Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Walter R. Peters is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Walter R. Peters.


Annals of Surgery | 2007

Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial

James W. Fleshman; Daniel J. Sargent; Erin M. Green; Mehran Anvari; Steven J. Stryker; Robert W. Beart; Michael D. Hellinger; Richard J. Flanagan; Walter R. Peters; Heidi Nelson

Purpose:Oncologic concerns from high wound recurrence rates prompted a multi-institutional randomized trial to test the hypothesis that disease-free and overall survival are equivalent, regardless of whether patients receive laparoscopic-assisted or open colectomy. Methods:Eight hundred seventy-two patients with curable colon cancer were randomly assigned to undergo laparoscopic-assisted or open colectomy at 1 of 48 institutions by 1 of 66 credentialed surgeons. Patients were followed for 8 years, with 5-year data on 90% of patients. The primary end point was time to recurrence, tested using a noninferiority trial design. Secondary endpoints included overall survival and disease-free survival. (Kaplan–Meier) Results:As of March 1, 2007, 170 patients have recurred and 252 have died. Patients have been followed a median of 7 years (range 5–10 years). Disease-free 5-year survival (Open 68.4%, Laparoscopic 69.2%, P = 0.94) and overall 5-year survival (Open 74.6%, Laparoscopic 76.4%, P = 0.93) are similar for the 2 groups. Overall recurrence rates were similar for the 2 groups (Open 21.8%, Laparoscopic 19.4%, P = 0.25). These recurrences were distributed similarly between the 2 treatment groups. Sites of first recurrence were distributed similarly between the treatment arms (Open: wound 0.5%, liver 5.8%, lung 4.6%, other 8.4%; Laparoscopic: wound 0.9%, liver 5.5%, lung 4.6%, other 6.1%). Conclusion:Laparoscopic colectomy for curable colon cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on long-term oncologic endpoints from a prospective randomized trial.


Diseases of The Colon & Rectum | 2000

Practice parameters for the treatment of sigmoid diverticulitis - Supporting documentation

W. Douglas Wong; Steven D. Wexner; Ann C. Lowry; Anthony M. VernavaIII; Marcus Burnstein; Frederick Denstman; Victor W. Fazio; Bruce Kerner; Richard Moore; Gregory C. Oliver; Walter R. Peters; Theodore Ross; Peter Senatore; Clifford Simmang

It should be recognized that these guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all of the circumstances presented by the individual patient.


Diseases of The Colon & Rectum | 1996

Early results of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer - Retrospective analysis of 372 patients treated by clinical outcomes of Surgical Therapy (Cost) Study Group

James W. Fleshman; Heidi Nelson; Walter R. Peters; H. Charles Kim; Sergio W. Larach; Richard R. Boorse; Wayne L. Ambroze; Phillip Leggett; Ronald Bleday; Steven J. Stryker; Brent Christenson; Steven D. Wexner; Anthony J. Senagore; David W. Rattner; John E. Sutton; Arthur P. Fine

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to determine the early experience of the embers of the COST Study Group with colorectal cancer treated by laparoscopic approaches. METHOD: A retrospective review was performed of all patients with colorectal cancer treated with laparoscopy by the COST Study Group before August 1994. Tumor site, stage, differentiation, procedure completion, presence of recurrence (local, distant, trocar site), and cause of death were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 372 patients with adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum were treated by laparoscopic approach between October 1991 and August 1994 (170 men and 192 women): right colectomy, 170; sigmoid colectomy, 55; low anterior resection, 56; abdominoperineal resection, 44; left colectomy, 22; colostomy, 8; total colectomy, 6; transverse colectomy, 7; exploration, 2. Conversion to an open procedure was required in 15.6 percent of cases. Operative mortality was 2 percent. Tumor characteristics were as follows: TNM state: I, 40 percent; II, 25 percent; III, 18 percent; IV, 17 percent; Differentiation: well-moderate, 88 percent; poor, 12 percent; carcinomatosis, 5 percent. Local (3.6 percent) and distant implantation occurred in four patients (1.1 percent). Only one of these patients died a cancer-related death (Stage III at 36 months). Cancer-related death rates increased with increasing stage of tumor: I, −4 percent; II, 17 percent; III, 31 percent; IV, 70 percent. CONCLUSION: A laparoscopic approach to colorectal cancer results in early outcome after treatment that is comparable with conventional therapy for colorectal cancer. A randomized trial is needed to compare long-term outcomes of open and laparoscopic approaches with colorectal cancer.


JAMA | 2015

Effect of Laparoscopic-Assisted Resection vs Open Resection of Stage II or III Rectal Cancer on Pathologic Outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 Randomized Clinical Trial

James W. Fleshman; Megan E. Branda; Daniel J. Sargent; Anne Marie Boller; Virgilio V. George; Maher A. Abbas; Walter R. Peters; Dipen C. Maun; George J. Chang; Alan J. Herline; Alessandro Fichera; Matthew G. Mutch; Steven D. Wexner; Mark H. Whiteford; John Marks; Elisa H. Birnbaum; David A. Margolin; David E. Larson; Peter W. Marcello; Mitchell C. Posner; Thomas E. Read; John R. T. Monson; Sherry M. Wren; Peter W.T. Pisters; Heidi Nelson

IMPORTANCE Evidence about the efficacy of laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer is incomplete, particularly for patients with more advanced-stage disease. OBJECTIVE To determine whether laparoscopic resection is noninferior to open resection, as determined by gross pathologic and histologic evaluation of the resected proctectomy specimen. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A multicenter, balanced, noninferiority, randomized trial enrolled patients between October 2008 and September 2013. The trial was conducted by credentialed surgeons from 35 institutions in the United States and Canada. A total of 486 patients with clinical stage II or III rectal cancer within 12 cm of the anal verge were randomized after completion of neoadjuvant therapy to laparoscopic or open resection. INTERVENTIONS Standard laparoscopic and open approaches were performed by the credentialed surgeons. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome assessing efficacy was a composite of circumferential radial margin greater than 1 mm, distal margin without tumor, and completeness of total mesorectal excision. A 6% noninferiority margin was chosen according to clinical relevance estimation. RESULTS Two hundred forty patients with laparoscopic resection and 222 with open resection were evaluable for analysis of the 486 enrolled. Successful resection occurred in 81.7% of laparoscopic resection cases (95% CI, 76.8%-86.6%) and 86.9% of open resection cases (95% CI, 82.5%-91.4%) and did not support noninferiority (difference, -5.3%; 1-sided 95% CI, -10.8% to ∞; P for noninferiority = .41). Patients underwent low anterior resection (76.7%) or abdominoperineal resection (23.3%). Conversion to open resection occurred in 11.3% of patients. Operative time was significantly longer for laparoscopic resection (mean, 266.2 vs 220.6 minutes; mean difference, 45.5 minutes; 95% CI, 27.7-63.4; P < .001). Length of stay (7.3 vs 7.0 days; mean difference, 0.3 days; 95% CI, -0.6 to 1.1), readmission within 30 days (3.3% vs 4.1%; difference, -0.7%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%), and severe complications (22.5% vs 22.1%; difference, 0.4%; 95% CI, -4.2% to 2.7%) did not differ significantly. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen in 462 operated and analyzed surgeries was complete (77%) and nearly complete (16.5%) in 93.5% of the cases. Negative circumferential radial margin was observed in 90% of the overall group (87.9% laparoscopic resection and 92.3% open resection; P = .11). Distal margin result was negative in more than 98% of patients irrespective of type of surgery (P = .91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with stage II or III rectal cancer, the use of laparoscopic resection compared with open resection failed to meet the criterion for noninferiority for pathologic outcomes. Pending clinical oncologic outcomes, the findings do not support the use of laparoscopic resection in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00726622.


Diseases of The Colon & Rectum | 1993

Minimally invasive colectomy: are the potential benefits realized?

Walter R. Peters; Tina L. Bartels

Laparoscopic surgical techniques have recently been applied to various types of colon resection. Early reports have focused on the technical feasibility of these procedures, and it has not yet been clearly shown that such procedures benefit the patient. We reviewed our experience with 28 attempted minimally invasive colectomies (MICs) performed over a nine-month period. Laparoscopic or laparoscopic-assisted resections were successfully completed in 24 of these patients. We compared the results of surgery in these 24 patients with a group of 33 patients undergoing similar procedures at the same institution by the same surgeon in the nine months preceding the laparoscopic experience. The two groups of patients were similar with respect to age, weight, and the types of procedures performed. However, the postoperative length of stay for patients undergoing MIC (4.8 days) was significantly shorter than for those undergoing open colectomies (8.2 days). Patients undergoing MIC also regained bowel function significantly earlier than those undergoing open colectomy. The operative times for the minimally invasive procedures were significantly longer than for those undergoing open colectomy. No surgically related deaths were encountered, and morbidity was 13 percent. None of the four patients converted from laparoscopic to open colectomy suffered complications as a result of the attempted laparoscopic procedure. We conclude that MIC can be safely performed and does appear to reduce the duration of postoperative ileus and decrease the length of postoperative hospitalization.


Diseases of The Colon & Rectum | 1999

Practice parameters for detection of colorectal neoplasms

Clifford Simmang; Peter Senatore; Ann C. Lowry; Terry C. Hicks; Marcus Burnstein; Frederick Dentsman; Victor W. Fazio; Edward J. Glennon; Neil Hyman; Bruce Kerner; John Kilkenny; Richard Moore; Walter R. Peters; Theodore Ross; Paul E. Savoca; Anthony M. Vernava; W. Douglas Wong

It should be recognized that these guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of proper methods of care or exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all of the circumstances presented by the individual patient.


Annals of Surgery | 2015

High rate of positive circumferential resection margins following rectal cancer surgery a call to action

Aaron S. Rickles; David W. Dietz; George J. Chang; Steven D. Wexner; Mariana Berho; Feza H. Remzi; Frederick L. Greene; James W. Fleshman; Maher A. Abbas; Walter R. Peters; Katia Noyes; John R. T. Monson; Fergal J. Fleming

Objectives : To identify predictors of positive circumferential resection margin following rectal cancer resection in the United States. Background: Positive circumferential resection margin is associated with a high rate of local recurrence and poor morbidity and mortality for rectal cancer patients. Prior study has shown poor compliance with national rectal cancer guidelines, but whether this finding is reflected in patient outcomes has yet to be shown. Methods: Patients who underwent resection for stage I-III rectal cancer were identified from the 2010–2011 National Cancer Database. The primary outcome was a positive circumferential resection margin. The relationship between patient, hospital, tumor, and treatment-related characteristics was analyzed using bivariate and multivariate analysis. Results: A positive circumferential resection margin was noted in 2859 (17.2%) of the 16,619 patients included. Facility location, clinical T and N stage, histologic type, tumor size, tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, type of operation, and operative approach were significant predictors of positive circumferential resection margin on multivariable analysis. Total proctectomy had nearly a 30% increased risk of positive margin compared with partial proctectomy (OR 1.293, 95%CI 1.185–1.411) and a laparoscopic approach had nearly 22% less risk of a positive circumferential resection margin compared with an open approach (OR 0.882, 95%CI 0.790–0.985). Conclusions: Despite advances in surgical technique and multimodality therapy, rates of positive circumferential resection margin remain high in the United States. Several tumor and treatment characteristics were identified as independent risk factors, and advances in rectal cancer care are necessary to approach the outcomes seen in other countries.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2004

A Comparison of Laparoscopically Assisted and Open Colectomy for Colon Cancer

Heidi Nelson; Daniel J. Sargent; H. Sam Wieand; James Flesh; Mehran Anvari; Robert W. Beart; Michael D. Hellinger; Richard J. Flanagan; Walter R. Peters


Diseases of The Colon & Rectum | 2000

Practice Parameters for the Prevention of Venous Thrombosis

Frederick Denstman; Ann C. Lowry; Anthony M. Vernava; Marcus Burnstein; Victor W. Fazio; Edward J. Glennon; Terry C. Hicks; Neil Hyman; Bruce Kerner; John Kilkenny; Richard Moore; Greg Oliver; Walter R. Peters; Theodore Ross; Paul E. Savoca; Peter Senatore; Clifford Simmang; Douglas W. Wong


Journal of The American College of Surgeons | 2017

Multi-Institution Analysis of Infection Control Practices Identifies the Subset Associated with Best Surgical Site Infection Performance: A Texas Alliance for Surgical Quality Collaborative Project

Catherine H. Davis; Lillian S. Kao; Jason B. Fleming; Thomas A. Aloia; Barbara L. Bass; Joseph R. Cali; Ben Coopwood; John A. Griswold; Stacey A. Milan; Sarah C. Oltmann; Walter R. Peters; Justin L. Regner; Anthony J. Senagore; Ronald M. Stewart; James W. Suliburk; Shelton Viney

Collaboration


Dive into the Walter R. Peters's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar

James W. Fleshman

Baylor University Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Ann C. Lowry

University of Minnesota

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Clifford Simmang

University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

George J. Chang

University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

John R. T. Monson

University of Central Florida

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge