José M Quintana1, Ane Antón-Ladisla2, Nerea González2, Santiago Lázaro3, Marisa Baré4, Nerea Fernández de Larrea5, Maximino Redondo6, Eduardo Briones7, Antonio Escobar8, Cristina Sarasqueta9, Susana García-Gutierrez2. 1. Unidad de Investigación, Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo, Galdakao, Bizkaia, Spain; Red de Investigación en Servicios Sanitarios y Enfermedades Crónicas (REDISSEC). Electronic address: josemaria.quintanalopez@osakidetza.eus. 2. Unidad de Investigación, Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo, Galdakao, Bizkaia, Spain; Red de Investigación en Servicios Sanitarios y Enfermedades Crónicas (REDISSEC). 3. Servicio de Cirugía General, Hospital Galdakao-Usansolo, Galdakao, Bizkaia, Spain. 4. Unidad de Epidemiología Clínica, Corporació Parc Taulí, Sabadell, Barcelona, Spain; Red de Investigación en Servicios Sanitarios y Enfermedades Crónicas (REDISSEC). 5. Centro Nacional de Epidemiología, ISCIII, Madrid, Spain; CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP). 6. Unidad de Investigación, Hospital Costa del Sol, Málaga, Spain; Red de Investigación en Servicios Sanitarios y Enfermedades Crónicas (REDISSEC). 7. Unidad de Epidemiología. Distrito Sanitario Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain. 8. Unidad de Investigación, Hospital U. Basurto, Bilbao, Bizkaia, Spain; Red de Investigación en Servicios Sanitarios y Enfermedades Crónicas (REDISSEC). 9. Unidad de Investigación, Hospital U. Donostia/BIODONOSTIA, Donostia-San Sebastian, Gipuzkoa, Spain; Red de Investigación en Servicios Sanitarios y Enfermedades Crónicas (REDISSEC).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: There is limited information on health service use or patient-reported outcomes when comparing the effectiveness of laparoscopic with that of open surgery. The aim was to compare the effectiveness of laparoscopic with that of open surgery up to 2 years after intervention in patients with colon cancer. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients with colon cancer who underwent surgery (laparoscopic or open surgery) between June 2010 and December 2012, at 22 hospitals. Main outcomes of the study were mortality, complications, reoperation, readmission, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), as measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Duke-UNC, EuroQol-5D, and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Q30 and Q29 at baseline, and 30 days and 1 and 2 years after surgery. Multivariable multilevel logistic regression and generalized linear models were used in analyses after adjusting for specific propensity scores developed for each outcome and time point. RESULTS: In the multivariable analysis, the complication rates up to 30 days (infectious, surgical, and medical) and 1 year (surgical), and readmission rate at 30 days and at 2 years were higher among patients who underwent open surgery than among those who underwent laparoscopic surgery. There were no differences between the two surgical approaches in all other parameters assessed and in changes of all PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Though in most outcomes both surgical approaches provide similar results up to 2 years after intervention, still the rates of some complications and readmission, mainly up to 30 days, are higher in open surgery. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02488161.
OBJECTIVE: There is limited information on health service use or patient-reported outcomes when comparing the effectiveness of laparoscopic with that of open surgery. The aim was to compare the effectiveness of laparoscopic with that of open surgery up to 2 years after intervention in patients with colon cancer. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of patients with colon cancer who underwent surgery (laparoscopic or open surgery) between June 2010 and December 2012, at 22 hospitals. Main outcomes of the study were mortality, complications, reoperation, readmission, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), as measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Duke-UNC, EuroQol-5D, and European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Q30 and Q29 at baseline, and 30 days and 1 and 2 years after surgery. Multivariable multilevel logistic regression and generalized linear models were used in analyses after adjusting for specific propensity scores developed for each outcome and time point. RESULTS: In the multivariable analysis, the complication rates up to 30 days (infectious, surgical, and medical) and 1 year (surgical), and readmission rate at 30 days and at 2 years were higher among patients who underwent open surgery than among those who underwent laparoscopic surgery. There were no differences between the two surgical approaches in all other parameters assessed and in changes of all PROMs. CONCLUSIONS: Though in most outcomes both surgical approaches provide similar results up to 2 years after intervention, still the rates of some complications and readmission, mainly up to 30 days, are higher in open surgery. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02488161.
Authors: Javier Mar; Ane Anton-Ladislao; Oliver Ibarrondo; Arantzazu Arrospide; Santiago Lázaro-Aramburu; Nerea Gonzalez; Marisa Bare; Antonio Escobar; Maximino Redondo; José M Quintana Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-05-28 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Cristina Regueiro; Laura Codesido; Laura García-Nimo; Sara Zarraquiños; David Remedios; Arturo Rodríguez-Blanco; Esteban Sinde; Catalina Fernández-de-Ana; Joaquín Cubiella Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2022-05-16