Patients with Endoscopically Visible Polypoid Adenomatous Lesions Within the Extent of Ulcerative Colitis Have an Increased Risk of Colorectal Cancer Despite Endoscopic Resection.

OBJECTIVES: Ulcerative colitis (UC) is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Few studies have looked at long-term outcomes of endoscopically visible adenomatous lesions removed by endoscopic resection in these patients. We aimed to assess the risk of developing CRC in UC patients with adenomatous lesions that develop within the segment of colitis compared to the remainder of an ulcerative colitis cohort. METHODS: We identified patients with a confirmed histological diagnosis of UC from 1991 to 2004 and noted outcomes till June 2011. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate cumulative probability of subsequent CRC. Factors associated with risk of CRC were assessed in a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Twenty-nine of 301 patients with UC had adenomatous lesions noted within the segment of colitis. The crude incidence rate of developing colon cancer in patients with UC was 2.45 (95 % CI 1.06-4.83) per 1000 PYD and in those with UC and polypoid adenomas within the extent of inflammation was 11.07 (95 % CI 3.59-25.83) per 1000 PYD. Adjusted hazards ratio of developing CRC on follow-up in UC patients with polypoid dysplastic adenomatous lesions within the extent of inflammation was 4.0 (95 % CI 1.3-12.4). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of developing CRC is significantly higher in UC patients with polypoid adenomatous lesions, within the extent of inflammation, despite endoscopic resection. Patients and physicians should take the increased risk into consideration during follow-up of these patients

The Politics of Evidence Use in Health Policy Making in Germany-the Case of Regulating Hospital Minimum Volumes.

This article examines the role of scientific evidence in informing health policy decisions in Germany, using minimum volumes policy as a case study. It argues that scientific evidence was used strategically at various stages of the policy process both by individual corporatist actors and by the Federal Joint Committee as the regulator. Minimum volumes regulation was inspired by scientific evidence suggesting a positive relationship between service volume and patient outcomes for complex surgical interventions. Federal legislation was introduced in 2002 to delegate the selection of services and the setting of volumes to corporatist decision makers. Yet, despite being represented in the Federal Joint Committee, hospitals affected by its decisions took the Committee to court to seek legal redress and prevent policy implementation. Evidence has been key to support, and challenge, decisions about minimum volumes, including in court. The analysis of the role of scientific evidence in minimum volumes regulation in Germany highlights the dynamic relationship between evidence use and the political and institutional context of health policy making, which in this case is characterized by the legislative nature of policy making, corporatism, and the role of the judiciary in reviewing policy decisions

In-hospital mortality after stomach cancer surgery in Spain and relationship with hospital volume of interventions

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is no consensus about the possible relation between in-hospital mortality in surgery for gastric cancer and the hospital annual volume of interventions. The objectives were to identify factors associated to greater in-hospital mortality for surgery in gastric cancer and to analyze the possible independent relation between hospital annual volume and in-hospital mortality.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients discharged after surgery for stomach cancer during 2001–2002 in four regions of Spain using the Minimum Basic Data Set for Hospital Discharges. The overall and specific in-hospital mortality rates were estimated according to patient and hospital characteristics. We adjusted a logistic regression model in order to calculate the in-hospital mortality according to hospital volume.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were 3241 discharges in 144 hospitals. In-hospital mortality was 10.3% (95% CI 9.3–11.4). A statistically significant relation was observed among age, type of admission, volume, and mortality, as well as diverse secondary diagnoses or the type of intervention. Hospital annual volume was associated to Charlson score, type of admission, region, length of stay and number of secondary diagnoses registered at discharge. In the adjusted model, increased age and urgent admission were associated to increased in-hospital mortality. Likewise, partial gastrectomy (Billroth I and II) and simple excision of lymphatic structure were associated with a lower probability of in-hospital mortality. No independent association was found between hospital volume and in-hospital mortality</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Despite the limitations of our study, our results corroborate the existence of patient, clinical, and intervention factors associated to greater hospital mortality, although we found no clear association between the volume of cases treated at a centre and hospital mortality.</p

High-Volume versus Low-Volume for Esophageal Resections for Cancer: The Essential Role of Case-Mix Adjustments based on Clinical Data

Background: Most studies addressing the volume-outcome relationship in complex surgical procedures use hospital mortality as the sole outcome measure and are rarely based on detailed clinical data. The lack of reliable information about comorbidities and tumor stages makes the conclusions of these studies debatable. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes for esophageal resections for cancer in low- versus high-volume hospitals, using an extensive set of variables concerning case-mix and outcome measures, including long-term survival. Methods: Clinical data, from 903 esophageal resections performed between January 1990 and December 1999, were retrieved from the original patients' files. Three hundred and forty-two patients were operated on in 11 low-volume hospitals (<7 resections/year) and 561 in a single high-volume center. Results: Mortality and morbidity rates were significantly lower in the high-volume center, which had an in-hospital mortality of 5 vs 13% (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, hospital volume, but also the presence of comorbidity proved to be strong prognostic factors predicting in-hospital mortality (ORs 3.05 and 2.34). For stage I and II disease, there was a significantly better 5-year survival in the high-volume center. (P = .04). Conclusions: Hospital volume and comorbidity patterns are important determinants of outcome in esophageal cancer surgery. Strong clinical endpoints such as in-hospital mortality and survival can be used as performance indicators, only if they are joined by reliable case-mix information