Impact of postoperative complications on outcomes after oesophagectomy for cancer. BJS 2019; 106: 111-119.
Published: 29th October 2018
Authors: L. Goense, J. Meziani, J. P. Ruurda, R. van Hillegersberg
To allocate healthcare resources optimally, complication‐related quality initiatives should target complications that have the greatest overall impact on outcomes after surgery. The aim of this study was to identify the most clinically relevant complications after oesophagectomy for cancer in a nationwide cohort study.
Consecutive patients who underwent oesophagectomy for cancer between January 2011 and December 2016 were identified from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. The adjusted population attributable fraction (PAF) was used to estimate the impact of specific postoperative complications on the clinical outcomes postoperative mortality, reoperation, prolonged hospital stay and readmission to hospital in the study population. The PAF represents the percentage reduction in the frequency of a given outcome (such as death) that would occur in a theoretical scenario where a specific complication (for example anastomotic leakage) was able to be prevented completely in the study population.
Some 4096 patients were analysed. Pulmonary complications and anastomotic leakage had the greatest overall impact on postoperative mortality (risk‐adjusted PAF 44·1 and 30·4 per cent respectively), prolonged hospital stay (risk‐adjusted PAF 31·4 and 30·9 per cent) and readmission to hospital (risk‐adjusted PAF 7·3 and 14·7 per cent). Anastomotic leakage had the greatest impact on reoperation (risk‐adjusted PAF 47·1 per cent). In contrast, the impact of other complications on these outcomes was relatively small.
Reducing the incidence of pulmonary complications and anastomotic leakage may have the greatest clinical impact on outcomes after oesophagectomy.Full text
You may also be interested in
Effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiation on preoperative pulmonary physiology, postoperative respiratory complications and quality of life in patients with oesophageal cancer.
Authors: J. A. Elliott, L. O'Byrne, G. Foley, C. F. Murphy, S. L. Doyle, S. King et al.
Quality assurance of surgery in the randomized ST03 trial of perioperative chemotherapy in carcinoma of the stomach and gastro‐oesophageal junction.
Authors: W. H. Allum, E. C. Smyth, J. M. Blazeby, H. I. Grabsch, S. M. Griffin, S. Rowley et al.
Meta‐analysis of randomized clinical trials of early versus delayed cholecystectomy for mild gallstone pancreatitis.
Authors: N. Moody, A. Adiamah, F. Yanni, D. Gomez
Authors: Y. Y. Broza, S. Khatib, A. Gharra, A. Krilaviciute, H. Amal, I. Polaka et al.
Authors: S. Ahlin, C. Cefalù, I. Bondia‐Pons, E. Capristo, L. Marini, A. Gastaldelli et al.
Development and validation of a staging system for gastric adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy.
Authors: J. X. Lin, C. Yoon, J. Desiderio, B. C. Yi, P. Li, C. H. Zheng et al.
Hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma after perioperative management of portal hypertension. BJS 2019; 106: 1066-1074.
Authors: N. Takemura, T. Aoki, K. Hasegawa, J. Kaneko, J. Arita, N. Akamatsu et al.
Meta‐analysis of risk factors and complications associated with atrial fibrillation after oesophagectomy. BJS 2019; 106: 534-547.
Authors: D. Schizas, M. Kosmopoulos, S. Giannopoulos, S. Giannopoulos, D. G. Kokkinidis, N. Karampetsou et al.
Changes in gut hormones, glycaemic response and symptoms after oesophagectomy. BJS 2019; 106: 735-746.
Authors: J. A. Elliott, N. G. Docherty, C. F. Murphy, H.‐G. Eckhardt, S. L. Doyle, E. M. Guinan et al.
Diagnostic performance of MRI for assessment of response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in oesophageal cancer. BJS 2019; 106: 596-605.
Authors: S. E. Vollenbrock, F. E. M. Voncken, J. M. van Dieren, D. M. J. Lambregts, M. Maas, G. J. Meijer et al.
Major hepatectomy with or without pancreatoduodenectomy for advanced gallbladder cancer. BJS 2019; 106: 626-635.
Authors: T. Mizuno, T. Ebata, Y. Yokoyama, T. Igami, J. Yamaguchi, S. Onoe et al.