The Influence of Hospital Volume on Circumferential Resection Margin Involvement: Results of the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit

This population-based study evaluates the association between hospital volume and CRM (circumferential resection margin) involvement, adjusted for other confounders, in rectal cancer surgery. A low hospital volume ( <20 cases/year) was independently associated with a higher risk of CRM involvement (odds ratio=1.54; 95% CI: 1.12-2.11). To evaluate the association between hospital volume and CRM (circumferential resection margin) involvement in rectal cancer surgery. To guarantee the quality of surgical treatment of rectal cancer, the Association of Surgeons of the Netherlands has stated a minimal annual volume standard of 20 procedures per hospital. The influence of hospital volume has been examined for different outcome variables in rectal cancer surgery. Its influence on the pathological outcome (CRM) however remains unclear. As long-term outcomes are best predicted by the CRM status, this parameter is of essential importance in the debate on the justification of minimal volume standards in rectal cancer surgery. Data from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit (2011-2012) were used. Hospital volume was divided into 3 groups, and baseline characteristics were described. The influence of hospital volume on CRM involvement was analyzed, in a multivariate model, between low- and high-volume hospitals, according to the minimal volume standards. This study included 5161 patients. CRM was recorded in 86% of patients. CRM involvement was 11% in low-volume group versus 7.7% and 7.9% in the medium- and high-volume group (P≤0.001). After adjustment for relevant confounders, the influence of hospital volume on CRM involvement was still significant odds ratio (OR) = 1.54; 95% CI: 1.12-2.11). The outcomes of this pooled analysis support minimal volume standards in rectal cancer surgery. Low hospital volume was independently associated with a higher risk of CRM involvement (OR = 1.54; 95% CI: 1.12-2.11

Safety of elective colorectal cancer surgery:Non-surgical complications and colectomies are targets for quality improvement

Background Mortality following severe complications (failure-to-rescue, FTR) is targeted in surgical quality improvement projects. Rates may differ between colon- and rectal cancer resections. Methods Analysis of patients undergoing elective colon and rectal cancer resections registered in the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit in 2011-2012. Severe complication- and FTR rates were compared between the groups in univariate and multivariate analysis. Results Colon cancer (CC) patients (n = 10,184) were older and had more comorbidity. Rectal cancer (RC) patients (n = 4,906) less often received an anastomosis and had more diverting stomas. Complication rates were higher in RC patients (24.8% vs. 18.3%, P <0.001). However, FTR rates were higher in CC patients (18.6% vs. 9.4%, P <0.001). Particularly, FTR associated with anastomotic leakage, postoperative bleeding, and infections was higher in CC patients. Adjusted for casemix, CC patients had a twofold risk of FTR compared to RC patients (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.06-3.37). Conclusions Severe complication rates were lower in CC patients than in RC patients; however, the risk of dying following a severe complication was twice as high in CC patients, regardless of differences in characteristics between the groups. Efforts should be made to improve recognition and management of postoperative (non-)surgical complications, especially in colon cancer surgery. J. Surg. Oncol. 2014 109:???-???. (c) 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc

Successful and safe introduction of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in Dutch hospitals

To investigate the safety of laparoscopic colorectal cancer resections in a nationwide population-based study. Although laparoscopic techniques are increasingly used in colorectal cancer surgery, little is known on results outside trials. With the fast introduction of laparoscopic resection (LR), questions were raised about safety. Of all patients who underwent an elective colorectal cancer resection in 2010 in the Netherlands, 93% were included in the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Short-term outcome after LR, open resection (OR), and converted LR were compared in a generalized linear mixed model. We further explored hospital differences in LR and conversion rates. A total of 7350 patients, treated in 90 hospitals, were included. LR rate was 41% with a conversion rate of 15%. After adjustment for differences in case-mix, LR was associated with a lower risk of mortality (odds ratio 0.63, P 0.05). A large variation in LR and conversion rates among hospitals was found; however, the difference in outcome associated with operative techniques was not influenced by hospital of treatment. Use of laparoscopic techniques in colorectal cancer surgery in the Netherlands is safe and results are better in short-term outcome than open surgery, irrespective of the hospital of treatment. Outcome after conversion was similar to O