The influence of hospital volume on circumferential resection margin involvement: Results of the Dutch surgical colorectal audit

Annals of Surgery

Volumn 263, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 745-750

  Gietelink, Lieke ^a   Henneman, Daniel ^b   Van Leersum, Nicoline J ^a   Noo, Mirre De ^c   Manusama, Eric ^d   Tanis, Pieter J ^e   Tollenaar, Rob A E M ^a   Wouters, Michel W J M ^a,f  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b RIJNLAND HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^c DEVENTER HOSPITAL   (Netherlands)

^d MEDICAL CENTER LEEUWARDEN   (Netherlands)

^e ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^f NETHERLANDS CANCER INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Circumferential resection margin involvement; Dutch surgical colorectal audit; Hospital volume; Rectal cancer resection

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; CANCER SURGERY; CIRCUMFERENTIAL RESECTION MARGIN; DIGESTIVE TRACT PARAMETERS; FEMALE; HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT; HOSPITAL VOLUME; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LOW ANTERIOR RESECTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECTUM ABDOMINOPERINEAL RESECTION; RECTUM CANCER; REGISTER; ABDOMINAL SURGERY; ADULT; EVALUATION STUDY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HIGH VOLUME HOSPITAL; LOW VOLUME HOSPITAL; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NETHERLANDS; PATHOLOGY; RECTAL NEOPLASMS; RECTUM; STANDARDS; VERY ELDERLY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM SURGICAL PROCEDURES; FEMALE; HOSPITALS, HIGH-VOLUME; HOSPITALS, LOW-VOLUME; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NETHERLANDS; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; RECTAL NEOPLASMS; RECTUM;

EID: 84946866898     PISSN: 00034932     EISSN: 15281140     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001009     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Verdecchia A, Francisci S, Brenner H, et al. Recent cancer survival in Europe: a 2000-02 period analysis of EUROCARE-4 data. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8: 784-796.
2. Kolfschoten NE, Marang van de Mheen PJ, Gooiker GA, et al. Variation in case-mix between hospitals treating colorectal cancer patients in the Netherlands. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37:956-963.
3. Kapiteijn E, Putter H, van de Velde CJ. Impact of the introduction and training of total mesorectal excision on recurrence and survival in rectal cancer in the Netherlands. Br J Surg. 2002;89:1142-1149.
4. Martling AL, Holm T, Rutqvist LE, et al. Effect of a surgical training programme on outcome of rectal cancer in the County of Stockholm. Stockholm Colorectal Cancer Study Group, Basingstoke Bowel Cancer Research Project. Lancet. 2000;356:93-96.
5. van Gijn W, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, et al. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer: 12-year follow-up of the multicentre, randomised controlled TME trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:575-582.
6. McCall JL, Cox MR, Wattchow DA. Analysis of local recurrence rates after surgery alone for rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis. 1995; 10:126-132.
7. Russell MC, You YN, Hu CY, et al. A novel risk-adjusted nomogram for rectal cancer surgery outcomes. JAMA Surg. 2013;1-9.
8. Adam IJ, Mohamdee MO, Martin IG, et al. Role of circumferential margin involvement in the local recurrence of rectal cancer. Lancet. 1994;344: 707-711.
9. Nagtegaal ID, Marijnen CA, Kranenbarg EK, et al. Circumferential margin involvement is still an important predictor of local recurrence in rectal carcinoma: not one millimeter but two millimeters is the limit. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26:350-357.
10. Wibe A, Rendedal PR, Svensson E, et al. Prognostic significance of the circumferential resection margin following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2002;89:327-334.
11. Rullier A, Gourgou-Bourgade S, Jarlier M, et al. Predictive factors of positive circumferential resection margin after radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer: the French randomised trial ACCORD12/0405 PRODIGE 2. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:82-89.
12. Archampong D, Borowski D, Wille-Jorgensen P, et al. Workload and surgeon's specialty for outcome after colorectal cancer surgery. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;3:CD005391.
13. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1128-1137.
14. van Gijn W, Gooiker GA, Wouters MW, et al. Volume and outcome in colorectal cancer surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010;36:S55-S63.
15. Borowski DW, Bradburn DM, Mills SJ, et al. Volume-outcome analysis of colorectal cancer-related outcomes. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1416-1130.
16. Cornish JA, Tekkis PP, Tan E, et al. The national bowel cancer audit project: the impact of organisational structure on outcome in operative bowel cancer within the United Kingdom. Surg Oncol. 2011;20:e72-e77.
17. Harling H, Bulow S, Moller LN, et al. Hospital volume and outcome of rectal cancer surgery in Denmark 1994-99. Colorectal Dis. 2005;7:90-95.
18. Kennelly RP, Rogers AC, Winter DC. Multicentre study of circumferential margin positivity and outcomes following abdominoperineal excision for rectal cancer. Br J Surg. 2013;100:160-166.
19. Van Leersum NJ, Snijders HS, Henneman D, et al. The Dutch surgical colorectal audit. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39:1063-1070.
20. Dutch Institute for Clinical Auditing. Annual Reports 2012. Available at: http://www.clinicalaudit.nl. Accessed May 5, 2014.
21. Iversen LH, Harling H, Laurberg S, et al. Influence of caseload and surgical speciality on outcome following surgery for colorectal cancer: a review of evidence. Part 1: short-term outcome. Colorectal Dis. 2007;9: 28-37.
22. Finlayson SR. The volume-outcome debate revisited. Am Surg. 2006;72:1038-1042; discussion 1061-1069, 1133-1048.
23. National Bowel Cancer Audit Programme (NBOCAP). Annual reports 2013. Available at: http://www.acpgbi.org.uk/content/uploads/Bowel-Cancer-Audit-2013-INTERACTIVE-PDF-01-07-13.pdf. Accessed February 3, 2014.
24. Demetter P, Vandendael T, Sempoux C, et al. Need for objective and reproducible criteria in histopathological assessment of total mesorectal excision specimens: lessons from a national improvement project. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:1351-1358.
25. Birbeck KF, Macklin CP, Tiffin NJ, et al. Rates of circumferential resection margin involvement vary between surgeons and predict outcomes in rectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg. 2002;235:449-457.
26. Mesman R, Faber MJ, Westert GP, et al. Volume standards: quality through quantity? Relationship between treatment volume and outcomes not well founded. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2013;157:A5466.
27. Hohenberger W, Merkel S, Hermanek P. Volume and outcome in rectal cancer surgery: the importance of quality management. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2013;28:197-206.
28. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1966;44:166-206.