Literature DB >> 25605511

Pattern of Postoperative Mortality After Esophageal Cancer Resection According to Center Volume: Results from a Large European Multicenter Study.

Sheraz Markar1, Caroline Gronnier, Alain Duhamel, Jean-Marc Bigourdan, Bogdan Badic, Mael Chalret du Rieu, Jérémie H Lefevre, Kathleen Turner, Guillaume Luc, Christophe Mariette.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: High center procedural volume has been shown to reduce postoperative mortality (POM); however, the cause of POM has been poorly studied previously. The aim of this study was to define the pattern of POM and major morbidity in relation to center procedural volume.
METHODS: Data from 2,944 consecutive adult patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in 30 centers between 2000 and 2010 were retrospectively collected. Data between patients who suffered 30-day POM were compared with those who did not. Factors associated with POM were identified using binary logistic regression, with propensity matching to compare low- (LV) and high-volume (HV) centers.
RESULTS: The 30-day and in-hospital POM rates were 5.0 and 7.3 %, respectively. Pulmonary complications were the most common, affecting 38.1 % of patients, followed by surgical site infection (15.5 %), cardiovascular complications (11.2 %), and anastomotic leak (10.2 %). Factors that were independently associated with 30-day POM included American Society of Anesthesiologists grade IV, LV center, anastomotic leak, pulmonary, cardiovascular and neurological complications, and R2 resection margin status. Surgical complications preceded POM in approximately 30 % of patients compared to medically-related causes in 68 %. Propensity-matched analysis demonstrated LV centers were significantly associated with increased 30-day POM, and POM secondary to anastomotic leak, and pulmonary- and cardiac-related causes.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this large, multicenter study provide further evidence to support the centralization of esophagectomy to HV centers, with a lower rate of morbidity and better infrastructure to deal with complications following major surgery preventing further mortality.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25605511     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-014-4310-5

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


  32 in total

Review 1.  Emerging Trends in the Etiology, Prevention, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Anastomotic Leakage.

Authors:  Sami A Chadi; Abe Fingerhut; Mariana Berho; Steven R DeMeester; James W Fleshman; Neil H Hyman; David A Margolin; Joseph E Martz; Elisabeth C McLemore; Daniela Molena; Martin I Newman; Janice F Rafferty; Bashar Safar; Anthony J Senagore; Oded Zmora; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2016-09-16       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Preserving the pulmonary vagus nerve branches during thoracoscopic esophagectomy.

Authors:  Teus J Weijs; Jelle P Ruurda; Misha D P Luyer; Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen; Sylvia van der Horst; Ronald L A W Bleys; Richard van Hillegersberg
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Learning how to do esophagectomies.

Authors:  Katy A Marino; Benny Weksler
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 4.  Is There a Rationale for Structural Quality Assurance in Esophageal Surgery?

Authors:  Torben Glatz; Jens Höppner
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2017-03-24

5.  Recurrent laryngeal nerve injury after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: incidence, management, and impact on short- and long-term outcomes.

Authors:  Martijn G Scholtemeijer; Maarten F J Seesing; Hylke J F Brenkman; Luuk M Janssen; Richard van Hillegersberg; Jelle P Ruurda
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  Effectiveness of intervention with a perioperative multidisciplinary support team for radical esophagectomy.

Authors:  Yuji Akiyama; Takeshi Iwaya; Fumitaka Endo; Yoshihiro Shioi; Motoi Kumagai; Takeshi Takahara; Koki Otsuka; Hiroyuki Nitta; Keisuke Koeda; Masaru Mizuno; Yusuke Kimura; Kenji Suzuki; Akira Sasaki
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-06-28       Impact factor: 3.603

7.  Attaining Proficiency in Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy While Maximizing Safety During Procedure Development.

Authors:  Inderpal S Sarkaria; Nabil P Rizk; Rachel Grosser; Debra Goldman; David J Finley; Amanda Ghanie; Camelia S Sima; Manjit S Bains; Prasad S Adusumilli; Valerie W Rusch; David R Jones
Journal:  Innovations (Phila)       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug

8.  Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy may increase the risk of severe anastomotic complications after esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis.

Authors:  Fredrik Klevebro; Signe Friesland; Mattias Hedman; Jon A Tsai; Mats Lindblad; Ioannis Rouvelas; Lars Lundell; Magnus Nilsson
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 3.445

9.  Regionalization of thoracic surgery improves short-term cancer esophagectomy outcomes.

Authors:  Sora Ely; Amy Alabaster; Simon K Ashiku; Ashish Patel; Jeffrey B Velotta
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-05       Impact factor: 2.895

10.  Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision: Is There a Real Advantage? The Baltic View.

Authors:  Saulius Mikalauskas; Simonas Uselis; Digne Jurkeviciutė; Tomas Poskus; Eligijus Poskus; Kestutis Strupas
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2019-02-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.