| 1. |
- Abu Hilal, Mohammed, et al.
(författare)
-
Assessment of the financial implications for laparoscopic liver surgery : a single-centre UK cost analysis for minor and major hepatectomy.
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Surgical Endoscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0930-2794 .- 1432-2218. ; 27:7, s. 2542-50
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic hepatectomy is progressively gaining popularity. However, it is still unclear whether the laparoscopic approach offers cost advantages compared with the open approach, especially when major hepatectomies are required. Data providing useful insights into the costs of the laparoscopic approach for clinicians and hospitals are needed. The aim of this study is to assess the financial implications of the laparoscopic approach for two standardized minor and major hepatectomies: left lateral sectionectomy and right hepatectomy.METHODS: A cost comparison analysis of patients undergoing laparoscopic right hepatectomy (LRH) and laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (LLLS) versus the open counterparts was performed. Data considered for the comparison analysis were operative costs (theatre cost, consumables and surgeon/anaesthetic labour cost), postoperative costs (hospital stay, complication management and readmissions) and overall costs.RESULTS: A total of 149 patients were included: 38 patients underwent LRH and 46 open right hepatectomy (ORH); 46 patients underwent LLLS and 19 open left lateral sectionectomy (OLLS). For LRH the mean operative, postoperative and overall costs were £10,181, £4,037 and £14,218; for ORH the mean operative, postoperative and overall costs were £6,483 (p < 0.0001), £10,304 (p < 0.0001) and £16,787 (p = 0.886). Regarding LLLS, the mean operative, postoperative and overall costs were £5,460, £2,599 and £8,059; for OLLS the mean operative, postoperative and overall costs were £5,841 (p = 0.874), £5,796 (p < 0.0001) and £11,637 (p = 0.0001).CONCLUSION: Our data support the cost advantage of the laparoscopic approach for left lateral sectionectomy and the cost neutrality for right hepatectomy.
|
|
| 2. |
- Korrel, Maarten, et al.
(författare)
-
Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic cancer (DIPLOMA): an international randomised non-inferiority trial
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Regional Health. - : ELSEVIER. - 2666-7762. ; 31
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery has been questioned for several abdominal cancers. Concerns also exist regarding the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer as randomised trials are lacking. Methods In this international randomised non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults with resectable pancreatic cancer from 35 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to either MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Both patients and pathologists were blinded to the assigned approach. Primary endpoint was radical resection (R0, & GE;1 mm free margin) in patients who had ultimately undergone resection. Analyses for the primary endpoint were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding patients with missing data on primary endpoint. The pre-defined non-inferiority margin of -7% was compared with the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of absolute difference in the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN44897265). Findings Between May 8, 2018 and May 7, 2021, 258 patients were randomly assigned to MIDP (131 patients) or ODP (127 patients). Modified intention-to-treat analysis included 114 patients in the MIDP group and 110 patients in the ODP group. An R0 resection occurred in 83 (73%) patients in the MIDP group and in 76 (69%) patients in the ODP group (difference 3.7%, 90% CI -6.2 to 13.6%; pnon-inferiority = 0.039). Median lymph node yield was comparable (22.0 [16.0-30.0] vs 23.0 [14.0-32.0] nodes, p = 0.86), as was the rate of intraperitoneal recurrence (41% vs 38%, p = 0.45). Median follow-up was 23.5 (interquartile range 17.0-30.0) months. Other postoperative outcomes were comparable, including median time to functional recovery (5 [95% CI 4.5-5.5] vs 5 [95% CI 4.7-5.3] days; p = 0.22) and overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67-1.46, p = 0.94). Serious adverse events were reported in 23 (18%) of 131 patients in the MIDP group vs 28 (22%) of 127 patients in the ODP group. Interpretation This trial provides evidence on the non-inferiority of MIDP compared to ODP regarding radical resection rates in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The present findings support the applicability of minimally invasive surgery in patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer. Funding Medtronic Covidien AG, Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited, Dutch Gastroenterology Society. Copyright & COPY; 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
|
|
| 3. |
- Nordlinger, Bernard, et al.
(författare)
-
Perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (EORTC Intergroup trial 40983) : a randomised controlled trial.
- 2008
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 371:9617, s. 1007-1016
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Surgical resection alone is regarded as the standard of care for patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer, but relapse is common. We assessed the combination of perioperative chemotherapy and surgery compared with surgery alone for patients with initially resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Methods This parallel-group study reports the trial's final data for progression-free survival for a protocol unspecified interim time-point, while overall survival is still being monitored. 364 patients with histologically proven colorectal cancer and up to four liver metastases were randomly assigned to either six cycles of FOLFOX4 before and six cycles after surgery or to surgery alone (182 in perioperative chemotherapy group vs 182 in surgery group). Patients were centrally randomised by minimisation, adjusting for Centre and risk score. The primary objective was to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.71 or less for progression-free survival. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. Analyses were repeated for all eligible (171 vs 171) and resected patients (151 vs 152). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00006479. Findings In the perioperative chemotherapy group, 151 (83%) patients were resected after a median of six (range 1-6) preoperative cycles and 115 (63%) patients received a median six (1-8) postoperative cycles. 152 (84%) patients were resected in the surgery group. The absolute increase in rate of progression-free survival at 3 years was 7.3% (from 28.1% [95-66% CI 21.3-35.51 to 35.4% [28.1-42.7]; HR 0 . 79 [0.62-1.02]; p=0.058) in randomised patients; 8 . 1% (from 28.1% [21.2-36.6] to 36.2% [28.7-43.8]; HR 0 . 77 [0-60-1 . 001; p=0 . 041) in eligible patients; and 9.2% (from 33.2% [25.3-41.2] to 42.4% [34.0-50.5]; HR 0.73 [0.55-0.97]; p=0.025) in patients undergoing resection. 139 patients died (64 in perioperative chemotherapy group vs 75 in surgery group). Reversible postoperative complications occurred more often after chemotherapy than after surgery (40/159 [25%] vs 27/170 [16%]; p=0.04). After surgery we recorded two deaths in the surgery alone group and one in the perioperative chemotherapy group. Interpretation Perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 is compatible with major liver surgery and reduces the risk of events of progression-free survival in eligible and resected. patients. Funding Swedish Cancer Society, Cancer Research UK, Ligue Nationale Contre le Cancer, US National Cancer Institute, Sanofi-Aventis.
|
|
| 4. |
- Nordlinger, Bernard, et al.
(författare)
-
Perioperative FOLFOX4 chemotherapy and surgery versus surgery alone for resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer (EORTC 40983) : long-term results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial
- 2013
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Oncology. - 1470-2045 .- 1474-5488. ; 14:12, s. 1208-1215
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Previous results of the EORTC intergroup trial 40983 showed that perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) increases progression-free survival (PFS) compared with surgery alone for patients with initially resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer. Here we present overall survival data after long-term follow-up. Methods This randomised, controlled, parallel-group, phase 3 study recruited patients from 78 hospitals across Europe, Australia, and Hong Kong. Eligible patients aged 18-80 years who had histologically proven colorectal cancer and up to four liver metastases were randomly assigned (1:1) to either perioperative FOLFOX4 or surgery alone. Perioperative FOLFOX4 consisted of six 14-day cycles of oxaliplatin 85mg/m(2), folinic acid 200 mg/m(2) (DL form) or 100 mg/m2 (L form) on days 1-2 plus bolus, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m(2) (bolus) and 600 mg/m(2) (continuous 22 h infusion), before and after surgery. Patients were centrally randomised by minimisation, adjusting for centre and risk score and previous adjuvant chemotherapy to primary surgery for colorectal cancer, and the trial was open label. Analysis of overall survival was by intention to treat in all randomly assigned patients. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00006479. Findings Between Oct 10, 2000, and July 5, 2004, 364 patients were randomly assigned to a treatment group (182 patients in each group, of which 171 per group were eligible and 152 per group underwent resection). At a median follow-up of 8.5 years (IQR 7.6-9.5), 107 (59%) patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group had died versus 114 (63%) in the surgery-only group (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68-1.14; p=0.34). In all randomly assigned patients, median overall survival was 61.3 months (95% CI 51.0-83.4) in the perioperative chemotherapy group and 54.3 months (41.9-79.4) in the surgery alone group. 5-year overall survival was 51.2% (95% CI 43.6-58.3) in the perioperative chemotherapy group versus 47.8% (40.3-55.0) in the surgery-only group. Two patients in the perioperative chemotherapy group and three in the surgery-only group died from complications of protocol surgery, and one patient in the perioperative chemotherapy group died possibly as a result of toxicity of protocol treatment. Interpretation We found no difference in overall survival with the addition of perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 compared with surgery alone for patients with resectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer. However, the previously observed benefit in PFS means that perioperative chemotherapy with FOLFOX4 should remain the reference treatment for this population of patients.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
