Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Quality management in rectal carcinoma: what is feasible?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Colorectal Disease Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

A cohort study was carried out to analyse quality indicators in the diagnosis and treatment of rectal carcinoma.

Methods

A total of 2,470 patients with rectal carcinoma treated between 1985 and 2007 at the Department of Surgery, University of Erlangen, were analysed and compared within four time intervals.

Results

Most of the indicators analysed from 2004 to 2007 fulfilled the defined target values. The indicators for process quality of surgical treatment and the surrogate indicators of outcome quality in surgery showed excellent results. Comparing this to previous data, it displays the new developments such as introduction of multimodal treatment for high-risk patients. While the rate of locoregional recurrences decreased, no significant improvement in survival was found.

Conclusions

Careful analysis of quality indicators is important for both quality management and comparison of treatment results. The progress in diagnosis and treatment requires a continuous update of definitions and target values.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Soreide O, Norstein J, Fielding LP, Silen W (1997) International standardization and documentation of the treatment of rectal cancer. In: Soreide O, Norstein J (eds) Rectal Cancer Surgery. Optimisation–standardisation–documentation. Springer, Berlin, pp 405–445

    Google Scholar 

  2. Schmiegel W, Pox C, Adler G, Fleig W, Fölsch UR, Frühmorgen P, Graeven U, Hohenberger W, Holstege A, Junginger T, Kühlbacher T, Porschen R, Propping P, Riemann JF, Sauer R, Sauerbruch T, Schmoll HJ, Zeitz M, Selbmann HK (2004) S3-Leitlinienkonferenz “Kolorektales Karzinom” 2004. Z Gastroenterol 42:1129–1177

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Schmiegel W, Reinacher-Schick A, Arnold D, Graeven U, Heinemann V, Porschen R, Riemann J, Rödel C, Sauer R, Wieser M, Schmitt W, Schmoll HJ, Seufferlein T, Kopp I, Pox C (2008) S3-Leitlinie „Kolorektales Karzinom“—Aktualisierung 2008. Z Gastroenterol 46:799–840

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bittner R, Burghardt J, Gross E, Grundmann RT, Hermanek P, Isbert C, Junginger T, Köckerling F, Merkel S, Möslein G, Raab HR, Roder J, Ruf G, Schwenk W, Strassburg J, Tannapfel A, de Vries A, Zühlke H (2007) Qualitätsindikatoren bei Diagnostik und Therapie des Rektumkarzinoms. Zentralblatt für Chirurgie 132:85–94

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sobin LH, Wittekind Ch (eds) UICC (2002): TNM classification of malignant tumours, 6th edn. Wiley, New York

  6. UICC (2003) TNM Supplement. In: Wittekind Ch, Greene FL, Henson DE, Hutter RVP, Sobin LH (eds) A commentary on uniform use, 3rd edn. Wiley–Liss, New York

    Google Scholar 

  7. Heald RJ, Husband EM, Ryall RD (1982) The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—the clue to pelvic recurrence? Br J Surg 69:613–616

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Compton CC (2002) Pathologic prognostic factors in the recurrence of rectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2:149–160

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hermanek P, Hermanek P, Hohenberger W, Klimpfinger M, Köckerling F, Papadopoulos T (2003) The pathological assessment of mesorectal excision: implications for further treatment and quality management. Int J Colorectal Dis 18:335–341

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Maughan NJ, Quirke P (2003) Modern management of colorectal cancer—a pathologist’s view. Scand J Surg 92:11–19

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJH, Marijnen CAM, van Krieken JHJM, Quirke P (2005) Low rectal cancer: a call for a change of approach in abdominoperineal resection. J Clin Oncol 23:9257–9264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Glynne-Jones R, Mawdsley S, Novell JR (2006) The clinical significance of the circumferential resection margin following preoperative pelvic chemo-radiotherapy in rectal cancer: why we need a common language. Colorectal Dis 8:800–807

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Junginger T, Kneist W, Sultanov F, Heintz A (2003) Qualitätsindikatoren der chirurgischen Therapie des Rektumkarzinoms. Chirurg 74:444–451

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Steinert R, Marusch F, Koch A, Ptok H, Reymond MA, Gastinger I (2005) Möglichkeiten der Qualitätsverbesserung bei der Therapie des Rektumkarzinoms. Zentralbl Chir 130:387–392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Lippert H, Gastinger I (2006) Versorgung von Patienten mit Rektumkarzinomen in Deutschland. Deutsches Ärzteblatt 103:A2704–A2709

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ptok H, Marusch F, Kuhn R, Gastinger I, Lippert H (2007) Influence of hospital volume on the frequency of abdominoperineal resection and long-term oncological outcomes in low rectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 33:854–861

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Benchmarking Darmzentren WDC. Bericht 1. Halbjahr 2007. Available via: http://www.brustcentrum.de/doc/controls/document/docrender.aspx?ID=96. Accessed 15 Jan 2009

  18. Luna-Pérez P, Rodríguez-Ramírez S, Alvarado I, Gutiérrez de la Barrera M, Labastida S (2003) Prognostic significance of retrieved lymph nodes per specimen in resected rectal adenocarcinoma after preoperative chemoradiation therapy. Arch Med Res 34:281–286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hermanek P (1994) Hermanek P, Marzoli GP. In: Hermanek P, Marzoli GP (eds) Lokale Therapie des Rektumkarzinoms in kurativer Intention. Springer, Berlin, pp 7–19

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sengupta S, Tjandra JJ (2001) Local excision of rectal cancer: what is the evidence? Dis Colon Rectum 44:1345–1361

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Matzel KE, Merkel S, Hohenberger W (2003) Lokale Therapieprinzipien beim Rektumkarzinom. Chirurg 74:897–904

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Borschitz T, Gockel I, Kiesslich R, Junginger T (2008) Oncological outcome after local excision of rectal carcinomas. Ann Surg Oncol 15:3101–3108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bittorf B, Stadelmaier U, Göhl J, Hohenberger W, Matzel KE (2004) Functional outcome after intersphincteric resection of the rectum with coloanal anastomosis in low rectal cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 30:260–265

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Gervaz P, Bucher P, Konrad B, Morel P, Beyeler S, Lataillade L, Allal A (2008) A prospective longitudinal evaluation of quality of life after abdominoperineal resection. J Surg Oncol 97:14–19

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schmidt O, Merkel S, Hohenberger W (2003) Anastomotic leakage after low rectal stapler anastomosis: significance of intraoperative anastomotic testing. Eur J Surg Oncol 29:239–243

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Bittorf B, Stadelmaier U, Merkel S, Hohenberger W, Matzel KE (2003) Does anastomotic leakage affect functional outcome after rectal resection for cancer? Langenbecks Arch Surg 387:406–410

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Merkel S, Wang WY, Schmidt O, Dworak O, Wittekind C, Hohenberger W, Hermanek P (2001) Locoregional recurrence in patients with anastomotic leakage after anterior resection for rectal carcinoma. Colorectal Dis 3:154–160

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Sauer R, Becker H, Hohenberger W, Rödel C, Wittekind C, Fietkau R, Martus P, Tschmelitsch J, Hager E, Hess CF, Karstens JH, Liersch T, Schmidberger H, Raab R, German Rectal Cancer 29. Study Group (2004) Preoperative versus postoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 351:1731–1740

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Merkel S, Mansmann U, Siassi M, Papadopoulos T, Hohenberger W, Hermanek P (2001) The prognostic inhomogeneity in pT3 rectal carcinomas. Int J Colorectal Dis 16:298–304

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Zirngibl H, Husemann B, Hermanek P (1990) Intraoperative spillage of tumor cells in surgery of rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 33:610–614

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Nagtegaal ID, van de Velde CJ, van der Worp E, Kapiteijn E, Quirke P, van Krieken JH, Cooperative Clinical Investigators of the Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group (2002) Macroscopic evaluation of rectal cancer resection specimen: clinical significance of the pathologist in quality control. J Clin Oncol 20:1729–1734

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Maslekar S, Sharma A, Macdonald A, Gunn J, Monson JR, Hartley JE (2007) Mesorectal grades predict recurrences after curative resection for rectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 50:168–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Quirke P, Guillou P, Thorpe H et al (2006) Circumferential margins in rectum and right colon in the MRC CLASSIC trial: 3 year disease free survival and local recurrence. J Pathol 208:30A

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nagtegaal ID, Quirke P (2008) What is the role for the circumferential margin in the modern treatment of rectal cancer? J Clin Oncol 26:303–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Strassburg J, Junginger T, Trinh T, Püttcher O, Oberholzer K, Heald RJ, Hermanek P (2008) Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based indication for neoadjuvant treatment of rectal carcinoma and the surrogate endpoint CRM status. Int J Colorectal Dis 23:1099–1107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Merkel S, Meyer T, Göhl J, Hohenberger W (2002) Late locoregional recurrence in rectal carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 28:716–722

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. EUROCARE Homepage. Available via: http://www.eurocare.it/. Accessed 31 Mar 2009

  38. SEER Homepage. Available via: http://seer.cancer.gov/index.html. Accessed 31 Mar 2009

  39. Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft e. V. (2009) Erhebungsbogen für Darmzentren der Deutschen Krebsgesellschaft. Available via: http://www.krebsgesellschaft.de/download/eb_darm-b1_12.03.2009.doc. Accessed 31 Mar 2009

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the financial support provided by the Bundesärztekammer. We also thank Ms. Marion Peters for her assistance in the study.

Conflict of interest

The authors indicate no financial relationship with the organisation that sponsored the research. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Data were presented at the 18th Conference for Tumour Documentation of Clinical and Epidemiological Cancer Registries, held in Jena, Germany, on April 1–3, 2009.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University Hospital Erlangen, Krankenhausstr. 12, 91054, Erlangen, Germany

    Susanne Merkel, Daniela Klossek, Jonas Göhl, Werner Hohenberger & Paul Hermanek

  2. Department of Pathology, Vivantes Klinikum Spandau, Berlin, Germany

    Thomas Papadopoulos

Authors
  1. Susanne Merkel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniela Klossek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jonas Göhl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Papadopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Werner Hohenberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Paul Hermanek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susanne Merkel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Merkel, S., Klossek, D., Göhl, J. et al. Quality management in rectal carcinoma: what is feasible?. Int J Colorectal Dis 24, 931–942 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-009-0736-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-009-0736-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation