Ptok H, Gastinger I, Meyer F, Ilsemann A, Lippert H, Bruns C
AN-Institut für Qualitätssicherung in der operativen Medizin, Otto-v.-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Deutschland.
Klinik für Allgemein-, Viszeral- und Gefäßchirurgie, Otto-v.-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Deutschland.
Chirurg. 2017 Apr;88(4):328-338. doi: 10.1007/s00104-016-0292-0.
The impact of hospital and surgeon volume on the treatment outcome based on data obtained from cohort and register studies has been controversially discussed in the international literature. The results of large-scale prospective observational studies within the framework of clinical healthcare research may lead to relevant recommendations in this ongoing discussion.
Within the framework of the prospective multicenter German Gastric Cancer Study 2 (QCGC 2), from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2009 a total of 2897 patients with the histological diagnosis of gastric cancer from 140 surgical departments were registered and analyzed. The departments were subdivided according to the number of cases into 4 volume groups: I) <5, II) 5-10, III) 11-20 and IV) >20 patients with surgical interventions per year.
Overall 1163 patients (65.6 %) underwent surgical interventions in the departments of groups III and IV. Of the patients 521 (18 %) were scheduled for neoadjuvant treatment but with no significant differences among the various volume groups. In the departments of volume groups I and II subtotal gastric resection was performed significantly more often. Transthoracic extended surgical interventions in cases of a proximal tumor site were significantly more frequent in departments from volume group IV (p <0.001). The proportion of intraoperative fresh frozen sections correlated with the case volume: group I 23.2 % vs. group IV 61.2 %. Overall hospital mortality was 6.1 % and slightly higher in volume group I with 7.8 %. The median survival time and the 5‑year survival rate showed no significant differences between the various volume groups independent of tumor stages. There was a tendency towards a longer median survival time in volume group IV only for proximal tumor sites, i.e. adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG). Using Cox regression analysis hospital volume did not have an independent impact on long-term survival.
Hospital volume effects could only be detected for the treatment of AEG. To improve oncological long-term outcome, centralization of treatment of proximal gastric cancer appears to be recommendable.
基于队列研究和登记研究数据,医院规模和外科医生手术量对治疗结果的影响在国际文献中一直存在争议。临床医疗研究框架内的大规模前瞻性观察性研究结果可能会为这一持续讨论提供相关建议。
在德国胃癌前瞻性多中心研究2(QCGC 2)框架内,2007年1月1日至2009年12月31日,共登记并分析了来自140个外科科室的2897例经组织学诊断为胃癌的患者。各科室根据病例数分为4个手术量组:I)<5例,II)5 - 10例,III)11 - 20例,IV)每年手术干预>20例。
总体而言,1163例患者(65.6%)在III组和IV组科室接受了手术干预。其中521例患者(18%)计划接受新辅助治疗,但不同手术量组之间无显著差异。I组和II组科室更常进行胃次全切除术。IV组科室近端肿瘤部位经胸扩大手术干预明显更频繁(p<0.001)。术中新鲜冰冻切片比例与病例数相关:I组为23.2%,IV组为61.2%。总体医院死亡率为6.1%,I组略高,为7.8%。不同手术量组的中位生存时间和5年生存率在不考虑肿瘤分期的情况下无显著差异。仅对于近端肿瘤部位,即食管胃交界腺癌(AEG),IV组中位生存时间有延长趋势。使用Cox回归分析,医院规模对长期生存无独立影响。
仅在AEG治疗中发现了医院规模效应。为改善肿瘤学长期结局,近端胃癌治疗的集中化似乎是可取的。