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: M. Kanda, D. Shimizu, H. Tanaka, C. Tanaka, D. Kobayashi, M. Hayashi et al.
Notes: Potential target for therapy
Development and validation of a difficulty score to predict intraoperative complications during laparoscopic liver resection.
Authors: M. C. Halls, G. Berardi, F. Cipriani, L. Barkhatov, P. Lainas, S. Harris et al.
Notes: Helps improve selection for laparoscopic liver resection
Authors: D. Zeng, R. Zhou, Y. Yu, Y. Luo, J. Zhang, H. Sun et al.
Notes: Immunoscore predicts prognosis in gastric cancer
Reappraisal of classification of distal cholangiocarcinoma based on tumour depth. BJS 2018; 105: 867-875.
Authors: H. Aoyama, T. Ebata, M. Hattori, M. Takano, H. Yamamoto, M. Inoue et al.
Notes: Better for T staging
Authors: S. D. Nelen, K. Bosscha, V. E. P. P. Lemmens, H. H. Hartgrink, R. H. A. Verhoeven, J. H. W. de Wilt et al.
Notes: Age does not matter
Prediction of major complications after hepatectomy using liver stiffness values determined by magnetic resonance elastography.
Authors: N. Sato, A. Kenjo, T. Kimura, R. Okada, T. Ishigame, Y. Kofunato et al.
Notes: liver stiffness predicts complications
Nationwide trends in the incidence and outcome of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumour in the imatinib era.
Authors: W. T. A. van der Graaf, R. Tielen, J. J. Bonenkamp, V. Lemmens, R. H. A. Verhoeven, J. H. W. de Wilt et al.
Notes: Surgery improves survival
Association between hospital volume and quality of gastric cancer surgery in the CRITICS trial. BJS 2018; 105: 728-735.
Authors: Y. H. M. Claassen, J. W. van Sandick, H. H. Hartgrink, J. L. Dikken, W. O. De Steur, N. C. T. van Grieken et al.
Notes: High volume better quality
Population‐based cohort study of surgical myotomy and pneumatic dilatation as primary interventions for oesophageal achalasia.
Authors: S. R. Markar, H. Mackenzie, A. Askari, O. Faiz, J. Hoare, G. Zaninotto et al.
Notes: Less reinterventions after surgical myotomy
Relationship between intraoperative non‐technical performance and technical events in bariatric surgery.
Authors: A. B. Fecso, S. S. Kuzulugil, C. Babaoglu, A. B. Bener, T. P. Grantcharov
Notes: Ways to assess team performance
Cardiopulmonary fitness before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with oesophagogastric cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 900-906.
Authors: M. Navidi, A. W. Phillips, S. M. Griffin, K. E. Duffield, A. Greystoke, K. Sumpter et al.
Notes: Chemotherapy reduces cardiopulmonary reserve