Implementation of mandatory ERCP registration in The Netherlands and compliance with European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy performance measures: a multicenter database study.

BACKGROUND: In 2018, the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) and United European Gastroenterology (UEG) published quality performance measures for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Since January 2016, all endoscopists in the Netherlands have been required to register all ERCP procedures in a nationwide quality registry. This study aimed to evaluate the procedural success rates of ERCP after the implementation of mandatory national registration and to compare these with the ESGE quality performance measures. METHODS: This study was conducted with data from a multicenter endoscopy database. Data from 2019 and 2020 were analyzed. The primary outcome was ERCP procedural outcome. ESGE performance measures that could be evaluated were the percentage of successful bile duct cannulations in patients with virgin papillary anatomy; successful stent placement for a biliary obstruction located below the liver hilum; and complete removal of bile duct stones (< 10 mm). RESULT: In total, 5295 ERCPs performed in 11 centers were included for analysis. The overall procedural success rate was 89.1 %. Successful biliary cannulation in patients with a virgin papilla was 90.3 % in nonacademic and 92.4 % in academic centers. The rates of successful stent placement in patients with a biliary obstruction located below the liver hilum were 97.0 % in nonacademic and 98.2 % in academic centers, and of successful bile duct stone extraction were 97.9 % in both nonacademic and academic centers. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of ERCPs performed met five of the six evaluated ESGE performance measures. The 95 % target for successful biliary cannulation in patients with virgin papillary anatomy in academic centers was not met. Mandatory registration provides valuable insight into ERCP performance rates.

Low value of second-look endoscopy for detecting residual colorectal cancer after endoscopic removal.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic resection is often feasible for submucosal invasive colorectal cancers (T1 CRCs) and usually judged as complete. If histology casts doubt on the radicality of resection margins, adjuvant surgical resection is advised, although residual intramural cancer is found in only 5% to 15% of patients. We assessed the sensitivity of biopsy specimens from the resection area for residual intramural cancer as a potential tool to estimate the preoperative risk of residual intramural cancer in patients without risk factors for lymph node metastasis (LNM). METHODS: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, patients with complete endoscopic resection of T1 CRC, scheduled for adjuvant resection due to pathologically unclear resection margins, but absent risk factors for LNM, were asked to consent to second-look endoscopy with biopsies. The results were compared with the pathology results of the surgical resection specimen (criterion standard). RESULTS: One hundred three patients were included. In total, 85% of resected lesions were unexpectedly malignant, and 45% were removed using a piecemeal resection technique. Sixty-four adjuvant surgical resections and 39 local full-thickness resections were performed. Residual intramural cancer was found in 7 patients (6.8%). Two of these patients had cancer in second-look biopsy specimens, resulting in a sensitivity of 28% (95% confidence interval, <58%). The preoperative risk of residual intramural cancer in the case of negative biopsy specimens was not significantly reduced (P = .61). CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of second-look endoscopy with biopsies for residual intramural cancer after endoscopic resection of CRC is low. Therefore, it should not be used in the decision whether or not to perform adjuvant resection. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02328664.).

Risk stratification for surgical outcomes in older colorectal cancer patients using ISAR-HP and G8 screening tools.

BACKGROUND: Older patients are at risk for adverse outcomes after surgical treatment of cancer. Identifying patients at risk could affect treatment decisions and prevent functional decline. Screening tools are available to select patients for Geriatric Assessment. Until now their predictive value for adverse outcomes in older colorectal cancer patients has not been investigated. OBJECTIVE: To study the predictive value of the Geriatric 8 (G8) and Identification of Seniors at Risk for Hospitalized Patients (ISAR-HP) screening tools for adverse outcomes after elective colorectal surgery in patients older than 70years. Primary outcomes were 30-day complication rates, secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay and six-month mortality. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Multicentre cohort study from two hospitals in the Netherlands. Frail was defined as a G8 ≤14 and/or ISAR-HP ≥2. Odds ratio (OR) is given with 95% CI. RESULTS: Overall, 139 patients (52%) out of 268 patients were included; 32 patients (23%) were ISAR-HP-frail, 68 (50%) were G8-frail, 20 were frail on both screening tools. Median age was 77.7years. ISAR-HP frail patients were at risk for 30-day complications OR 2.4 (CI 1.1-5.4, p=0.03), readmission OR 3.4 (1.1-11.0), cardiopulmonary complications OR 5.9 (1.6-22.6), longer hospital stay (10.3 versus 8.9day) and six-months mortality OR 4.9 (1.1-23.4). When ISAR-HP and G8 were combined OR increased for readmission, 30-day and six-months mortality. G8 alone had no predictive value. CONCLUSIONS: ISAR-HP-frail patients are at risk for adverse outcomes after colorectal surgery. ISAR-HP combined with G8 has the strongest predictive value for complications and mortality. KEY POINTS: Patients screening frail on ISAR-HP are at increased risk for morbidity and mortality. Screening results of G8 alone was not predictive for postoperative outcomes. Predictive value increased when G8 and ISAR-HP were combined.