Using textbook outcome as a measure of quality of care in oesophagogastric cancer surgery. BJS 2018; 105: 561-569.
Published: 21st February 2018
Authors: R. T. van der Kaaij, M. V. de Rooij, F. van Coevorden, F. E. M. Voncken, P. Snaebjornsson, H. Boot et al.
Textbook outcome is a multidimensional measure representing an ideal course after oesophagogastric cancer surgery. It comprises ten perioperative quality‐of‐care parameters and has been developed recently using population‐based data. Its association with long‐term outcome is unknown. The objectives of this study were to validate the clinical relevance of textbook outcome at a hospital level, and to assess its relation with long‐term survival after treatment for oesophagogastric cancer.
All patients with oesophageal or gastric cancer scheduled for surgery with curative intent between January 2009 and June 2015 were selected from an institutional database. A Cox model was used to study the association between textbook outcome and survival.
A textbook outcome was achieved in 58 of 144 patients (40·3 per cent) with oesophageal cancer and in 48 of 105 (45·7 per cent) with gastric cancer. Factors associated with not achieving a textbook outcome were failure to achieve a lymph node yield of at least 15 (after oesophagectomy) and postoperative complications of grade II or more. After oesophagectomy, median overall survival was longer for patients with a textbook outcome than for patients without (median not reached
Textbook outcome is a clinically relevant measure in patients undergoing oesophagogastric cancer surgery as it can identify underperforming parameters in a hospital setting. Overall survival in patients with a textbook outcome is better than in patients without a textbook outcome.Full text
You may also be interested in
Authors: J. A. Elliott, N. G. Docherty, C. F. Murphy, H.‐G. Eckhardt, S. L. Doyle, E. M. Guinan et al.
Diagnostic performance of MRI for assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancer.
Authors: S. E. Vollenbrock, F. E. M. Voncken, J. M. van Dieren, D. M. J. Lambregts, M. Maas, G. J. Meijer et al.
Authors: T. Mizuno, T. Ebata, Y. Yokoyama, T. Igami, J. Yamaguchi, S. Onoe et al.
Meta‐analysis of clinical outcome after treatment for achalasia based on manometric subtypes. BJS 2019; 106: 332-341.
Authors: C. Andolfi, P. M. Fisichella
Systematic review of management of incidental gallbladder cancer after cholecystectomy. BJS 2019; 106: 32-45.
Authors: K. Søreide, R. V. Guest, E. M. Harrison, T. J. Kendall, O. J. Garden, S. J. Wigmore et al.
Relationship between R1 resection, tumour rupture and recurrence in resected gastrointestinal stromal tumour. BJS 2019; 106: 419-426.
Authors: T. Hølmebakk, B. Bjerkehagen, I. Hompland, S. Stoldt, K. Boye
Notes: Tumour rupture is most important
Survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma. BJS 2019; 106: 255-262.
Authors: B.‐Y. Wang, S.‐C. Wu, H.‐C. Chen, W.‐H. Hung, C.‐H. Lin, C.‐L. Huang et al.
Notes: Surgery after chemoradiation indicated
Effect of preoperative biliary drainage on cholestasis‐associated inflammatory and fibrotic gene signatures in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. BJS 2019; 106: 55-58.
Authors: M. J. Reiniers, L. de Haan, R. Weijer, J. K. Wiggers, A. Jongejan, P. D. Moerland et al.
Impact of postoperative complications on outcomes after oesophagectomy for cancer. BJS 2019; 106: 111-119.
Authors: L. Goense, J. Meziani, J. P. Ruurda, R. van Hillegersberg
Meta‐analysis of the influence of lifestyle changes for preoperative weight loss on surgical outcomes. BJS 2019; 106: 181-189.
Authors: M. Roman, A. Monaghan, G. F. Serraino, D. Miller, S. Pathak, F. Lai et al.
Notes: Possible but how much is enough?
Multicentre cohort study of antihypertensive and lipid‐lowering therapy cessation after bariatric surgery. BJS 2019; 106: 286-295.
Authors: J. Thereaux, T. Lesuffleur, S. Czernichow, A. Basdevant, S. Msika, D. Nocca et al.
Notes: Better than controls
Overall survival before and after centralization of gastric cancer surgery in the Netherlands. BJS 2018; 105: 1807-1815.
Authors: M. van Putten, S. D. Nelen, V. E. P. P. Lemmens, J. H. M. B. Stoot, H. H. Hartgrink, S. S. Gisbertz et al.
Notes: Practice makes perfect?