Textbook Oncological Outcome in European GASTRODATA.
Journal
Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 11 2023
01 11 2023
Historique:
medline:
6
10
2023
pubmed:
9
8
2023
entrez:
9
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To assess the rate of textbook outcome (TO) and textbook oncological outcome (TOO) in the European population based on the GASTRODATA registry. TO is a composite parameter assessing surgical quality and strongly correlates with improved overall survival. Following the standard of treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer, TOO was proposed as a quality and optimal multimodal treatment parameter. TO was achieved when all the following criteria were met: no intraoperative complications, radical resection according to the surgeon, pR0 resection, retrieval of at least 15 lymph nodes, no severe postoperative complications, no reintervention, no admission to the intensive care unit, no prolonged length of stay, no postoperative mortality and no hospital readmission. TOO was defined as TO with the addition of perioperative chemotherapy compliance. Of the 2558 patients, 1700 were included in the analysis. TO was achieved in 1164 (68.5%) patients. The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy [odds ratio (OR) = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.04-1.70] and D2 or D2+ lymphadenectomy (OR = 1.55, 95% CI: 1.15-2.10) had a positive impact on TO achievement. Older age (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.94), pT3/4 (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.63-0.99), ASA 3/4 (OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.54-0.86) and total gastrectomy (OR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.45-0.70), had a negative impact on TO achievement. TOO was achieved in 388 (22.8%) patients. Older age (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.27-0.53), pT3 or pT4 (OR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.39-0.69), and ASA 3 or 4 (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.43-0.79) had a negative impact on TOO achievement. Despite successively improved surgical outcomes, stage-appropriate chemotherapy in adherence to the current guidelines for multimodal treatment of gastric cancer remains poor. Further implementation of oncologic quality metrics should include greater emphasis on perioperative chemotherapy and adequate lymphadenectomy.
Sections du résumé
OBJECTIVE
To assess the rate of textbook outcome (TO) and textbook oncological outcome (TOO) in the European population based on the GASTRODATA registry.
BACKGROUND
TO is a composite parameter assessing surgical quality and strongly correlates with improved overall survival. Following the standard of treatment for locally advanced gastric cancer, TOO was proposed as a quality and optimal multimodal treatment parameter.
METHODS
TO was achieved when all the following criteria were met: no intraoperative complications, radical resection according to the surgeon, pR0 resection, retrieval of at least 15 lymph nodes, no severe postoperative complications, no reintervention, no admission to the intensive care unit, no prolonged length of stay, no postoperative mortality and no hospital readmission. TOO was defined as TO with the addition of perioperative chemotherapy compliance.
RESULTS
Of the 2558 patients, 1700 were included in the analysis. TO was achieved in 1164 (68.5%) patients. The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy [odds ratio (OR) = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.04-1.70] and D2 or D2+ lymphadenectomy (OR = 1.55, 95% CI: 1.15-2.10) had a positive impact on TO achievement. Older age (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.94), pT3/4 (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.63-0.99), ASA 3/4 (OR = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.54-0.86) and total gastrectomy (OR = 0.56, 95% CI: 0.45-0.70), had a negative impact on TO achievement. TOO was achieved in 388 (22.8%) patients. Older age (OR = 0.37, 95% CI: 0.27-0.53), pT3 or pT4 (OR = 0.52, 95% CI: 0.39-0.69), and ASA 3 or 4 (OR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.43-0.79) had a negative impact on TOO achievement.
CONCLUSIONS
Despite successively improved surgical outcomes, stage-appropriate chemotherapy in adherence to the current guidelines for multimodal treatment of gastric cancer remains poor. Further implementation of oncologic quality metrics should include greater emphasis on perioperative chemotherapy and adequate lymphadenectomy.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37555342
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006054
pii: 00000658-202311000-00025
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
823-831Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
Références
Busweiler LA, Schouwenburg MG, van Berge Henegouwen MI, et al. Textbook outcome as a composite measure in oesophagogastric cancer surgery. Br J Surg. 2017;104:742–750.
Neary C, O’Brien L, McCormack E, et al. Defining a textbook outcome for the resection of colorectal liver metastases. J Surg Oncol. 2022;127:616–624.
Levy J, Gupta V, Amirazodi E, et al. Textbook outcome and survival in patients with gastric cancer: an analysis of the Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumours in Ontario (PRESTO). Ann Surg. 2022;275:140–148.
Dal Cero M, Roman M, Grande L, et al. Textbook outcome and survival after gastric cancer resection with curative intent: a population-based analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2022;48:768–775.
van der Werf LR, Wijnhoven BPL, Fransen LFC, et al. A national cohort study evaluating the association between short-term outcomes and long-term survival after esophageal and gastric cancer surgery. Ann Surg. 2019;270:868–876.
Baiocchi GL, Giacopuzzi S, Marrelli D, et al. International consensus on a complications list after gastrectomy for cancer. Gastric Cancer. 2019;22:172–189.
Lordick F, Carneiro F, Cascinu S, et al. Gastric cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2022;33:1005–1020.
Ajani JA, D’Amico TA, Bentrem DJ, et al. Gastric cancer, version 2.2022, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2022;20:167–192.
Smyth EC, Verheij M, Allum W, et al. Gastric cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(suppl 5):v38–v49.
Sedlak K, Rawicz-Pruszynski K, Mlak R, et al. Union is strength: textbook outcome with perioperative chemotherapy compliance decreases the risk of death in advanced gastric cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2022;48:356–361.
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283:2008–2012.
Baiocchi GL, Giacopuzzi S, Reim D, et al. Incidence and grading of complications after gastrectomy for cancer using the GASTRODATA registry: a European retrospective observational study. Ann Surg. 2020;272:807–813.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240:205–213.
Slankamenac K, Graf R, Barkun J, et al. The comprehensive complication index: a novel continuous scale to measure surgical morbidity. Ann Surg. 2013;258:1.
Clavien PA, Vetter D, Staiger RD, et al. The Comprehensive Complication Index [CCI]: added value and clinical perspectives 3 years “down the line”. Ann Surg. 2017;265:1045–1050.
Voeten DM, Busweiler LAD, van der Werf LR, et al. Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit, G. Outcomes of Esophagogastric cancer surgery during eight years of surgical auditing by the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA). Ann Surg. 2021;274:866–873.
Chen JY, Lin GT, Chen QY, et al. Textbook outcome, chemotherapy compliance, and prognosis after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a large sample analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2022;48:2141–2148.
van Putten M, Lemmens V, van Laarhoven HWM, et al. Poor compliance with perioperative chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer and its impact on survival. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019;45:1926–1933.
Spolverato G, Paro A, Capelli G, et al. Surgical treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma: are we achieving textbook oncologic outcomes for our patients? J Surg Oncol. 2022;125:621–630.
Cibulas MA, Avila A, Mahendra AM, et al. Impact of textbook oncologic outcome attainment on survival after gastrectomy: a review of the national cancer database. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022;29:8239–8248.
Lin GT, Chen JY, Chen QY, et al. Reciprocity between lymphadenectomy quality and adjuvant chemotherapy compliance in gastric cancer: post hoc analysis of two randomized controlled trials. Surg Endosc. 2022;36:8774–8783.
de Jongh C, Triemstra L, van der Veen A, et al. Pattern of lymph node metastases in gastric cancer: a side-study of the multicenter LOGICA-trial. Gastric Cancer. 2022;25:1060–1072.
Claassen YHM, Hartgrink HH, Dikken JL, et al. Surgical morbidity and mortality after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the CRITICS gastric cancer trial. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44:613–619.
Zhang Q, Zhuang LP, Liu ZK. Comment on “textbook outcome and survival in patients with gastric cancer: an analysis of the Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumors in Ontario (PRESTO)”. Ann Surg. 2021;274:e885–e886.
Aquina CT, Hamad A, Becerra AZ, et al. Is textbook oncologic outcome a valid hospital-quality metric after high-risk surgical oncology procedures? Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:8028–8045.
Kalff MC, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Gisbertz SS. Textbook outcome for esophageal cancer surgery: an international consensus-based update of a quality measure. Dis Esophagus. 2021;34:doab011.
van der Kaaij RT, de Rooij MV, van Coevorden F, et al. Using textbook outcome as a measure of quality of care in oesophagogastric cancer surgery. Br J Surg. 2018;105:561–569.
Levy J, Gupta V, Amirazodi E, et al. Gastrectomy case volume and textbook outcome: an analysis of the Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumours of Ontario (PRESTO. Gastric Cancer. 2020;23:391–402.
Priego P, Cuadrado M, Ballestero A, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for treatment of gastric cancer: analysis of a textbook outcome. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2019;29:458–464.
Roh CK, Lee S, Son SY, et al. Textbook outcome and survival of robotic versus laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a propensity score matched cohort study. Sci Rep. 2021;11:15394.
Bolger JC, Al Azzawi M, Whooley J, et al. Surgery by a minimally invasive approach is associated with improved textbook outcomes in oesophageal and gastric cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021;47:2332–2339.
Voeten DM, Gisbertz SS, Ruurda JP, et al. Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit, G. Overall volume trends in esophageal cancer surgery results from the dutch upper gastrointestinal cancer audit. Ann Surg. 2021;274:449–458.
Oesophago-Gastric Anastomotic Audit C. Textbook outcome following oesophagectomy for cancer: international cohort study. Br J Surg. 2022;109:439–449.
Carbonell Morote S, Gracia Alegria E, Ruiz de la Cuesta Tapia E, et al. Textbook outcome in gastric surgery, what implications does it have on survival? Cir Esp (Engl Ed). 2023;101:20–28.
Gregory J, Tselikas L, Allimant C, et al. Defining textbook outcome for selective internal radiation therapy of hepatocellular carcinoma: an international expert study. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2023;50:921–928.
Görgec B, Cacciaguerra AB, Pawlik TM, et al. An International expert Delphi consensus on defining textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS). Ann Surg. 2022;277:821–828.
Chen Q, Diaz A, Beane J, et al. Achieving an optimal textbook outcome following pancreatic resection: The impact of surgeon specific experience in achieving high quality outcomes. Am J Surg. 2022;225:499–503.
Hyer JM, Diaz A, Tsilimigras D, et al. A novel machine learning approach to identify social risk factors associated with textbook outcomes after surgery. Surgery. 2022;172:955–961.
Xu SJ, Lin LQ, Chen TY, et al. Nomogram for prognosis of patients with esophageal squamous cell cancer after minimally invasive esophagectomy established based on non-textbook outcome. Surg Endosc. 2022;36:8326–8339.