Outcomes after gastrectomy according to the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA).

IF 6 1区医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY

Gastric Cancer Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-28 DOI:10.1007/s10120-024-01527-0

Maurits R Visser, Daan M Voeten, Suzanne S Gisbertz, Jelle P Ruurda, Mark I van Berge Henegouwen, Richard van Hillegersberg

{"title":"Outcomes after gastrectomy according to the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA).","authors":"Maurits R Visser, Daan M Voeten, Suzanne S Gisbertz, Jelle P Ruurda, Mark I van Berge Henegouwen, Richard van Hillegersberg","doi":"10.1007/s10120-024-01527-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In 2019, the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) published a standardized set of complications aiming toward uniform reporting of post-gastrectomy complications. This study aimed to report outcomes after gastrectomy in the Netherlands according to GCCG definitions and compare them to previously reported national results and the European database reported by the GCCG.Methods: This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer registered in the DUCA in 2020-2021. Postoperative morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality were analyzed according to the GCCG definitions. For all patients, baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared with the GCCG cohort consisting of 27 European expert centers (GASTRODATA; 2017-2018).Results: In 2020-2021, 782 patients underwent gastrectomy in the Netherlands. Variation was seen in baseline characteristics between the Dutch and the GCCG cohort (N = 1349), most notably in minimally invasive surgery (80.6% vs 19.6%, p < 0.001). In the Netherlands, 223 (28.5%) patients developed a total of 407 complications, the most frequent being non-surgical infections (28.5%) and anastomotic leakage (13.4%). The overall complication and 30-day mortality rates were similar between the Dutch and GCCG cohort (28.5% vs 29.8%, p = 0.563; 3.7% vs 3.6%, p = 0.953). Higher surgical and endoscopic/radiologic reintervention rates were observed in the Netherlands compared to the GCCG cohort (10.7% vs 7.8%, p = 0.025; 10.9% vs 2.9%, p < 0.001).Conclusion: Reporting outcomes according to the standardized GCCG definitions allows for international benchmarking. Postoperative outcomes were comparable between Dutch and GCCG cohorts, but both exceed the international benchmark for expert gastrectomy care, highlighting targets for national and international quality improvement.","PeriodicalId":12684,"journal":{"name":"Gastric Cancer","volume":" ","pages":"1124-1135"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11335793/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastric Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-024-01527-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In 2019, the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group (GCCG) published a standardized set of complications aiming toward uniform reporting of post-gastrectomy complications. This study aimed to report outcomes after gastrectomy in the Netherlands according to GCCG definitions and compare them to previously reported national results and the European database reported by the GCCG.

Methods: This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer registered in the DUCA in 2020-2021. Postoperative morbidity and 30-day/in-hospital mortality were analyzed according to the GCCG definitions. For all patients, baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared with the GCCG cohort consisting of 27 European expert centers (GASTRODATA; 2017-2018).

Results: In 2020-2021, 782 patients underwent gastrectomy in the Netherlands. Variation was seen in baseline characteristics between the Dutch and the GCCG cohort (N = 1349), most notably in minimally invasive surgery (80.6% vs 19.6%, p < 0.001). In the Netherlands, 223 (28.5%) patients developed a total of 407 complications, the most frequent being non-surgical infections (28.5%) and anastomotic leakage (13.4%). The overall complication and 30-day mortality rates were similar between the Dutch and GCCG cohort (28.5% vs 29.8%, p = 0.563; 3.7% vs 3.6%, p = 0.953). Higher surgical and endoscopic/radiologic reintervention rates were observed in the Netherlands compared to the GCCG cohort (10.7% vs 7.8%, p = 0.025; 10.9% vs 2.9%, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: Reporting outcomes according to the standardized GCCG definitions allows for international benchmarking. Postoperative outcomes were comparable between Dutch and GCCG cohorts, but both exceed the international benchmark for expert gastrectomy care, highlighting targets for national and international quality improvement.

查看原文本刊更多论文

根据荷兰上消化道癌症审计（DUCA）中的胃切除术并发症共识小组（GCCG）得出的胃切除术后结果。

背景：2019年，胃切除术并发症共识小组（GCCG）发布了一套标准化并发症，旨在统一报告胃切除术后并发症。本研究旨在根据 GCCG 的定义报告荷兰胃切除术后的结果，并将其与之前报告的国家结果和 GCCG 报告的欧洲数据库进行比较：这项以人口为基础的全国性队列研究纳入了 2020-2021 年在 DUCA 登记的所有胃癌胃切除术患者。根据 GCCG 的定义分析了术后发病率和 30 天/住院死亡率。所有患者的基线特征和结果均与由27个欧洲专家中心组成的GCCG队列（GASTRODATA；2017-2018年）进行了比较：2020-2021年，荷兰共有782名患者接受了胃切除术。荷兰和GCCG队列（N = 1349）的基线特征存在差异，最明显的是微创手术（80.6% vs 19.6%，P 结论：荷兰和GCCG队列（N = 1349）的基线特征存在差异，最明显的是微创手术（80.6% vs 19.6%，P 结论：荷兰和GCCG队列的基线特征存在差异：根据标准化的 GCCG 定义报告疗效有助于制定国际基准。荷兰队列和 GCCG 队列的术后疗效相当，但都超过了胃切除术专家护理的国际基准，突出了国家和国际质量改进的目标。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Gastric Cancer 医学-胃肠肝病学

CiteScore

14.70

自引率

2.70%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Gastric Cancer is an esteemed global forum that focuses on various aspects of gastric cancer research, treatment, and biology worldwide. The journal promotes a diverse range of content, including original articles, case reports, short communications, and technical notes. It also welcomes Letters to the Editor discussing published articles or sharing viewpoints on gastric cancer topics. Review articles are predominantly sought after by the Editor, ensuring comprehensive coverage of the field. With a dedicated and knowledgeable editorial team, the journal is committed to providing exceptional support and ensuring high levels of author satisfaction. In fact, over 90% of published authors have expressed their intent to publish again in our esteemed journal.