Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto SALVA/INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
SFERA Archivio dei prodotti della Ricerca dell'Università di Ferrara
Background: The association between volume, complications and pathological outcomes is still under debate regarding colorectal
cancer surgery. The aim of the study was to assess the association between centre volume and severe complications, mortality,
less-than-radical oncologic surgery, and indications for neoadjuvant therapy.
Methods: Retrospective analysis of 16,883 colorectal cancer cases from 80 centres (2018–2021). Outcomes: 30-day mortality; ClavienDindo grade >2 complications; removal of ≥ 12 lymph nodes; non-radical resection; neoadjuvant therapy. Quartiles of hospital
volumes were classified as LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, and VERY HIGH. Independent predictors, both overall and for rectal cancer, were
evaluated using logistic regression including age, gender, AJCC stage and cancer site.
Results: LOW-volume centres reported a higher rate of severe postoperative complications (OR 1.50, 95% c.i. 1.15–1.096, P = 0.003).
The rate of ≥ 12 lymph nodes removed in LOW-volume (OR 0.68, 95% c.i. 0.56–0.85, P < 0.001) and MEDIUM-volume (OR 0.72, 95%
c.i. 0.62–0.83, P < 0.001) centres was lower than in VERY HIGH-volume centres. Of the 4676 rectal cancer patients, the rate of ≥ 12
lymph nodes removed was lower in LOW-volume than in VERY HIGH-volume centres (OR 0.57, 95% c.i. 0.41–0.80, P = 0.001). A lower
rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with HIGH (OR 0.66, 95% c.i. 0.56–0.77, P < 0.001), MEDIUM (OR 0.75, 95%
c.i. 0.60–0.92, P = 0.006), and LOW (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.52–0.94, P = 0.019) volume centres (vs. VERY HIGH).
Conclusion: Colorectal cancer surgery in low-volume centres is at higher risk of suboptimal management, poor postoperative
outcomes, and less-than-adequate oncologic resections. Centralisation of rectal cancer cases should be taken into consideration to
optimise the outcomes.
Effect of centre volume on pathological outcomes and postoperative complications after surgery for colorectal cancer: results of a multicentre national study
Background: The association between volume, complications and pathological outcomes is still under debate regarding colorectal
cancer surgery. The aim of the study was to assess the association between centre volume and severe complications, mortality,
less-than-radical oncologic surgery, and indications for neoadjuvant therapy.
Methods: Retrospective analysis of 16,883 colorectal cancer cases from 80 centres (2018–2021). Outcomes: 30-day mortality; ClavienDindo grade >2 complications; removal of ≥ 12 lymph nodes; non-radical resection; neoadjuvant therapy. Quartiles of hospital
volumes were classified as LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH, and VERY HIGH. Independent predictors, both overall and for rectal cancer, were
evaluated using logistic regression including age, gender, AJCC stage and cancer site.
Results: LOW-volume centres reported a higher rate of severe postoperative complications (OR 1.50, 95% c.i. 1.15–1.096, P = 0.003).
The rate of ≥ 12 lymph nodes removed in LOW-volume (OR 0.68, 95% c.i. 0.56–0.85, P < 0.001) and MEDIUM-volume (OR 0.72, 95%
c.i. 0.62–0.83, P < 0.001) centres was lower than in VERY HIGH-volume centres. Of the 4676 rectal cancer patients, the rate of ≥ 12
lymph nodes removed was lower in LOW-volume than in VERY HIGH-volume centres (OR 0.57, 95% c.i. 0.41–0.80, P = 0.001). A lower
rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation was associated with HIGH (OR 0.66, 95% c.i. 0.56–0.77, P < 0.001), MEDIUM (OR 0.75, 95%
c.i. 0.60–0.92, P = 0.006), and LOW (OR 0.70, 95% c.i. 0.52–0.94, P = 0.019) volume centres (vs. VERY HIGH).
Conclusion: Colorectal cancer surgery in low-volume centres is at higher risk of suboptimal management, poor postoperative
outcomes, and less-than-adequate oncologic resections. Centralisation of rectal cancer cases should be taken into consideration to
optimise the outcomes.
I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11392/2569571
Attenzione
Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo
Citazioni
ND
ND
ND
social impact
Conferma cancellazione
Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla propria produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2023-2025 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione. La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e sugli indicatori bibliometrici alla data indicata e non tiene conto di eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori. La simulazione può differire dall'esito di un’eventuale domanda ASN sia per errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS, sia per la variabilità dei dati bibliometrici nel tempo. Si consideri che Anvur calcola i valori degli indicatori all'ultima data utile per la presentazione delle domande.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle specifiche raccolte sul tavolo ER del Focus Group IRIS coordinato dall’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e delle regole riportate nel DM 589/2018 e allegata Tabella A. Cineca, l’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e il Focus Group IRIS non si assumono alcuna responsabilità in merito all’uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione. Si specifica inoltre che la simulazione contiene calcoli effettuati con dati e algoritmi di pubblico dominio e deve quindi essere considerata come un mero ausilio al calcolo svolgibile manualmente o con strumenti equivalenti.