ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2020
Benchmarking Perioperative Outcomes of Cytoreductive Surgery for Cancer: Implications for Quality Measurement.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quality indicators in surgical oncology: systematic review of measures used to compare quality across hospitals.BJS open · 2024Pooled it
- Quality Standards for Surgery of Colorectal Peritoneal Metastasis After Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2022Pooled it
- Textbook outcome in ovarian cancer and its impact on survival: comparative study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- PI3K Pathway Alterations in Peritoneal Metastases are Associated with Earlier Recurrence in Patients with Colorectal Cancer Undergoing Optimal Cytoreductive Surgery.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding variation and heterogeneity in practice patterns allows programs to develop effective strategies to improve patient outcomes. Cytoreductive surgery is a potentially highly morbid operation that could benefit from systematic assessments directed towards quality improvement. We describe the hospital-level variation and benchmarks for programs performing cytoreductive surgery. PATIENTS AND
methodsCytoreductive and tumor debulking operations with or without hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy performed for cancer between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2018 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry. Risk-adjusted hospital-level variation in 30-day death, serious morbidity, reoperation, readmission, and a composite of death or serious morbidity (DSM) were evaluated using hierarchical models. National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated cancer center (NCI-CC) status was also explored.
resultsA total of 6203 operations across 589 hospitals were included, of which 56 were at NCI-CCs. Unadjusted rates of death, serious morbidity, reoperation, readmission, and DSM were 1.4%, 12.9%, 3.6%, 8.6%, and 13.4%, respectively. The coefficients of variation for hospital-level performance were 4.7%, 2.1%, 4.6%, 14.4%, and 1.0% for DSM, death, serious morbidity, unplanned reoperation, and unplanned readmissions, respectively. When compared with other hospitals, NCI-CCs had better risk-adjusted 30-day mortality (median odds ratio 0.984 versus 0.998, p < 0.001), but not for the other outcomes studied.
conclusionsHospital-level variation was modestly detected using the usual measures of perioperative outcomes. Given the increasing interest in cytoreductive surgery, we demonstrate a clear opportunity to not only improve the quality of our care but to also better improve the way quality is measured for these patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.