Suppr超能文献

Multi-institutional assessment of sphincter preservation for rectal cancer.

作者信息

Abdelsattar Zaid M, Wong Sandra L, Birkmeyer Nancy J, Cleary Robert K, Times Melissa L, Figg Ryan E, Peters Nanette, Krell Robert W, Campbell Darrell A, Russell Marcia M, Hendren Samantha

机构信息

Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA,

出版信息

Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Dec;21(13):4075-80. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3882-4. Epub 2014 Jul 8.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Sphincter-preserving surgery (SPS) has been proposed as a quality measure for rectal cancer surgery. However, previous studies on SPS rates lack critical clinical characteristics, rendering it unclear if variation in SPS rates is due to unmeasured case-mix differences or surgeons' selection criteria. In this context, we investigate the variation in SPS rates at various practice settings.

METHODS

Ten hospitals in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative collected rectal cancer-specific data, including tumor location and reasons for non-SPS, of patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery from 2007 to 2012. Hospitals were divided into terciles of SPS rates (frequent, average, and infrequent). Patients were categorized as 'definitely SPS eligible' a priori if they did not have any of the following: sphincter involvement, tumor <6 cm from the anal verge, fecal incontinence, stoma preference, or metastatic disease. Fixed-effects logistic regression was used to evaluate for factors associated with SPS.

RESULTS

In total, 329 patients underwent rectal cancer surgery at 10 hospitals (5/10 higher volume, and 6/10 major teaching). Overall, 72 % had SPS (range by hospital 47-91 %). Patient and tumor characteristics were similar between hospital terciles. On multivariable analysis, only hospital ID, younger age, and tumor location were associated with SPS, but not sex, race, body mass index, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage, preoperative radiation, or American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class. Analysis of the 181 (55 %) 'definitely-eligible' patients revealed an SPS rate of 90 % (65-100 %).

CONCLUSIONS

SPS rates vary by hospital, even after accounting for clinical characteristics using detailed chart review. These data suggest missed opportunities for SPS, and refute the general hypothesis that hospital variation in previous studies is due to unmeasured case-mix differences.

摘要

相似文献

1
Multi-institutional assessment of sphincter preservation for rectal cancer.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Dec;21(13):4075-80. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3882-4. Epub 2014 Jul 8.
5
Is Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Beneficial for Sphincter Preservation in Low-Lying Rectal Cancer Patients?
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 May;95(18):e3463. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000003463.
6
Patient and hospital factors associated with use of sphincter-sparing surgery for rectal cancer.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2010 Feb;53(2):115-20. doi: 10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181bc98a1.
7
Patterns of Care and Outcomes of Rectal Cancer Patients from the Iowa Cancer Registry: Role of Hospital Volume and Tumor Location.
J Gastrointest Surg. 2023 Jun;27(6):1228-1237. doi: 10.1007/s11605-023-05656-2. Epub 2023 Mar 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Risk factors influencing sphincter preservation in laparoscopic radical rectal cancer surgery.
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2025 Mar 27;17(3):101061. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i3.101061.
2
Shared Decision-Making, Sphincter Preservation, and Rectal Cancer Treatment: Identifying and Executing What Matters Most to Patients.
Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2023 Jul 19;37(4):256-265. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1770720. eCollection 2024 Jul.
4
Sex Disparities in Rectal Cancer Surgery: An In-Depth Analysis of Surgical Approaches and Outcomes.
World J Mens Health. 2024 Apr;42(2):304-320. doi: 10.5534/wjmh.230335. Epub 2024 Feb 29.
6
Statewide Clinic Registries: The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative.
Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2019 Jan;32(1):16-24. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1673350. Epub 2019 Jan 8.
7
Trends and outcomes of sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer: a national cancer database study.
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2019 Feb;34(2):239-245. doi: 10.1007/s00384-018-3171-y. Epub 2018 Oct 2.
8
The fate of preserved sphincter in rectal cancer patients.
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2018 Jun;33(6):745-753. doi: 10.1007/s00384-018-3001-2. Epub 2018 Mar 12.

本文引用的文献

2
Practice parameters for the management of rectal cancer (revised).
Dis Colon Rectum. 2013 May;56(5):535-50. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e31828cb66c.
4
Who performs proctectomy for rectal cancer in the United States?
Dis Colon Rectum. 2011 Oct;54(10):1210-5. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e31822867a5.
5
Accelerating the pace of surgical quality improvement: the power of hospital collaboration.
Arch Surg. 2010 Oct;145(10):985-91. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.2010.220.
6
Practicability of quality goals for the treatment of rectal cancer.
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2010 Sep;25(9):1093-102. doi: 10.1007/s00384-010-0965-y. Epub 2010 Jun 12.
7
Sphincter-sparing resection for rectal cancer.
Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2007 Aug;20(3):203-12. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-984864.
9
Unacceptable variation in abdominoperineal excision rates for rectal cancer: time to intervene?
Gut. 2008 Dec;57(12):1690-7. doi: 10.1136/gut.2007.137877. Epub 2008 Jun 5.
10
The status of radical proctectomy and sphincter-sparing surgery in the United States.
Dis Colon Rectum. 2007 Aug;50(8):1119-27; discussion 1126-7. doi: 10.1007/s10350-007-0250-5.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验