Publications by authors named "H Brenkman"

38 Publications

Worldwide Practice in Gastric Cancer Surgery: A 6-Year Update.

Dig Surg 2021 Jun 1:1-9. Epub 2021 Jun 1.

Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to evaluate the current status of gastric cancer surgery worldwide and update the changes compared to a previous survey in 2014.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was sent to surgical members of the International Gastric Cancer Association, pilot centers of the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Diseases of the Esophagus, and the Australian and New Zealand Gastric and Oesophageal Surgeons Association in addition to participants of the 2019 International Gastric Cancer and European Society for Diseases of the Esophagus congresses. Topics addressed included hospital volume, staging, perioperative treatment, surgical approach, anastomotic techniques, lymphadenectomy, and palliative management.

Results: Between June 2019 and January 2020, 165 respondents from 44 countries completed the survey. In total, 80% worked in a hospital performing >20 gastrectomies annually. Staging laparoscopy and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography were preferred by 68 and 26% for advanced cancer, and 90% offered perioperative chemo(radio)therapy to patients. For early cancer, a minimally invasive surgical approach was preferred by 65% for distal and by 50% for total gastrectomy. For advanced cancer, this was preferred by 39% for distal and by 33% for total gastrectomy. And 84% favored a stapled anastomosis, and 14% created a jejunal pouch as reconstruction during total gastrectomy. A D2 lymphadenectomy was preferred for distal as well as for total gastrectomy, in both early (62 and 71%) and advanced (84 and 89%) cancer.

Conclusion: This international survey demonstrates that perioperative chemotherapy and a D2 lymphadenectomy have now become the preferred treatment for gastric cancer. A minimally invasive surgical approach has gained popularity.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000515768DOI Listing
June 2021

Patient-reported outcomes after oesophagectomy in the multicentre LASER study.

Br J Surg 2021 May 11. Epub 2021 May 11.

Oesophago-gastric Centre, Churchill Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Background: Data on the long-term symptom burden in patients surviving oesophageal cancer surgery are scarce. The aim of this study was to identify the most prevalent symptoms and their interactions with health-related quality of life.

Methods: This was a cross-sectional cohort study of patients who underwent oesophageal cancer surgery in 20 European centres between 2010 and 2016. Patients had to be disease-free for at least 1 year. They were asked to complete a 28-symptom questionnaire at a single time point, at least 1 year after surgery. Principal component analysis was used to assess for clustering and association of symptoms. Risk factors associated with the development of severe symptoms were identified by multivariable logistic regression models.

Results: Of 1081 invited patients, 876 (81.0 per cent) responded. Symptoms in the preceding 6 months associated with previous surgery were experienced by 586 patients (66.9 per cent). The most common severe symptoms included reduced energy or activity tolerance (30.7 per cent), feeling of early fullness after eating (30.0 per cent), tiredness (28.7 per cent), and heartburn/acid or bile regurgitation (19.6 per cent). Clustering analysis showed that symptoms clustered into six domains: lethargy, musculoskeletal pain, dumping, lower gastrointestinal symptoms, regurgitation/reflux, and swallowing/conduit problems; the latter two were the most closely associated. Surgical approach, neoadjuvant therapy, patient age, and sex were factors associated with severe symptoms.

Conclusion: A long-term symptom burden is common after oesophageal cancer surgery.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znab124DOI Listing
May 2021

Refraining from resection in patients with potentially curable gastric carcinoma.

Eur J Surg Oncol 2021 May 22;47(5):1062-1068. Epub 2020 Oct 22.

Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands. Electronic address:

Background: Surgical resection is the cornerstone of curative treatment for gastric cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate reasons for and patient- and tumor characteristics that are associated with refraining from surgical resection in patients with potentially curable gastric cancer.

Materials And Methods: Between 2015 and 2017, all patients with potentially curable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4a-x, cN0-3-x, cM0) were included from the Netherlands Cancer Registry (NCR). Patients were divided into a resection (RG) and a no-resection group (nRG). Reasons for not undergoing resection as registered by the NCR were evaluated. Using multivariable logistic regression analyses, patient and tumor characteristics associated with refraining from resection were assessed.

Results: Of the 1679 analyzed patients with potentially curable disease, 1127 patients (67%) underwent resection, and 552 patients (33%) did not. Most common registered reasons for refraining from surgery were patient refusal (25%), low performance status (23%), comorbidity and extent of disease (both 10%). Factors associated with not undergoing resection were: age ≥80 years (OR 4.77, [95%CI 2.27-10.06], p < 0.001), low Social-Economic-Status (SES) (OR 2.68 [95%CI 1.31-5.46], p = 0.007), WHO performance status 3-4 (OR 10.48 [95%CI 2.41-45.73], p = 0.002) with several accompanying comorbidities, unclassified Lauren classification (OR 3.93 [95%CI 1.61-9.56], p = 0.003) and overlapping/diffuse tumors (OR 3.51, [95%CI 1.54-8.05], p = 0.003).

Conclusion: A third of patients with potentially curable gastric cancer did not undergo resection. Most frequent registered reasons for refraining from surgery were patient refusal, performance status, comorbidity and extent of disease. Additionally, multivariable analyses identified higher age, lower SES, and poor tumor characteristics as associated factors.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2020.10.025DOI Listing
May 2021

Evaluation of the Implementation of FDG-PET/CT and Staging Laparoscopy for Gastric Cancer in The Netherlands.

Ann Surg Oncol 2021 Apr 8;28(4):2384-2393. Epub 2020 Sep 8.

Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Background: The role of F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) and staging laparoscopy (SL) has increased in the preoperative staging of gastric cancer. Dutch national guidelines have recommended the use of FDG-PET/CT and SL for patients with locally advanced tumors since July 2016.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of FDG-PET/CT and SL in The Netherlands.

Methods: Between 2011 and 2018, all patients who underwent surgery for gastric cancer were included from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit. The use of FDG-PET/CT and SL was evaluated before and after revision of the Dutch guidelines. Outcomes included the number of non-curative procedures (e.g. palliative and futile procedures) and the association of FDG-PET/CT and SL, with waiting times from diagnosis to the start of treatment.

Results: A total of 3310 patients were analyzed. After July 2016, the use of FDG-PET/CT (23% vs. 61%; p < 0.001) and SL (21% vs. 58%; p < 0.001) increased. FDG-PET/CT was associated with additional waiting time to neoadjuvant therapy (4 days), as well as primary surgical treatment (20 days), and SL was associated with 8 additional days of waiting time to neoadjuvant therapy. Performing SL or both modalities consecutively in patients in whom it was indicated was not associated with the number of non-curative procedures.

Conclusion: During implementation of FDG-PET/CT and SL after revision of the guidelines, both have increasingly been used in The Netherlands. The addition of these staging methods was associated with increased waiting time to treatment. The number of non-curative procedures did not differ after performing none, solely one, or both staging modalities.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-020-09096-zDOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7940330PMC
April 2021

Non-curative gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer does not result in additional risk of postoperative morbidity compared to curative gastrectomy.

Surg Oncol 2020 Dec 21;35:126-131. Epub 2020 Aug 21.

Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands. Electronic address:

Background: Non-curative gastrectomy (nCG) for gastric cancer can be considered in selected cases to relieve symptoms. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients who underwent nCG and compare these results with an intended curative gastrectomy (CG).

Materials And Methods: All patients who underwent both nCG and CG in the Netherlands were included from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (2011-2016). In this population-based cohort study postoperative morbidity, mortality, readmissions and short-term oncological outcomes were appraised. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to create comparable groups of patients who underwent nCG versus CG, using patient and tumor characteristics.

Results: Of the 2202 eligible patients, 115 patients underwent nCG and 2087 underwent CG. After PSM, 115 nCG-patients were matched to 227 CG-patients. More conversions from laparoscopic to open surgery occurred during nCG (10·4 versus 2·6%, p = 0·007). Although postoperative mortality was higher after nCG in the original cohort (9·6 versus 4·8%, p = 0·026), after PSM there was no difference between groups (9·6 versus 7·0%, p = 0·415). Postoperative morbidity, re-interventions and readmission rates did not differ significantly between groups. Resection of additional organs (30·4 versus 11·5%, p < 0·001) and R+ resections (65·2 versus 12·3%, p < 0·001) occurred more frequently during nCG.

Conclusions: nCG does not lead to additional postoperative risks compared to CG in patients with similar characteristics, and may be considered in fit patients with advanced gastric cancer. However, randomized trials evaluating potential (survival) benefits of nCG should be awaited.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suronc.2020.08.018DOI Listing
December 2020