Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective: Analyzing textbook outcome (TO) following rectal cancer resection and its association with long-term survival when compared to hospital case volume alone. Background: TO is a quality metric representing the ideal result following complex cancer surgery. Prior studies have suggested improved long-term survival for rectal cancer patients undergoing surgery at HV institutions. Methods: Patients undergoing surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma from 2014 to 2015 were identified using the National Cancer Database. Low (LV), medium (MV), and high-volume (HV) hospital strata were defined by quartile cutoffs (low <25th, high >75th, and 25–75th medium volume). TO was achieved with adequate lymph node count (≥12), negative margins (R0 resection), length of stay <75th percentile, absence of 30-day readmission/mortality event, and appropriate plus timely systemic therapy. Adjusted analyses for long-term survival were performed using a hierarchical multivariable Cox regression model. Results: TO was achieved in 28.5% of 48,484 patients. LV or MV hospital patients were more likely to be older, uninsured/Medicaid, and less likely to achieve a TO (HV 31.2% vs MV 29.6% vs LV 23.2%, P < 0.001). TO was associated with improved 5-year survival (84.0% vs 72.0%, P < 0.001). On multivariable analyses, TO was the strongest protective factor against mortality (HR 0.60, 95% confidence interval = 0.56–0.64), even after controlling for case volume. Conclusions: Only 28.5% of patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer achieve TO. However, they had a 40% reduction in long-term mortality independent of hospital volume. Optimizing long-term survival in patients with rectal cancer can be achieved by TO criteria rather than increasing surgical case volume.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aly et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: