4.5 Article

Team Strategy Optimization in Combined Resections for Synchronous Colorectal Liver Metastases. A Comparative Study with Bootstrapping Analysis

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY
Volume 45, Issue 11, Pages 3424-3435

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-021-06260-8

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that the surgical approach and intraoperative blood loss are independent prognostic factors for morbidity in patients with synchronous colorectal liver metastases. The team approach did not show significant correlation with postoperative complications or choice of laparoscopic approach.
Background The aim of the study was to evaluate perioperative outcomes and to evaluate factors influencing rative morbidity and adoption of minimally invasive technique in 1-team (1-T) versus two teams (2-T) management of synchronous colorectal liver metastases. Methods Within four referral centers, a group of 234 patients treated in 1-T centers was identified and compared with a group of 253 patients treated in 2-T. A nonparametric bootstrap process was applied to the original cohorts of 1-T group and 2-T group as a resampling method to obtain bootstrapped cohorts (155 patients per group). Results 33.5% of patients in 1-T boot group and 38.1% in the 2-T boot group were operated by laparoscopic approach. Multivariate analysis revealed that approach to primary tumor (laparoscopic or open) and intraoperative blood loss were independent prognostic factors for morbidity. Team approach did not show any significant correlation with incidence of postoperative complications nor with choice for laparoscopic approach. Conclusion The optimization of team strategy for patients with SCRLM is not solely based on the adoption of a 1-T or 2-T approach, but should instead be based on the implementation of a standard protocol for management of these patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available