Literature DB >> 22456179

Effect of hospital volume on postoperative mortality and survival after oesophageal and gastric cancer surgery in the Netherlands between 1989 and 2009.

Johan L Dikken1, Anneriet E Dassen, Valery E P Lemmens, Hein Putter, Pieta Krijnen, Lydia van der Geest, Koop Bosscha, Marcel Verheij, Cornelis J H van de Velde, Michel W J M Wouters.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: High hospital volume is associated with better outcomes after oesophagectomy and gastrectomy. In the Netherlands, a minimal volume standard of 10 oesophagectomies per year was introduced in 2006. For gastrectomy, no minimal volume standard was set. Aims of this study were to describe changes in hospital volumes, mortality and survival and to explore if high hospital volume is associated with better outcomes after oesophagectomy and gastrectomy in the Netherlands.
METHODS: From 1989 to 2009, 24,246 patients underwent oesophagectomy (N = 10,025) or gastrectomy (N = 14,221) in the Netherlands. Annual hospital volumes were defined as very low (1-5), low (6-10), medium (11-20), and high (≥ 21). Volume-outcome analyses were performed using Cox regression, adjusting for year of diagnosis, case-mix and the use of multi-modality treatment.
RESULTS: From 1989 to 2009, the percentage of patients treated in high-volume hospitals increased for oesophagectomy (from 7% to 64%), but decreased for gastrectomy (from 8% to 5%). Six-month mortality (from 15% to 7%) and 3-year survival (from 41% to 52%) improved after oesophagectomy, and to a lesser extent after gastrectomy (6-month mortality: 15%-10%, three-year survival: 55-58%). High hospital volume was associated with lower 6-month mortality (hazard ratio (HR) 0.48, P<0.001) and longer 3-year survival (HR 0.77, P<0.001) after oesophagectomy, but not after gastrectomy.
CONCLUSIONS: Oesophagectomy was effectively centralised in the Netherlands, improving mortality and survival. Gastrectomies were mainly performed in low volumes, and outcomes after gastrectomy improved to a lesser extent, indicating an urgent need for improvement in quality of surgery and perioperative care for gastric cancer in the Netherlands.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22456179     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.02.064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Cancer        ISSN: 0959-8049            Impact factor:   9.162


  36 in total

1.  Staging and surgical approaches in gastric cancer: a clinical practice guideline.

Authors:  N Coburn; R Cosby; L Klein; G Knight; R Malthaner; J Mamazza; C D Mercer; J Ringash
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 3.677

2.  Patterns of surveillance following curative intent therapy for gastroesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Renata D Peixoto; Howard J Lim; Haerin Kim; Ahmad Abdullah; Winson Y Cheung
Journal:  J Gastrointest Cancer       Date:  2014-09

3.  [Hospital volume effects in surgical treatment of gastric cancer : Results of a prospective multicenter observational study].

Authors:  H Ptok; I Gastinger; F Meyer; A Ilsemann; H Lippert; C Bruns
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 0.955

Review 4.  Anaesthesia during oesophagectomy.

Authors:  Denise P Veelo; Bart F Geerts
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 5.  Potentially Curable Cancers of the Esophagus and Stomach.

Authors:  Elena Elimova; Dilsa Mizrak Kaya; Kazuto Harada; Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 7.616

6.  Long-term quality of life after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy for early gastric cancer: results of a prospective multi-institutional comparative trial.

Authors:  Kazunari Misawa; Michitaka Fujiwara; Masahiko Ando; Seiji Ito; Yoshinari Mochizuki; Yuichi Ito; Eiji Onishi; Kiyoshi Ishigure; Yuki Morioka; Tsunenobu Takase; Takuya Watanabe; Yoshitaka Yamamura; Satoshi Morita; Yasuhiro Kodera
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 7.370

7.  Institutional variation in short- and long-term outcomes after surgery for gastric or esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: correlative study of two randomized phase III trials (JCOG9501 and JCOG9502).

Authors:  Yukinori Kurokawa; Takuhiro Yamaguchi; Mitsuru Sasako; Takeshi Sano; Junki Mizusawa; Kenichi Nakamura; Haruhiko Fukuda
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2016-08-27       Impact factor: 7.370

8.  Drain amylase aids detection of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy.

Authors:  Erin H Baker; Joshua S Hill; Mark K Reames; James Symanowski; Susie C Hurley; Jonathan C Salo
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2016-04

9.  Is a clear benefit in survival enough to modify patient access to the surgery service? A retrospective analysis in a cohort of gastric cancer patients.

Authors:  Mattia Altini; Elisa Carretta; Paolo Morgagni; Tiziano Carradori; Emanuele Ciotti; Elena Prati; Domenico Garcea; Dino Amadori; Amadori Dino; Fabio Falcini; Oriana Nanni
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 7.370

10.  Economic impacts of care by high-volume providers for non-curative esophagogastric cancer: a population-based analysis.

Authors:  Julie Hallet; Nicole J Look Hong; Victoria Zuk; Laura E Davis; Vaibhav Gupta; Craig C Earle; Nicole Mittmann; Natalie G Coburn
Journal:  Gastric Cancer       Date:  2019-12-13       Impact factor: 7.370

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.