Impact of postoperative complications on outcomes after oesophagectomy for cancer.
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
Relationship between R1 resection, tumour rupture and recurrence in resected gastrointestinal stromal tumour.
Authors: T. Hølmebakk, B. Bjerkehagen, I. Hompland, S. Stoldt, K. Boye
Notes: Tumour rupture is most important
Survival after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy for patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
Authors: B.‐Y. Wang, S.‐C. Wu, H.‐C. Chen, W.‐H. Hung, C.‐H. Lin, C.‐L. Huang et al.
Notes: Surgery after chemoradiation indicated
Effect of preoperative biliary drainage on cholestasis‐associated inflammatory and fibrotic gene signatures in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma.
Authors: M. J. Reiniers, L. de Haan, R. Weijer, J. K. Wiggers, A. Jongejan, P. D. Moerland et al.
Meta‐analysis of the influence of lifestyle changes for preoperative weight loss on surgical outcomes.
Authors: M. Roman, A. Monaghan, G. F. Serraino, D. Miller, S. Pathak, F. Lai et al.
Notes: Possible but how much is enough?
Multicentre cohort study of antihypertensive and lipid‐lowering therapy cessation after bariatric surgery.
Authors: J. Thereaux, T. Lesuffleur, S. Czernichow, A. Basdevant, S. Msika, D. Nocca et al.
Notes: Better than controls
Overall survival before and after centralization of gastric cancer surgery in the Netherlands. BJS 2018; 105: 1807-1815.
Authors: M. van Putten, S. D. Nelen, V. E. P. P. Lemmens, J. H. M. B. Stoot, H. H. Hartgrink, S. S. Gisbertz et al.
Notes: Practice makes perfect?
Oesophagectomy with or without supraclavicular lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant treatment for squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus. BJS 2018; 105: 1793-1798.
Authors: S. Mine, M. Watanabe, K. Kumagai, A. Okamura, K. Yamashita, M. Hayami et al.
Notes: Extended dissection not needed
Population‐based cohort study of diabetes mellitus and mortality in gastric adenocarcinoma. BJS 2018; 105: 1799-1806.
Authors: J. Zheng, S.‐H. Xie, G. Santoni, J. Lagergren
Notes: Diabetes increases risk
Lymph node regression and survival following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. BJS 2018; 105: 1639-1649.
Authors: A. R. Davies, D. Myoteri, J. Zylstra, C. R. Baker, W. Wulaningsih, M. Van Hemelrijck et al.
Notes: Nodal response predicts survival
Authors: H. Mackenzie, S. R. Markar, A. Askari, O. Faiz, M. Hull, S. Purkayastha et al.
Network meta‐analysis of surgical management of gastro‐oesophageal reflux disease in adults. BJS 2018; 105: 1398-1407.
Authors: M. A. Amer, M. D. Smith, C. H. Khoo, G. P. Herbison, J. L. McCall
Meta‐analysis of prognostic factors for overall survival in patients with resected hilar cholangiocarcinoma. BJS 2018; 105: 1408-1416.
Authors: N. T. E. Bird, A. McKenna, J. Dodd, G. Poston, R. Jones, H. Malik et al.
Notes: Tumour biology is important