Development of a Reliable Surgical Quality Assurance System for 2-stage Esophagectomy in Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

Objective: The aim was to develop a reliable surgical quality assurance system for 2-stage esophagectomy. This development was conducted during the pilot phase of the multicenter ROMIO trial, collaborating with international experts. Summary of Background Data:There is evidence that the quality of surgical performance in randomized controlled trials influences clinical outcomes, quality of lymphadenectomy and loco-regional recurrence. Methods: Standardization of 2-stage esophagectomy was based on structured observations, semi-structured interviews, hierarchical task analysis, and a Delphi consensus process. This standardization provided the structure for the operation manual and video and photographic assessment tools. Reliability was examined using generalizability theory. Results: Hierarchical task analysis for 2-stage esophagectomy comprised fifty-four steps. Consensus (75%) agreement was reached on thirty-nine steps, whereas fifteen steps had a majority decision. An operation manual and record were created. A thirty five-item video assessment tool was developed that assessed the process (safety and efficiency) and quality of the end product (anatomy exposed and lymphadenectomy performed) of the operation. The quality of the end product section was used as a twenty seven-item photographic assessment tool. Thirty-one videos and fifty-three photographic series were submitted from the ROMIO pilot phase for assessment. The overall Gcoefficient for the video assessment tool was 0.744, and for the photographic assessment tool was 0.700. Conclusions: A reliable surgical quality assurance system for 2-stage esophagectomy has been developed for surgical oncology randomized controlled trials. Ethical approval: 11/NW/0895 and confirmed locally as appropriate, 12/ SW/0161, 16/SW/0098. Trial registration number: ISRCTN59036820, ISRCTN10386621.

Esophagectomy or Total Gastrectomy for Siewert 2 Gastroesophageal Junction (GEJ) Adenocarcinoma? A Registry-Based Analysis

“…Future studies, both observational cohort studies and randomized controlled trials, must seek to address this, with pictures or videos at the end of the lymphadenectomy providing an accurate measurement of intraoperative findings as well as a measure of quality of surgery and lymphadenectomy. 35 This study had important limitations. First, a clear treatment selection bias existed between the patients receiving esophagectomy and those receiving gastrectomy, with surgeon preference often an unmeasured but crucial driving factor.…”

Use of Generalizability Theory for Exploring Reliability of and Sources of Variance in Assessment of Technical Skills: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Of these, 137 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility with a final inclusion of 44 studies in our qualitative synthesis (see Supplemental Digital Appendix 2 at http://links.lww.com/ACADMED/B108). 15–58 For 39 of these studies, sufficient details on the variance components were reported or obtained from the authors for the quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis). 15–27,29–43,45,47–52,54,56–58…”

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Compared with Surgery for Oesophageal Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study and Missing Evidence

“…The surgical techniques were quite different from those in the last century. As the only local control method in NAC combination, surgical QC should be stricter 28 . In the 8911 trial, there was no MIE, and the surgical experience was limited compared to that currently 2 .…”