprentices (3.19 vs 2.60; P = 0.004), and apprentices who passed had better scores than those who failed (2.95 vs 2.28; P < 0.001). There was an inverse correlation between CAT scores and observational clinical human reliability analysis error counts (ρ = -0.520, P < 0.001). The combination of both methods reached overall sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 83.3%, a positive predictive value of 93.8%, and a negative predictive value of 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The CAT can reliably assess technical performance in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The use of CATs to judge specialist technical performance before embarking on independent practice of new procedures is achievable on a national scale and can be adapted by other specialties.

Systematic review of the costs of laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: Recent studies have confirmed the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic colorectal surgery; however, its use has not become widespread. One reason for this is perceived economic implications. A systematic review was undertaken examining the costs of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for articles comparing laparoscopic colorectal surgery and open surgery. Primary outcome measures were operating room, direct hospital, and indirect costs. Secondary outcomes were conversion rates and length of hospital stay. The percentage difference in costs was used for comparisons between studies. RESULTS: Twenty-nine articles were identified in which cost data were presented (total number of patients 3,681); the economic data in most studies was limited. Operating room costs were greater for laparoscopic colorectal surgery than open surgery in all studies (median difference, 50 percent; interquartile range, 27-78 percent; P < 0.001). There was no overall difference in total hospital costs (median difference, 0 percent; interquartile range, -17.5 to 21 percent). Only two articles collected data on indirect costs, with both in favor of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Hospital stay was shorter for laparoscopic colorectal surgery in all studies (median difference, 2.8 days; interquartile range, 1.3-3.7; P < 0.001). Median conversion rate was 7.8 percent (mean, 14 percent; interquartile range, 6-21 percent). CONCLUSIONS: Operating room costs are greater for laparoscopic colorectal surgery than open surgery. Total hospital costs are similar. There may be societal benefits associated with lower indirect costs for laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Cost should not be a deterrent to performing laparoscopic colorectal surgery.