Search

Your search keyword '"Kok, N"' showing total 12 results
Start Over Author "Kok, N" Journal british journal of surgery
12 results on '"Kok, N"'

3. Factors affecting outcomes following pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer

Author

Kelly M. E., Glynn R., Aalbers A. G. J., Abraham-Nordling M., Alberda W., Antoniou A., Austin K. K., Beets G. L., Beynon J., Bosman S. J., Brunner M., Buchler M. W., Burger J. W. A., Campain N., Christensen H. K., Codd M., Coscia M., Colquhoun A. J., Daniels I. R., Davies R. J., de Wilt J. H. W., Deutsch C., Dietz D., Eglinton T., Fearnhead N., Frizelle F. A., Garcia-Sabrido J. L., George M. L., Gentilini L., Harris D. A., Harji D., Heriot A. G., Hohenberger Brunner W., Jenkins J. T., Kanemitsu Y., Chan K. K. L., Kim H., Koh C. E., Kok N. F., Kontovounisios C., Kulu Y., Law W. L., Le G. N., Lee P., Lydrup M. L., Lynch A. C., Martling A., Meijerink J., Merkel S., McDermott F. D., McGrath J. S., Nielsen Christensen M. B., Nieuwenhuijzen G. A. P., Nordling M. A., Northover J. M. A., O'Connell P. R., Patsouras D., Poggioli G., Radwan R. W., Rasheed S., Rasmussen P. C., Rothbarth J., Rutten H. J. T., Sagar P. M., Schizas A. M. P., Shida D., Smart N. J., Solomon M. J., Stocchi L., Tekkis P. P., Tsukamoto S., Turner W. H., Tuynman J., Ulrich A., van Leeuwenhoek A., van Ramshorst G. H., Vasquez-Jimenez W., Verhoef C., Versteegen M., Wakeman C., Warrier S., Yip J., Winter D. C., Surgery, Kelly M.E., Glynn R., Aalbers A.G.J., Abraham-Nordling M., Alberda W., Antoniou A., Austin K.K., Beets G.L., Beynon J., Bosman S.J., Brunner M., Buchler M.W., Burger J.W.A., Campain N., Christensen H.K., Codd M., Coscia M., Colquhoun A.J., Daniels I.R., Davies R.J., de Wilt J.H.W., Deutsch C., Dietz D., Eglinton T., Fearnhead N., Frizelle F.A., Garcia-Sabrido J.L., George M.L., Gentilini L., Harris D.A., Harji D., Heriot A.G., Hohenberger Brunner W., Jenkins J.T., Kanemitsu Y., Chan K.K.L., Kim H., Koh C.E., Kok N.F., Kontovounisios C., Kulu Y., Law W.L., Le G.N., Lee P., Lydrup M.L., Lynch A.C., Martling A., Meijerink J., Merkel S., McDermott F.D., McGrath J.S., Nielsen Christensen M.B., Nieuwenhuijzen G.A.P., Nordling M.A., Northover J.M.A., O'Connell P.R., Patsouras D., Poggioli G., Radwan R.W., Rasheed S., Rasmussen P.C., Rothbarth J., Rutten H.J.T., Sagar P.M., Schizas A.M.P., Shida D., Smart N.J., Solomon M.J., Stocchi L., Tekkis P.P., Tsukamoto S., Turner W.H., Tuynman J., Ulrich A., van Leeuwenhoek A., van Ramshorst G.H., Vasquez-Jimenez W., Verhoef C., Versteegen M., Wakeman C., Warrier S., Yip J., Winter D.C., AGEM - Re-generation and cancer of the digestive system, and CCA - Cancer Treatment and quality of life

Subjects
Male, medicine.medical_specialty, medicine.medical_treatment, 030230 surgery, Tumours of the digestive tract Radboud Institute for Health Sciences [Radboudumc 14], 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being, medicine, Clinical endpoint, Humans, Survival rate, Survival analysis, Neoadjuvant therapy, Aged, Rectal Neoplasm, Pelvic exenteration, Rectal Neoplasms, business.industry, Odds ratio, Middle Aged, Survival Analysis, Neoadjuvant Therapy, Pelvic Exenteration, Surgery, Radiation therapy, Treatment Outcome, 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis, Resection margin, Female, Survival Analysi, Neoplasm Recurrence, Local, business, Human
Abstract

Background Pelvic exenteration for locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) is associated with variable outcomes, with the majority of data from single-centre series. This study analysed data from an international collaboration to determine robust parameters that could inform clinical decision-making. Methods Anonymized data on patients who had pelvic exenteration for LRRC between 2004 and 2014 were accrued from 27 specialist centres. The primary endpoint was survival. The impact of resection margin, bone resection, node status and use of neoadjuvant therapy (before exenteration) was assessed. Results Of 1184 patients, 614 (51·9 per cent) had neoadjuvant therapy. A clear resection margin (R0 resection) was achieved in 55·4 per cent of operations. Twenty-one patients (1·8 per cent) died within 30 days and 380 (32·1 per cent) experienced a major complication. Median overall survival was 36 months following R0 resection, 27 months after R1 resection and 16 months following R2 resection (P < 0·001). Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy had more postoperative complications (unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 1·53), readmissions (unadjusted OR 2·33) and radiological reinterventions (unadjusted OR 2·12). Three-year survival rates were 48·1 per cent, 33·9 per cent and 15 per cent respectively. Bone resection (when required) was associated with a longer median survival (36 versus 29 months; P < 0·001). Node-positive patients had a shorter median overall survival than those with node-negative disease (22 versus 29 months respectively). Multivariable analysis identified margin status and bone resection as significant determinants of long-term survival. Conclusion Negative margins and bone resection (where needed) were identified as the most important factors influencing overall survival. Neoadjuvant therapy before pelvic exenteration did not affect survival, but was associated with higher rates of readmission, complications and radiological reintervention.

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. Volume–outcome relationship of liver surgery: a nationwide analysis

Author

Olthof, P B, primary, Elfrink, A K E, additional, Marra, E, additional, Belt, E J T, additional, van den Boezem, P B, additional, Bosscha, K, additional, Consten, E C J, additional, den Dulk, M, additional, Gobardhan, P D, additional, Hagendoorn, J, additional, van Heek, T N T, additional, IJzermans, J N M, additional, Klaase, J M, additional, Kuhlmann, K F D, additional, Leclercq, W K G, additional, Liem, M S L, additional, Manusama, E R, additional, Marsman, H A, additional, Mieog, J S D, additional, Oosterling, S J, additional, Patijn, G A, additional, te Riele, W, additional, Swijnenburg, R-J, additional, Torrenga, H, additional, van Duijvendijk, P, additional, Vermaas, M, additional, Kok, N F M, additional, Grünhagen, D J, additional, Besselink, M G H, additional, de Boer, M T, additional, Buis, C I, additional, van Gulik, T M, additional, Hoogwater, F J H, additional, Molenaar, I Q, additional, Dejong, C H C, additional, and Verhoef, C, additional

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

8. Multicentre study of short-course radiotherapy, systemic therapy and resection/ablation for stage IV rectal cancer

Author

Kok, E N D, primary, Havenga, K, additional, Tanis, P J, additional, Wilt, J H W, additional, Hagendoorn, J, additional, Peters, F P, additional, Buijsen, J, additional, Rutten, H J T, additional, Kuhlmann, K F D, additional, Beets, G L, additional, Aalbers, A G J, additional, Kok, N F M, additional, Ruers, T J M, additional, Kobus, C B H A, additional, Siemons, S V, additional, Grootscholten, C, additional, Dewit, L G H, additional, Berg, J G, additional, Zavrakidis, I, additional, Jong, K P, additional, Hospers, G A P, additional, Karrenbeld, A, additional, Geijsen, E D, additional, Punt, C J A, additional, Rutten, H, additional, Radema, S, additional, Intven, M P W, additional, Roodhart, J M L, additional, Holman, F, additional, Kapiteijn, E, additional, Melenhorst, J, additional, Cnossen, J S, additional, and Creemers, G-J M, additional

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

9. Variation in pancreatoduodenectomy as delivered in two national audits

Author

Mackay, T M, primary, Wellner, U F, additional, van Rijssen, L B, additional, Stoop, T F, additional, Busch, O R, additional, Groot Koerkamp, B, additional, Bausch, D, additional, Petrova, E, additional, Besselink, M G, additional, Keck, T, additional, van Santvoort, H C, additional, Molenaar, I Q, additional, Kok, N, additional, Festen, S, additional, van Eijck, C H J, additional, Bonsing, B A, additional, Erdmann, J, additional, de Hingh, I, additional, Buhr, H J, additional, and Klinger, C, additional

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

11. Diffusion‐weighted MRI assessment of the peritoneal cancer index before cytoreductive surgery.

Author

van 't Sant, I., van Eden, W. J., Engbersen, M. P., Kok, N. F. M., Woensdregt, K., Lambregts, D. M. J., Shanmuganathan, S., Beets‐Tan, R. G. H., Aalbers, A. G. J., and Lahaye, M. J.

Subjects
PERITONEAL cancer, HYPERTHERMIC intraperitoneal chemotherapy, CYTOREDUCTIVE surgery, PATIENT selection, INTRACLASS correlation, DIFFUSION coefficients
Abstract

Background: Patients with limited peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer may be candidates for an aggressive surgical approach including cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS–HIPEC). Selection is based on surgical inspection during laparoscopy or laparotomy. The aim of this study was to investigate whether diffusion‐weighted MRI (DW‐MRI) can be used to select patients for CRS–HIPEC. Methods: This was a prospective study at a tertiary referral centre. Patients with confirmed or suspected colorectal peritoneal metastases scheduled for exploratory laparotomy or laparoscopy were eligible. Two radiologists assessed the peritoneal cancer index (PCI) on CT (CT‐PCI) and DW‐MRI (MRI‐PCI). The reference standard was PCI at surgery. Radiologists were blinded to the surgical PCI and to each other's findings. The main outcome was the accuracy of DW‐MRI in predicting whether patients had resectable disease (PCI less than 21) or not. Results: Fifty‐six patients were included in the study, of whom 49 could be evaluated. The mean(s.d.) PCI at surgery was 11·27(7·53). The mean MRI‐PCI was 10·18(7·07) for reader 1 and 8·59(7·08) for reader 2. Readers 1 and 2 correctly staged 47 of 49 and 44 of 49 patients respectively (accuracy 96 and 90 per cent). Both readers detected all patients with resectable disease with a PCI below 21 at surgery (sensitivity 100 per cent). No patient was overstaged. The intraclass correlation (ICC) between readers was excellent (ICC 0·91, 95 per cent c.i. 0·77 to 0·96). MRI‐PCI had a stronger correlation with surgical PCI (ICC 0·83–0·88) than did CT‐PCI (ICC 0·39–0·44). Conclusion: DW‐MRI is a promising non‐invasive tool to guide treatment selection in patients with peritoneal metastases from colorectal cancer. Promising staging tool [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results