| Literature DB >> 30766629 |
Radek Vrba1, David Vrána2, Čestmír Neoral3, Bohuslav Melichar2, René Aujeský3, Jana Tesarikova1, Jan Cincibuch2, Jana Zapletalová4, Tomáš Jínek5, Martin Stašek3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Respiratory complications (RC) including respiratory failure and adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) affect the outcomes of esophagectomy substantially. In order to decrease their incidence, identification of important features of RC is necessary. AIM: To evaluate the incidence and risk factors of postoperative RC following hybrid esophagectomy.Entities:
Keywords: esophageal cancer therapy; esophagectomy complication; neoadjuvant therapy; respiratory complication
Year: 2018 PMID: 30766629 PMCID: PMC6372868 DOI: 10.5114/wiitm.2018.77276
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne ISSN: 1895-4588 Impact factor: 1.195
Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications
| Grade | Definition |
|---|---|
| I | Any deviation from the normal postoperative course without the need for pharmacological treatment or surgical, endoscopic, or radiological interventions. Allowed therapeutic regimens include drugs such as antiemetics, antipyretics, analgesics, diuretics, electrolytes, and physiotherapy. This grade also includes wound infections opened at the bedside |
| II | Requirement for pharmacological treatment with drugs other than those allowed for grade I complications. Blood transfusions and total parenteral nutrition are also included |
| IIIa | Requirement for surgical, endoscopic or radiological intervention not under general anesthesia |
| IIIb | Requirement for surgical, endoscopic or radiological intervention under general |
| IVa | Life-threatening complications (including CNS complications) requiring IC/ICU management. Single organ dysfunction (including dialysis) |
| IVb | Life-threatening complications (including CNS complications) requiring IC/ICU management. Multiple organ dysfunction |
| V | Death of the patient |
Characteristics of the group of patients managed using minimally invasive hybrid laparoscopic and thoracoscopic esophagectomy
| Parameter | MIE laparoscopic | MIE thoracoscopic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender: | |||
| Male | 187 (87) | 153 | 34 |
| Female | 28 (13) | 23 | 5 |
| Age [years]: | |||
| ≤ 60 | 92 (42.7) | 72 | 20 |
| > 60 | 123 (57.3) | 104 | 19 |
| Tumor type: | |||
| Adenocarcinoma | 129 (60) | 122 | 7 |
| Squamous cell | 81 (37.7) | 51 | 30 |
| Other histology | 5 (2.3) | 3 | 2 |
| Neoadjuvant therapy: | |||
| Yes | 174 (80.9) | 157 | 27 |
| No | 31 (19.1) | 19 | 12 |
| ASA score | |||
| I | 7 (3.3) | 6 | 1 |
| II | 107 (49.3) | 91 | 16 |
| III | 101 (47.4) | 79 | 22 |
Statistical evaluation of respiratory complications (mild – pneumothorax, pleural effusion, pneumonia, atelectasis; severe – ARDS, respiratory failure) based on the considered parameters
| Parameter | Without respiratory complications | Mild respiratory complications | Severe respiratory complications | Fisher’s exact test |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age [years]: | 0.276 | |||
| ≤ 60 | 63 (48.8%) | 25 (43.9%) | 18 (62.1%) | |
| > 60 | 66 (51.2%) | 32 (56.1%) | 11 (37.9%) | |
| Tumor type: | 0.242 | |||
| Adenocarcinoma | 84 (65.1%) | 29 (50.9%) | 16 (55.2%) | |
| Squamous cell | 41 (31.8%) | 27 (47.4%) | 13 (44.8%) | |
| Other histology | 4 (3.1%) | 1 (1.8%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Neoadjuvant therapy: | 0.469 | |||
| Yes | 107 (82.9%) | 43 (75.4%) | 24 (82.8%) | |
| No | 22 (17.1%) | 14 (24.6%) | 5 (17.2%) | |
| ASA score: | 0.0002 | |||
| I | 5 (3.9%) | 2 (3.5%) | 0 (0%) | |
| II | 72 (55.8%) | 31 (54.4%) | 4 (13.8%) | |
| III | 52 (40.3%) | 24 (42.1%) | 25 (86.2%) | |
| Procedure type: | 0.302 | |||
| MIE laparoscopic | 106 (82.2%) | 49 (86.0%) | 21 (72.4%) | |
| MIE thoracoscopic | 23 (17.8%) | 8 (14.0%) | 8 (27.6%) | |
| Anastomotic fistula: | 0.124 | |||
| Yes | 120 (93.0%) | 49 (86.0%) | 24 (82.8%) | |
| No | 9 (7.0%) | 8 (14.0%) | 5 (17.2%) | |
| TNM stage: | 0.090 | |||
| Complete pathological response | 22 (17.1%) | 12 (21.1%) | 4 (13.8%) | |
| I.A | 12 (9.3%) | 8 (14.0%) | 2 (6.9%) | |
| I.B | 12 (9.3%) | 12 (21.1%) | 1 (3.4%) | |
| II.A | 27 (20.9%) | 5 (8.8%) | 5 (17.2%) | |
| II.B | 15 (11.6%) | 8 (14%) | 4 (13.8%) | |
| III.A | 16 (12.4%) | 4 (7.0%) | 3 (10.3%) | |
| III.B | 10 (7.8%) | 2 (3.5%) | 5 (17.2%) | |
| III.C | 12 (9.3%) | 5 (8.8%) | 3 (10.3%) | |
| Clavien-Dindo: | < 0.0001 | |||
| 1 | 26 (27.7%) | 7 (13.7%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 2 | 47 (50.0%) | 29 (56.9%) | 0 (0%) | |
| 3 | 13 (13.8%) | 14 (27.8%) | 4 (13.8%) | |
| 4 | 6 (6.4%) | 1 (2.0%) | 11 (37.9%) | |
| 5 | 2 (2.1%) | 0 (0%) | 14 (48.3%) | |
Association of incidence of respiratory complications and quantitative parameters (Kruskal-Wallis test)
| Parameter | Without respiratory complications | Mild respiratory complications | Severe respiratory complications | Kruskal-Wallis |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age [years]: | 0.644 | |||
| Median | 61.0 | 63.0 | 59.0 | |
| Minimum | 34 | 44 | 37 | |
| Maximum | 78 | 79 | 81 | |
| Lymphadenectomy: | 0.366 | |||
| Median | 11.0 | 10.0 | 11.0 | |
| Minimum | 2 | 0 | 3 | |
| Maximum | 27 | 38 | 21 | |
| Blood loss [ml]: | 0.713 | |||
| Median | 450 | 410 | 400 | |
| Minimum | 100 | 120 | 140 | |
| Maximum | 3000 | 3500 | 3500 | |
| Hospital stay [day]: | < 0.0001 | |||
| Median | 15.0 | 18.0 | 28.0 | |
| Minimum | 9 | 11 | 9 | |
| Maximum | 119 | 73 | 76 | |