Literature DB >> 29707326

Spontaneous regionalization of esophageal cancer surgery: an analysis of the National Cancer Database.

Brian N Arnold1, Alexander S Chiu1, Jessica R Hoag2,3, Clara H Kim1, Michelle C Salazar1, Justin D Blasberg1, Daniel J Boffa1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy patients are up to three times more likely to die after surgery when cared for at low-volume hospitals (LVHs). Increased awareness by patients and clinicians of the hazards of esophagectomy at LVHs, may inspire a "spontaneous regionalization" away from LVHs, yet the extent to which this has taken place is unclear.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in the National Cancer Database (NCDB) across two eras: 2004-2006 (Era 1) and 2010-2012 (Era 2). Primary outcomes included the proportion of patients at high-volume hospitals (HVHs) (≥13/year per Leapfrog Group), adjusted, and unadjusted 90-day mortality.
RESULTS: The NCDB captured 5,968 esophagectomy patients in Era 1 and 5,580 in Era 2, a 6.5% decrease (P<0.001). Fewer hospitals performed esophagectomies in Era 2 (756 vs. 663, P=0.014), yet the proportion of patients treated at LVHs declined slightly between eras (73% vs. 70%, P<0.001). Patients with high-risk attributes (e.g., advanced age, multiple comorbidities, etc.) were disproportionately treated at LVHs in both eras (77% Era 1, P<0.001, 73% Era 2, P=0.017). However, the 90-day mortality rate for patients with high-risk attributes decreased considerably between Eras at LVHs (19.3% to 12.3%, P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Spontaneous regionalization of esophageal cancer surgery has not occurred on a large scale, yet for high-risk patients, the hazards of being cared for at LVHs have dissipated. Further study is needed to optimize alignment of esophagectomy patients and hospitals.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophageal cancer; esophagectomy; outcomes; regionalization

Year:  2018        PMID: 29707326      PMCID: PMC5906219          DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2018.02.12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Dis        ISSN: 2072-1439            Impact factor:   2.895


  19 in total

1.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States.

Authors:  John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-04-11       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery.

Authors:  Jonathan F Finks; Nicholas H Osborne; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-06-02       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Outcomes after esophagectomy: a ten-year prospective cohort.

Authors:  Stephen H Bailey; David A Bull; David H Harpole; Jeffrey J Rentz; Leigh A Neumayer; Theodore N Pappas; Jennifer Daley; William G Henderson; Barbara Krasnicka; Shukri F Khuri
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.330

4.  National trends in outcomes for esophageal resection.

Authors:  Justin B Dimick; Reid M Wainess; Gilbert R Upchurch; Mark D Iannettoni; Mark B Orringer
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 4.330

Review 5.  A systematic review of the impact of volume of surgery and specialization on patient outcome.

Authors:  M M Chowdhury; H Dagash; A Pierro
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 6.939

6.  The effect of regionalization on outcome in esophagectomy: a Canadian national study.

Authors:  Christian J Finley; Lindsay Jacks; Shaf Keshavjee; Gail Darling
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2011-06-25       Impact factor: 4.330

7.  National variation in operative mortality rates for esophageal resection and the need for quality improvement.

Authors:  Justin B Dimick; John A Cowan; Gorav Ailawadi; Reid M Wainess; Gilbert R Upchurch
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2003-12

8.  Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery.

Authors:  C B Begg; L D Cramer; W J Hoskins; M F Brennan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-11-25       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Comparison of commission on cancer-approved and -nonapproved hospitals in the United States: implications for studies that use the National Cancer Data Base.

Authors:  Karl Y Bilimoria; David J Bentrem; Andrew K Stewart; David P Winchester; Clifford Y Ko
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-07-27       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Readmission predicts 90-day mortality after esophagectomy: Analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry linked to Medicare outcomes.

Authors:  Yinin Hu; Timothy L McMurry; George J Stukenborg; Benjamin D Kozower
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 5.209

View more
  4 in total

Review 1.  Regionalization of esophagectomy: where are we now?

Authors:  James M Clark; Daniel J Boffa; Robert A Meguid; Lisa M Brown; David T Cooke
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Navigating by Stars: Using CMS Star Ratings to Choose Hospitals for Complex Cancer Surgery.

Authors:  Marianna V Papageorge; Benjamin J Resio; Andres F Monsalve; Maureen Canavan; Ranjan Pathak; Vincent J Mase; Andrew P Dhanasopon; Jessica R Hoag; Justin D Blasberg; Daniel J Boffa
Journal:  JNCI Cancer Spectr       Date:  2020-07-07

3.  Differential Safety Between Top-Ranked Cancer Hospitals and Their Affiliates for Complex Cancer Surgery.

Authors:  Jessica R Hoag; Benjamin J Resio; Andres F Monsalve; Alexander S Chiu; Lawrence B Brown; Jeph Herrin; Justin D Blasberg; Anthony W Kim; Daniel J Boffa
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2019-04-05

4.  Motivators, Barriers, and Facilitators to Traveling to the Safest Hospitals in the United States for Complex Cancer Surgery.

Authors:  Benjamin J Resio; Alexander S Chiu; Jessica R Hoag; Lawrence B Brown; Marney White; Audry Omar; Andres Monsalve; Andrew P Dhanasopon; Justin D Blasberg; Daniel J Boffa
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2018-11-02
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.