Dataset Information

Estimating the influencing factors for T1b/T2 gallbladder cancer on survival and surgical approaches selection.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The influencing factors, especially time to treatment (TTT), for T1b/T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC) patients remain unknown. We aimed to identify the influencing factors on survival and surgical approaches selection for T1b/T2 GBC.

Methods

We retrospectively screened GBC patients between January 2011 and August 2018 from our hospital. Clinical variables, including patient characteristics, TTT, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), surgery-related outcomes, and surgical approaches were collected.

Results

A total of 114 T1b/T2 GBC patients who underwent radical resection were included. Based on the median TTT of 7.5 days, the study cohort was divided into short TTT group (TTT ≤7 days, n = 57) and long TTT group (TTT >7 days, n = 57). Referrals were identified as the primary factor prolonging TTT (p < 0.001). There was no significance in OS (p = 0.790), DFS (p = 0.580), and surgery-related outcomes (all p > 0.05) between both groups. Decreased referrals (p = 0.005), fewer positive lymph nodes (LNs; p = 0.004), and well tumor differentiation (p = 0.004) were all associated with better OS, while fewer positive LNs (p = 0.049) were associated with better DFS. Subgroup analyses revealed no significant difference in survival between patients undergoing laparoscopic or open approach in different TTT groups (all p > 0.05). And secondary subgroup analyses found no significance in survival and surgery-related outcomes between different TTT groups of incidental GBC patients (all p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Positive LNs and tumor differentiation were prognostic factors for T1b/T2 GBC survival. Referrals associating with poor OS would delay TTT, while the prolonged TTT would not impact survival, surgery-related outcomes, and surgical approaches decisions in T1b/T2 GBC patients.

SUBMITTER: Cao J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10501227 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Estimating the influencing factors for T1b/T2 gallbladder cancer on survival and surgical approaches selection.

Cao Jiasheng J Yan Jiafei J Hu Jiahao J Zhang Bin B Topatana Win W Li Shijie S Chen Tianen T Jeungpanich Sarun S Lu Ziyi Z Peng Shuyou S Cai Xiujun X Chen Mingyu M

Cancer medicine 20230627 16

<h4>Background</h4>The influencing factors, especially time to treatment (TTT), for T1b/T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC) patients remain unknown. We aimed to identify the influencing factors on survival and surgical approaches selection for T1b/T2 GBC.<h4>Methods</h4>We retrospectively screened GBC patients between January 2011 and August 2018 from our hospital. Clinical variables, including patient characteristics, TTT, overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), surgery-related outcomes, an ...[more]

PMID: 37366278

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe primary laparoscopic approach (PLA) for T1b/T2 gallbladder cancer (GBC) remains contradicted. We aimed to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes after PLA versus open approach (OA) for T1b/T2 GBC.MethodsPatients with resected T1b/T2 GBC were selected from our hospital between January 2011 and August 2018. Overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and several secondary outcomes were used to evaluate safety and effectiveness. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify significant risk factors for OS/DFS in GBC patients undergoing PLA/OA.ResultsA total of 114 patients who underwent OA (n = 61) or PLA (n = 53) were included in the study. The percent of PLA cases was increased over time from 40.0% in 2011 to 70.0% in 2018 (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in OS [hazard ratio (HR), 1.572; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.866-2.855; p = 0.13] and DFS (HR, 1.225; 95% CI, 0.677-2.218; p = 0.49). No significance was found for intraoperative drainage placement (p = 0.253), intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.497), operation time (p = 0.105), postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.797), positive LNs (p = 0.494), total harvested LNs (p = 0.067), and recurrence rates (P = 0.334). Subgroup analyses demonstrated no significance of conversion rates after PLA (all p > 0.05). Patients undergoing PLA with good/poor OS would have similar recurrence rates (p = 0.402). Positive LNs (p = 0.032) and tumor differentiation (p = 0.048) were identified as risk factors for OS after PLA, while positive LNs (p = 0.005) was identified for OS after OA. Moreover, age (p = 0.013), gallbladder stone (p = 0.008), tumor size (p = 0.028), and positive LNs (p = 0.044) were potential risk factors for DFS after OA.ConclusionsPLA for T1b/T2 GBC was comparable to OA in terms of perioperative and long-term outcomes. Less positive LNs and well-differentiated tumors were independent predictors for better OS after PLA, and less positive LNs were also identified for better OS after OA. Additionally, younger age, without gallbladder stone, smaller tumor size, and less positive LNs were potential risk factors for better DFS after OA.

Project description:BackgroundThere is an increasing global interest in selection processes for candidates to surgical training. The aim of the present study is to compare selection processes to specialist surgeon training in the European Union (EU). A secondary goal is to provide guidance for evidence-based methods by a proposed minimum standard that would align countries within the EU.MethodsPublications and grey literature describing selection strategies were sought. Correspondence with Union Européenne des Médecins Specialists (UEMS) Section of Surgery delegates was undertaken to solicit current information on national selection processes. Content analysis of 13 semi-structured interviews with experienced Swedish surgeons on the selection process. Two field trips to Ireland, a country with a centralized selection process were conducted. Based on collated information typical cases of selection in a centralized and decentralized setting, Ireland and Sweden, are described and compared.ResultsA multitude of methods for selection to surgical training programs were documented in the 27 investigated countries, ranging from locally run processes with unstructured interviews to national systems for selection of trainees with elaborate structured interviews, and non-technical and technical skills assessments. Associated with the difference between centralized and decentralized selection systems is whether surgical training is primarily governed by an employment or educational logic. Ireland had the most centralized and elaborate system, conducting a double selection process using evidence-based methods along an educational logic. On the opposite end of the scale Sweden has a decentralized, local selection process with a paucity of evidence-based methods, no national guidelines and operates along an employment logic, and Spain that rely solely on examination tests to rank candidates.ConclusionThe studied European countries all have different processes for selection of surgical trainees and the use of evidence-based methods for selection is variable despite similar educational systems. Selection in decentralized systems is currently often conducted non-transparent and subjectively. A suggested improvement towards an evidence-based framework for selection applicable in centralized and decentralized systems as well as educational and employer logics is suggested.

Dataset Information

Estimating the influencing factors for T1b/T2 gallbladder cancer on survival and surgical approaches selection.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Estimating the influencing factors for T1b/T2 gallbladder cancer on survival and surgical approaches selection.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets