Challenging the knowledge base and skillset for providing surgical consent by orthopedic and plastic surgeons in the Netherlands:an identified area of improvement in patient safety

Background: Successfully completing a surgical informed consent process is an important element of the preoperative consult. A previous study of Dutch general surgeons demonstrated that the implementation of SIC did not meet acceptable standards. However, the quality of the SIC process in the orthopedic surgical or plastic surgical arena is unknown. Methods: Following ethical approval, an online survey investigating specifics of surgical informed consent was performed among members of the Dutch Scientific Association of Orthopedic Surgeons and the Dutch Society for Plastic Surgery. Results: A total of 335 responses from a majority of departments of orthopedic (86 %) and plastic surgery (78 %) were eligible for analysis. Scores on knowledge were poor as only 50 % recognized the three basic elements of surgical informed consent (competence, exchange of information and consent). The orthopedic group used more tools in the surgical informed consent process, such as instruction movies and websites or specialized nursing staff, compared to plastic surgery (orthopedic: 31-50 % vs. plastic: 6-30 %, p = 0.05- <0.001). In contrast, surgical informed consent forms were used more frequently by the plastic surgical group (orthopedic 21 % vs. plastic: 42 % p <0.001). Control of the efficacy of the surgical informed consent process was low, 36 % in both groups. One in every seven orthopedic or plastic surgeons was faced with an official surgical informed consent-related complaint in the previous five years. Conclusions: Similar to general surgeons, Dutch orthopedic and plastic surgeons demonstrate poor knowledge and skills regarding surgical informed consent. Increased awareness, better training and use of modern tools including standard forms and online software programs will improve the SIC process and will optimize patient car

Hospital variation and outcomes of simultaneous resection of primary colorectal tumour and liver metastases:a population-based study

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

Population-based study on practice variation regarding preoperative systemic chemotherapy in patients with colorectal liver metastases and impact on short-term outcomes

Introduction: Definitions regarding resectability and hence indications for preoperative chemotherapy vary. Use of preoperative chemotherapy may influence postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to assess the variation in use of preoperative chemotherapy for CRLM and related postoperative outcomes in the Netherlands. Materials and methods: All patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2018 were included from a national database. Case-mix factors contributing to the use of preoperative chemotherapy, hospital variation and postoperative outcomes were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Postoperative outcomes were postoperative complicated course (PCC), 30-day morbidity and 30-day mortality. Results: In total, 4469 patients were included of whom 1314 patients received preoperative chemotherapy and 3155 patients did not. Patients receiving chemotherapy were significantly younger (mean age (+SD) 66.3 (10.4) versus 63.2 (10.2) p < 0.001) and had less comorbidity (Charlson scores 2+ (24% versus 29%, p = 0.010). Unadjusted hospital variation concerning administration of preoperative chemotherapy ranged between 2% and 55%. After adjusting for case-mix factors, three hospitals administered significantly more preoperative chemotherapy than expected and six administered significantly less preoperative chemotherapy than expected. PCC was 12.1%, 30-day morbidity was 8.8% and 30-day mortality was 1.5%. No association between preoperative chemotherapy and PCC (OR 1.24, 0.98–1.55, p = 0.065), 30-day morbidity (OR 1.05, 0.81–1.39, p = 0.703) or with 30-day mortality (OR 1.22, 0.75–2.09, p = 0.467) was found. Conclusion: Significant hospital variation in the use of preoperative chemotherapy for CRLM was present in the Netherlands. No association between postoperative outcomes and use of preoperative chemotherapy was found

Short-term postoperative outcomes after liver resection in the elderly patient:a nationwide population-based study

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

Nationwide oncological networks for resection of colorectal liver metastases in the Netherlands:Differences and postoperative outcomes

INTRODUCTION: Widespread differences in patient demographics and disease burden between hospitals for resection of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have been described. In the Netherlands, networks consisting of at least one tertiary referral centre and several regional hospitals have been established to optimize treatment and outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess variation in case-mix, and outcomes between these networks. METHODS: This was a population-based study including all patients who underwent CRLM resection in the Netherlands between 2014 and 2019. Variation in case-mix and outcomes between seven networks covering the whole country was evaluated. Differences in case-mix, expected 30-day major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥3a) and 30-day mortality between networks were assessed. RESULTS: In total 5383 patients were included. Thirty-day major morbidity was 5.7% and 30-day mortality was 1.5%. Significant differences between networks were observed for Charlson Comorbidity Index, ASA 3+, previous liver resection, liver disease, preoperative MRI, preoperative chemotherapy, ≥3 CRLM, diameter of largest CRLM ≥55 mm, major resection, combined resection and ablation, rectal primary tumour, bilobar and extrahepatic disease. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 3.3% and 13.1% for hospitals, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 4.5%. Uncorrected 30-day major morbidity ranged between 4.4% and 6.0% for networks, 30-day mortality ranged between 0.0% and 2.5%. No negative outliers were observed after case-mix correction. CONCLUSION: Variation in case-mix and outcomes are considerably smaller on a network level as compared to a hospital level. Therefore, auditing is more meaningful at a network level and collaboration of hospitals within networks should be pursued

Case-mix adjustment to compare nationwide hospital performances after resection of colorectal liver metastases

Background: Differences in patient demographics and disease burden can influence comparison of hospital performances. This study aimed to provide a case-mix model to compare short-term postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing liver resection for colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Methods: This retrospective, population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2018 in the Netherlands. Variation in case-mix variables between hospitals and influence on postoperative outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Primary outcomes were 30-day major morbidity and 30-day mortality. Validation of results was performed on the data from 2019. Results: In total, 4639 patients were included in 28 hospitals. Major morbidity was 6.2% and mortality was 1.4%. Uncorrected major morbidity ranged from 3.3% to 13.7% and mortality ranged from 0.0% to 5.0%. between hospitals. Significant differences between hospitals were observed for age higher than 80 (0.0%-17.1%, p <0.001), ASA 3 or higher (3.3%-36.3%, p <0.001), histopathological parenchymal liver disease (0.0%-47.1%, p <0.001), history of liver resection (8.1%-36.3%, p <0.001), major liver resection (6.7%-38.0%, p <0.001) and synchronous metastases (35.5%-62.1%, p <0.001). Expected 30-day major morbidity between hospitals ranged from 6.4% to 11.9% and expected 30-day mortality ranged from 0.6% to 2.9%. After case-mix correction no significant outliers concerning major morbidity and mortality remained. Validation on patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM in 2019 affirmed these outcomes. Conclusion: Case-mix adjustment is a prerequisite to allow for institutional comparison of short-term postoperative outcomes after liver resection for CRLM. (C) 2020 University Medical Center Groningen. Published by Elsevier Ltd

Factors associated with failure to rescue after liver resection and impact on hospital variation:a nationwide population-based study

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

A Review of Surgical Informed Consent: Past, Present, and Future. A Quest to Help Patients Make Better Decisions

Contains fulltext : 87422.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)BACKGROUND: Informed consent (IC) is a process requiring a competent doctor, adequate transfer of information, and consent of the patient. It is not just a signature on a piece of paper. Current consent processes in surgery are probably outdated and may require major changes to adjust them to modern day legislation. A literature search may provide an opportunity for enhancing the quality of the surgical IC (SIC) process. METHODS: Relevant English literature obtained from PubMed, Picarta, PsycINFO, and Google between 1993 and 2009 was reviewed. RESULTS: The body of literature with respect to SIC is slim and of moderate quality. The SIC process is an underestimated part of surgery and neither surgeons nor patients sufficiently realize its importance. Surgeons are not specifically trained and lack the competence to guide patients through a legally correct SIC process. Computerized programs can support the SIC process significantly but are rarely used for this purpose. CONCLUSIONS: IC should be integrated into our surgical practice. Unfortunately, a big gap exists between the theoretical/legal best practice and the daily practice of IC. An optimally informed patient will have more realistic expectations regarding a surgical procedure and its associated risks. Well-informed patients will be more satisfied and file fewer legal claims. The use of interactive computer-based programs provides opportunities to improve the SIC process.1 juli 201

Resectability and Ablatability Criteria for the Treatment of Liver Only Colorectal Metastases:Multidisciplinary Consensus Document from the COLLISION Trial Group

The guidelines for metastatic colorectal cancer crudely state that the best local treatment should be selected from a 'toolbox' of techniques according to patient- and treatment-related factors. We created an interdisciplinary, consensus-based algorithm with specific resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). To pursue consensus, members of the multidisciplinary COLLISION and COLDFIRE trial expert panel employed the RAND appropriateness method (RAM). Statements regarding patient, disease, tumor and treatment characteristics were categorized as appropriate, equipoise or inappropriate. Patients with ECOG≤2, ASA≤3 and Charlson comorbidity index ≤8 should be considered fit for curative-intent local therapy. When easily resectable and/or ablatable (stage IVa), (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy is not indicated. When requiring major hepatectomy (stage IVb), neo-adjuvant systemic therapy is appropriate for early metachronous disease and to reduce procedural risk. To downstage patients (stage IVc), downsizing induction systemic therapy and/or future remnant augmentation is advised. Disease can only be deemed permanently unsuitable for local therapy if downstaging failed (stage IVd). Liver resection remains the gold standard. Thermal ablation is reserved for unresectable CRLM, deep-seated resectable CRLM and can be considered when patients are in poor health. Irreversible electroporation and stereotactic body radiotherapy can be considered for unresectable perihilar and perivascular CRLM 0-5cm. This consensus document provides per-patient and per-tumor resectability and ablatability criteria for the treatment of CRLM. These criteria are intended to aid tumor board discussions, improve consistency when designing prospective trials and advance intersociety communications. Areas where consensus is lacking warrant future comparative studies.</p

Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research.Peer reviewe