Despite excellent 1-year survival, morbidity in benchmark cases remains high with half of patients developing severe complications during 1-year follow-up. Benchmark cutoffs targeting morbidity parameters offer a valid tool to assess higher risk groups.

Benchmarking is a popular quality‐improvement tool in economic practice. Its basic principle consists of identifying the best (the benchmark), then comparing with the best, and learning from the best. In healthcare, the concept of benchmarking or establishing benchmarks has been less specific, where comparisons often do not target the best, but the average results. The goal, however, remains improvement in patient outcome. This article outlines the application of benchmarking and proposes a standard approach of benchmark determination in surgery, including the establishment of best achievable real‐world postoperative outcomes. Parameters used for this purpose must be reproducible, objective and universal. A systematic approach for determining benchmarks enables self‐assessment of surgical outcome and facilitates the detection of areas for improvement. The intention of benchmarking is to stimulate surgeons' genuine endeavour for perfection, rather than to judge centre or surgeon performance.

The CCI adds information on postoperative morbidity in almost half of the patients developing complications, with particular value following extensive surgery and longer postoperative observation up to 3 months. Each single complication, independently of their inter-connection, should be included in the CCI calculation to best mirror the patients' postoperative morbidity.

Objective: To define a standardized methodology for establishing benchmarks for relevant outcomes in surgery. Summary Background Data: Benchmarking is an established tool to improve quality in industry and economics, and is emerging in assessing outcome values in surgery. Despite a recent 10-step approach to identify such benchmark values, a standardized and more widely agreed-on approach is still lacking. Methods: A multinational web-based Delphi survey with a focus on methodological requirements for establishing benchmarks for surgical outcomes was performed. Participants were selected among internationally renowned specialists in abdominal, vascular, and thoracic surgery. Consensus was defined as ≥70% agreement and results were used to develop a checklist to establish benchmarks in surgery. Results: Forty-one surgical opinion leaders from 19 countries and 5 continents were involved. Experts’ response rates were 98% and 80% in rounds 1 and 2, respectively. Upon completion of the final Delphi round, consensus was successfully achieved for 26 of 36 items covering the following areas: center eligibility, validation of databases, patient cohort selection, procedure selection, duration of follow-up, statistical analysis, and publication requirements regarding center-specific outcomes. Conclusions: This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for developing a standardized approach for establishing benchmarks for relevant outcome measures in surgery. The provided consensual checklist customizes the methodology of outcome reporting in surgery and thus improves reproducibility and comparability of data and should ultimately serve to improve quality of care.

The aim of this study was to identify a readily available, reproducible, and internationally applicable cost assessment tool for surgical procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Strong economic pressure exists worldwide to slow down the rising of health care costs. Postoperative morbidity significantly impacts on cost in surgical patients. The comprehensive complication index (CCI), reflecting overall postoperative morbidity, may therefore serve as a new marker for cost. METHODS Postoperative complications and total costs from a single tertiary center were prospectively collected (2014 to 2016) up to 3 months after surgery for a variety of abdominal procedures (n = 1388). CCI was used to quantify overall postoperative morbidity. Pearson correlation coefficient (rpears) was calculated for cost and CCI. For cost prediction, a linear regression model based on CCI, age, and type of surgery was developed and validated in an international cohort of patients. RESULTS We found a high correlation between CCI and overall cost (rpears = 0.75) with the strongest correlation for more complex procedures. The prediction model performed very well (R = 0.82); each 10-point increase in CCI corresponded to a 14% increase to the baseline cost. Additional 12% of baseline cost must be added for patients older than 50 years, or 24% for those over 70 years. The validation cohorts showed a good match of predicted and observed cost. CONCLUSION Overall postoperative morbidity correlates highly with cost. The CCI together with the type of surgery and patient age is a novel and reliable predictor of expenses in surgical patients. This finding may enable objective cost comparisons among centers, procedures, or over time obviating the need to look at complex country-specific cost calculations (www.assessurgery.com).

Table. Pathological Features and Molecular Profile of Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer Pathological features Molecular profile Poor differentiation Microsatellite stability Mucinous tumors More likely to exhibit LINE-1 hypomethylation and TP53 sequence variations Signet-ring morphology Less frequently harbor KRAS, BRAF V600E, and APC sequence variations Perineural/venous invasion Promoter methylation of CpG islands Abbreviations: APC, adenomatous polyposis coli; BRAF, B-Raf; KRAS, K-Ras; LINE-1, long interspersed nuclear elements; TP53, tumor protein 53.

No statistically significant differences in treatment efficacy were detected between 20 Gy IF radiotherapy and 1X (COPP + ABVD) chemotherapy following CR after six cycles of alternating chemotherapy in patients with advanced-stage HD. However, limited observations in a non-randomized cohort indicate that patients without consolidation treatment of CR after 6 cycles of chemotherapy may have an elevated risk of relapse.

Suspicion of an SC should lead to performance of a magnetic resonance imaging for defining tumor extent, and a fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-CT for detection of metastases. Radical tumor excision and resection of tumor involved regional lymph nodes are essential for a curative approach. Histopathological evaluation should involve determination of tumor differentiation grade, because high-grade carcinomas seem to have a much more aggressive behavior. Excision of distant metastases has no therapeutic value. Follow-up needs to be carried out in short intervals with frequent imaging.