Literature DB >> 18379852

Postoperative mortality after esophagectomy for cancer: development of a preoperative risk prediction model.

Jin Ra1, E Carter Paulson, John Kucharczuk, Katrina Armstrong, Christopher Wirtalla, Rachel Rapaport-Kelz, Larry R Kaiser, Francis R Spitz.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection for the treatment of esophageal cancer remains a high-risk procedure. To develop a model to predict risk of postoperative death, we sought to identify factors associated with postoperative mortality for Medicare patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer.
METHODS: We evaluated patients in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER)-Medicare database who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer from 1997 to 2003. Variables evaluated were patient age, race, marital status, sex, tumor stage, Charlson score, and hospital volume. Hospital volume was evaluated in tertiles of even volume groups (low, < .67 cases a year; medium, .68 to 2.33 cases a year; high, > 2.33 cases a year). The primary outcome measure was postoperative mortality, defined as death within 30 days of esophagectomy or death during the hospitalization in which the primary surgical procedure was performed. In-hospital deaths more than 30 days after esophagectomy were included in the outcomes to more accurately estimate the true mortality of this procedure. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relationship between patient and provider characteristics and postoperative mortality. Finally, characteristics identified by the regression analysis were used to generate a simplified, clinically applicable model predicting risk of postoperative mortality in the Medicare population.
RESULTS: A total of 1172 patients underwent esophageal cancer surgery during this study period. Overall postoperative mortality was 14%. Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that age, Charlson score, and hospital volume were statistically significant predictors of postoperative mortality. The other variables such as race, martial status, sex, and disease stage were not found to be significant. The odds of postoperative mortality at low-volume hospitals were almost twice those at a high-volume hospital. Age greater than 80 increased odds of mortality almost twofold. Similarly, Charlson scores of > or = 2 resulted in more than a 1.5-fold risk of postoperative mortality. Our prediction model using these variables accurately stratified postoperative mortality for this population.
CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative mortality (30-day and in-hospital) remains high after esophagectomy. Age, Charlson score, and hospital volume were identified as independent predictors of postoperative mortality. A simple risk prediction model that uses preoperative clinical data accurately predicted patient postoperative mortality for this SEER-Medicare population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18379852     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-008-9867-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  46 in total

1.  Patient Selection for Oesophagectomy: Impact of Age and Comorbidities on Outcome.

Authors:  Gregory O'Grady; Ahmer M Hameed; Tony C Pang; Emma Johnston; Vincent T Lam; Arthur J Richardson; Michael J Hollands
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Traveling to a High-volume Center is Associated With Improved Survival for Patients With Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Paul J Speicher; Brian R Englum; Asvin M Ganapathi; Xiaofei Wang; Matthew G Hartwig; Thomas A D'Amico; Mark F Berry
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Risk prediction scores for postoperative mortality after esophagectomy: validation of different models.

Authors:  U Zingg; C Langton; B Addison; B P L Wijnhoven; J Forberger; S K Thompson; A J Esterman; D I Watson
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2008-12-03       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Individual risk modelling for esophagectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  John M Findlay; Richard S Gillies; Bruno Sgromo; Robert E K Marshall; Mark R Middleton; Nicholas D Maynard
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Change in tongue pressure and the related factors after esophagectomy: a short-term, longitudinal study.

Authors:  Aya Yokoi; Daisuke Ekuni; Reiko Yamanaka; Hironobu Hata; Yasuhiro Shirakawa; Manabu Morita
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 4.230

6.  Treatment modalities for T1N0 esophageal cancers: a comparative analysis of local therapy versus surgical resection.

Authors:  Mark F Berry; Josiane Zeyer-Brunner; Anthony W Castleberry; Jeremiah T Martin; Beat Gloor; Ricardo Pietrobon; Thomas A D'Amico; Mathias Worni
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 15.609

7.  Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A North American Perspective.

Authors:  Philippe Bouchard; Juan-Carlos Molina; Jonathan Cools-Lartigue; Jonathan Spicer; Carmen L Mueller; Lorenzo E Ferri
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-01-31       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 8.  Management of Locally Advanced and Metastatic Esophageal Cancer in the Older Population.

Authors:  Dara Bracken-Clarke; Abdul Rehman Farooq; Anne M Horgan
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2018-11-13       Impact factor: 5.075

9.  An alternative postoperative pathway reduces length of hospitalisation following oesophagectomy.

Authors:  Sandra C Tomaszek; Stephen D Cassivi; Mark S Allen; K Robert Shen; Francis C Nichols; Claude Deschamps; Dennis A Wigle
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2009-11-08       Impact factor: 4.191

10.  Impact of Positive Margins on Survival in Patients Undergoing Esophagogastrectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

Authors:  Jeffrey Javidfar; Paul J Speicher; Matthew G Hartwig; Thomas A D'Amico; Mark F Berry
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 4.330

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.