| 1. |
- Busweiler, L A D, et al.
(författare)
-
International benchmarking in oesophageal and gastric cancer surgery
- 2019
-
Ingår i: BJS Open. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2474-9842. ; 3:1, s. 62-73
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Benchmarking on an international level might lead to improved outcomes at a national level. The aim of this study was to compare treatment and surgical outcome data from the Swedish National Register for Oesophageal and Gastric Cancer (NREV) and the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA).Methods: All patients with primary oesophageal or gastric cancer who underwent a resection and were registered in NREV or DUCA between 2012 and 2014 were included. Differences in 30-day mortality were analysed using case mix-adjusted multivariable logistic regression.Results: In total, 4439 patients underwent oesophagectomy (2509 patients) or gastrectomy (1930 patients). Estimated resection rates were comparable. Swedish patients were older but had less advanced disease and less co-morbidity than Dutch patients. Neoadjuvant treatment rates were lower in Sweden than in the Netherlands, both for patients who underwent oesophagectomy (68·6 versus 90·0 per cent respectively; P < 0·001) and for those having gastrectomy (38·3 versus 56·6 per cent; P < 0·001). In Sweden, transthoracic oesophagectomy was performed in 94·7 per cent of patients, whereas in the Netherlands, a transhiatal approach was undertaken in 35·8 per cent. Higher annual procedural volumes per hospital were observed in the Netherlands. Adjusted 30-day and/or in-hospital mortality after gastrectomy was statistically significantly lower in Sweden than in the Netherlands (odds ratio 0·53, 95 per cent c.i. 0·29 to 0·95).Conclusion: For oesophageal and gastric cancer, there are differences in patient, tumour and treatment characteristics between Sweden and the Netherlands. Postoperative mortality in patients with gastric cancer was lower in Sweden.
|
|
| 2. |
- Baldaque-Silva, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Impact of gastroesophageal reflux control through tailored proton pump inhibition therapy or fundoplication in patients with Barrett's esophagus
- 2017
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Gastroenterology. - : Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.. - 1007-9327 .- 2219-2840. ; 23:17, s. 3174-3183
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- AIM To determine the impact of upwards titration of proton pump inhibition (PPI) on acid reflux, symptom scores and histology, compared to clinically successful fundoplication. Two cohorts of long-segment Barrett's esophagus (BE) patients were studied. In group 1 (n = 24), increasing doses of PPI were administered in 8-wk intervals until acid reflux normalization. At each assessment, ambulatory 24 h pH recording, endoscopy with biopsies and symptom scoring (by a gastroesophageal reflux disease health related quality of life questionnaire, GERD/HRLQ) were performed. Group 2 (n = 30) consisted of patients with a previous fundoplication. In group 1, acid reflux normalized in 23 of 24 patients, resulting in improved GERD/HRQL scores (P = 0.001), which were most pronounced after the starting dose of PPI (P < 0.001). PPI treatment reached the same level of GERD/HRQL scores as after a clinically successful fundoplication (P = 0.5). Normalization of acid reflux in both groups was associated with reduction in papillary length, basal cell layer thickness, intercellular space dilatation, and acute and chronic inflammation of squamous epithelium. This study shows that acid reflux and symptom scores co-vary throughout PPI increments in long-segment BE patients, especially after the first dose of PPI, reaching the same level as after a successful fundoplication. Minor changes were found among GERD markers at the morphological level.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Insulander, J., et al.
(författare)
-
Prognosis following surgical bypass compared with laparotomy alone in unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma
- 2016
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Surgery. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 103:9, s. 1200-1208
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Resection with curative intent has been shown to prolong survival of patients with locoregional pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, up to 33 per cent of patients are deemed unresectable at exploratory laparotomy owing to unanticipated locally advanced or metastatic disease. In these patients, prophylactic double bypass (PDB) procedures have been considered the standard of care. The aim of this study was to compare PDB with exploratory laparotomy alone in terms of impact on postoperative course, chemotherapy and overall survival.Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study (2004-2013) was conducted using a prospective institutional database. Patients with histologically confirmed, unresectable PDAC were included. Relationships between PDB procedures, exploratory laparotomy alone, postoperative chemotherapy and best supportive care were investigated by means of Cox regression. Overall survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier estimations and log rank test.Results: Of 503 patients with PDAC scheduled for resection with curative intent, 104 were deemed unresectable at laparotomy (resection rate 79·3 per cent). Seventy-four patients underwent PDB procedures and 30 had exploratory laparotomy alone. PDB and exploratory laparotomy were similar in terms of perioperative mortality, initiation of chemotherapy and overall survival. Compared with best supportive care, postoperative chemotherapy prolonged survival (8·0 versus 14·4 months in locally advanced PDAC, P = 0·007; 2·3 versus 8·0 months in metastatic PDAC, P < 0·001). Patients undergoing chemotherapy following exploratory laparotomy alone had longer median overall survival than patients undergoing chemotherapy following PDB procedures (16·3 versus 10·3 months; P = 0·040).Conclusion: Patients with pancreatic cancer deemed unresectable at laparotomy may derive survival benefit from subsequent chemotherapy as opposed to supportive care alone. At laparotomy, proceeding with a bypass procedure for prophylactic symptom control may be prognostically unfavourable.
|
|
| 9. |
- Klevebro, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Morbidity and mortality after surgery for cancer of the oesophagus and astro-oesophageal junction : a randomized clinical trial of neoadjuvant hemotherapy vs. neoadjuvant chemoradiation
- 2015
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Surgical Oncology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0748-7983 .- 1532-2157. ; 41:7, s. 920-926
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: To compare the incidence and severity of postoperative omplications after oesophagectomy for carcinoma of the oesophagus and astro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) after randomized accrual to eoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). ackground: Neoadjuvant therapy improves long-term survival after esophagectomy. To date, evidence is insufficient to determine whether ombined nCT, or nCRT alone, is the most beneficial. ethods: Patients with carcinoma of the oesophagus or GOJ, resectable ith a curative intention, were enrolled in this multicenter trial onducted at seven centres in Sweden and Norway. Study participants re andomized to nCT or nCRT followed by surgery with two-field ymphadenectomy. Three cycles of cisplatin/5-fluorouracil was dministered in all patients, while 40 Gy of concomitant radiotherapy as administered in the nCRT group. esults: Of the randomized 181 patients, 91 were assigned to nCT and 90 o nCRT. One-hundred-and-fifty-five patients, 78 nCT and 77 nCRT, nderwent resection. There was no statistically significant difference etween the groups in the incidence of surgical or nonsurgical omplications (P-value = 0.69 and 0.13, respectively). There was no 0-day mortality, while the 90-day mortality was 3% (2/78) in the nCT roup and 6% (5/77) in the nCRT group (P = 0.24). The median lavien-Dindo complication severity grade was significantly higher in he nCRT. group (P = 0.001). onclusion: There was no significant difference in the incidence of omplications between patients randomized to nCT and nCRT. However, omplications were significantly more severe after nCRT. Registration rial database: The trial was registered in the Clinical Trials tabase registration number NCT01362127).
|
|
| 10. |
- Klevebro, F., et al.
(författare)
-
Outcome of neoadjuvant therapies for cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction based on a national data registry
- 2016
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Surgery. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 103:13, s. 1864-1873
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Randomized trials have shown that neoadjuvant treatment improves survival in the curative treatment of oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer. Results from population-based observational studies are, however, sparse and ambiguous. Methods: This prospective population-based cohort study included all patients who had oesophagectomy for cancer in Sweden, excluding clinical T1 N0, recorded in the National Register for Oesophageal and Gastric Cancer, 2006–2014. Patients were stratified into three groups: surgery alone, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Results: Neoadjuvant treatment was given to 521 patients (51·1 per cent) and 499 (48·9 per cent) received surgery alone. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy increased the risk of postoperative surgical complications compared with surgery alone (adjusted odds ratio 2·01, 95 per cent c.i. 1·24 to 3·25; P = 0·005). Postoperative mortality was significantly increased after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with surgery alone (odds ratio 2·37, 1·06 to 5·29; P = 0·035). Survival improved in patients with squamous cell carcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, whereas after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy survival was significantly improved only in the subgroup with the highest performance status and without known co-morbidity. In adenocarcinoma there was a trend towards improved overall survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, but neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy did not offer a survival benefit. Stratified analysis including only patients with adenocarcinoma in the highest performance category without known co-morbidity showed a strong trend towards improved survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared with surgery alone (adjusted hazard ratio 0·47, 0·21 to 1·04; P = 0·061). Conclusion: For patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction, neoadjuvant treatments seemed to increase long-term survival, but also the risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality, compared with surgery alone. Neither neoadjuvant treatment option seemed to improve survival significantly among patients with adenocarcinoma, compared with surgery alone.
|
|
