Imaging for Quality Control: Comparison of Systematic Video Recording to the Operative Note in Colorectal Cancer Surgery. A Pilot Study

Annals of Surgical Oncology

Volumn 23, Issue , 2016, Pages 798-803

  van de Graaf, F W ^a   Lange, M M ^b   Menon, A G ^c   O'Mahoney P R A ^d   Milsom, J W ^d   Lange, J F ^a,c  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c Havenziekenhuis   (Netherlands)

^d NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL ABSCESS; AGED; ANASTOMOSIS LEAKAGE; ARTICLE; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COLON RESECTION; COLORECTAL CANCER; COLORECTAL SURGERY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ELECTIVE SURGERY; FEMALE; HEART DISEASE; HEMICOLECTOMY; HUMAN; IMAGING; INFORMATION; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MALE; NEUROLOGICAL COMPLICATION; PILOT STUDY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; POSTOPERATIVE ILEUS; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITY CONTROL; RESPIRATORY TRACT INFECTION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCORING SYSTEM; SURGICAL INFECTION; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; VIDEORECORDING; CHECKLIST; CLINICAL TRIAL; COLON TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DOCUMENTATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; MIDDLE AGED; RECTUM TUMOR; STANDARDS; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CHECKLIST; COLECTOMY; COLONIC NEOPLASMS; DOCUMENTATION; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PILOT PROJECTS; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY CONTROL; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; RECTAL NEOPLASMS; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 84988733895     PISSN: 10689265     EISSN: 15344681     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5563-y     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. New Engl J Med. 2004;350:2050–9.
2. Kolfschoten NE, van Leersum NJ, Gooiker GA, et al. Successful and safe introduction of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in Dutch hospitals. Ann Surg. 2013;257:916–21.
3. Mack LA, Temple WJ. Education is the key to quality of surgery for rectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31:636–44.
4. Iversen LH, Ingeholm P, Gogenur I, Laurberg S. Major reduction in 30-day mortality after elective colorectal cancer surgery: a nationwide population-based study in Denmark 2001–2011. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:2267–73.
5. Evans MD.., Thomas R, Williams GL, et al. A comparative study of colorectal surgical outcome in a national audit separated by 15 years. Colorectal Dis. 2013;15:608–12.
6. Panis Y, Maggiori L, Caranhac G, Bretagnol F, Vicaut E. Mortality after colorectal cancer surgery: a French survey of more than 84,000 patients. Ann Surg. 2011;254:738–43; discussion 743–4
7. Sant M, Allemani C, Santaquilani M, Knijn A, Marchesi F, Capocaccia R, Eurocare Working Group. EUROCARE-4. Survival of cancer patients diagnosed in 1995–1999. Results and commentary. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:931–91.
8. Giacomantonio CA, Temple WJ. Quality of cancer surgery: challenges and controversies. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2000;9:51–60.
9. Hermanek P, Wiebelt H, Staimmer D, Riedl S. Prognostic factors of rectum carcinoma—experience of the German Multicentre Study SGCRC. German Study Group Colo-Rectal Carcinoma. Tumori. 1995;81:60–4.
10. Lange MM, Martz JE, RaMD..een B, Brooks V, Boachie-Adjei K, van de Velde CJ, Enker WE. Long-term results of rectal cancer surgery with a systematical operative approach. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1806–15.
11. Lange MM, den Dulk M, Bossema ER, et al. Risk factors for faecal incontinence after rectal cancer treatment. Br J Surg. 2007;94:1278–84.
12. Lange MM, Maas CP, Marijnen CA, et al. Urinary dysfunction after rectal cancer treatment is mainly caused by surgery. Br J Surg. 2008;95:1020–8.
13. Wallner C, Lange MM, Bonsing BA, et al. Causes of fecal and urinary incontinence after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer based on cadaveric surgery: a study from the Cooperative Clinical Investigators of the Dutch total mesorectal excision trial. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4466–72.
14. Lange MM, Marijnen CA, Maas CP, et al. Risk factors for sexual dysfunction after rectal cancer treatment. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:1578–88.
15. Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, et al. A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. New Engl J Med. 2009;360:491–9.
16. Wauben LS, van Grevenstein WM, Goossens RH, van der Meulen FH, Lange JF. Operative notes do not reflect reality in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg. 2011;98:1431–6.
17. O’Mahoney PR, Trencheva K, Zhuo C, Shukla PJ, Lee SW, Sonoda T, Milsom JW. Systematic video documentation in laparoscopic colon surgery using a checklist: a feasibility and compliance pilot study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015;25:737–43.
18. Edhemovic I, Temple WJ, de Gara CJ, Stuart GC. The computer synoptic operative report—a leap forward in the science of surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:941–7.
19. Donahoe L, Bennett S, Temple W, Hilchie-Pye A, Dabbs K, Macintosh E, Porter G. Completeness of dictated operative reports in breast cancer–the case for synoptic reporting. J Surg Oncol. 2012;106:79–83.
20. Ma GW, Pooni A, Forbes SS, Eskicioglu C, Pearsall E, Brenneman FD, McLeod RS. Quality of inguinal hernia operative reports: room for improvement. Can J Surg. 2013;56:393–7.
21. Wiebe ME, Sandhu L, Takata JL, et al. Quality of narrative operative reports in pancreatic surgery. Can J Surg. 2013;56:E121–7.
22. Sundbom M, Ottosson J. Trocar injuries in 17,446 laparoscopic gastric bypass—a nationwide survey from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry. Obes Surg. 2016;26: 2127–30.
23. Champault G, Cazacu F, Taffinder N. Serious trocar accidents in laparoscopic surgery: a French survey of 103,852 operations. Surg Laparosc Endosc. 1996;6:367–70.
24. O’Mahoney PR, Yeo HL, Lange MM, Milsom JW. Driving surgical quality using operative video. Surg Innov. 2016;23:337–40.