4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Multidisciplinary Conference and Clinical Management of Rectal Cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS
卷 226, 期 5, 页码 874-880

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.01.056

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Presentation of rectal cancer cases at a colorectal cancer multidisciplinary conference (CRC-MDC) is a required standard for the newly formed National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer administered by the Commission on Cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency and manner in which CRC-MDC changed the management of rectal cancer patients at a tertiary academic center. STUDY DESIGN: All rectal cancer cases presented at a weekly CRC-MDC between July 2015 and June 2016 were prospectively included. Patient demographics and clinical information were recorded. The presenting physician completed a uniform written questionnaire outlining any changes in management as a result of the discussion. RESULTS: There were 408 rectal cancer cases included, and survey responses were obtained for 371 (91%). Thirty-nine patients (11%) had stage IV disease and 20 (5%) had locally recurrent cancer. There was a documented change in plan as a result of the CRC-MDC discussion in 97 of 371 (26%) cases surveyed. Changes in management included a change in therapy or change in therapy sequence in 76 cases, and recommendation of additional evaluation in 36 cases. Rates of management change were similar regardless of surgeon experience. Changes occurred in 23%, 28%, and 26% of cases presented by surgeons with <10, 10 to 20, and > 20 years of experience, respectively (chi-square p = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: The CRC-MDC changes clinical management for a significant portion of rectal cancer patients at a tertiary center, independent of the presenting surgeon's years of clinical experience. Our results support the CRC-MDC standard for the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer. ((C) 2018 by the American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据