Postoperative Complications Drive Unplanned Readmissions After Esophagectomy for Cancer

Readiness for hospital discharge and its association with post-discharge outcomes among oesophageal cancer patients after oesophagectomy: A prospective observational study

AIM

To examine the level and influencing factors of discharge readiness among patients with oesophageal cancer following oesophagectomy and to explore its association with post-discharge outcomes (post-discharge coping difficulty and unplanned readmission).

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal cancer is common and usually treated via oesophagectomy in China. The assessment of patient's discharge readiness gradually attracts attention as patients tend to be discharged more quickly.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study. The STROBE statement was followed.

METHODS

In total, 154 participants with oesophageal cancer after oesophagectomy were recruited in a tertiary cancer centre in Southern China from July 2019 to January 2020. The participants completed a demographic and disease-related questionnaire, the Quality of Discharge Teaching Scale and Readiness for Hospital Discharge Scale before discharge. Post-discharge outcomes were investigated on the 21st day (post-discharge coping difficulty) and 30th day (unplanned readmission) after discharge separately. Multiple linear regressions were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The mean scores of discharge readiness and quality of discharge teaching were (154.02 ± 31.58) and (138.20 ± 24.20) respectively. The quality of discharge teaching, self-care ability, dysphagia and primary caregiver mainly influenced patient's discharge readiness and explained 63.0% of the variance. The low discharge readiness could predict more risk of post-discharge coping difficulty (r = -0.729, p < 0.01) and unplanned readmission (t = -2.721, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Discharge readiness among patients with oesophageal cancer following oesophagectomy is influenced by various factors, especially the quality of discharge teaching. A high discharge readiness corresponds to good post-discharge outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND PATIENT CARE

Healthcare professionals should improve the discharge readiness by constructing high-quality discharge teaching, cultivating patients' self-care ability, mobilizing family participation and alleviating dysphagia to decrease adverse post-discharge outcomes among patients with oesophageal cancer.

PATIENTS OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients with oesophageal cancer after oesophagectomy who met the inclusion criteria were recruited.

Predictors and Significance of Readmission after Esophagogastric Surgery: A Nationwide Analysis

Objective

The aim of this study is to identify risk factors for readmission after elective esophagogastric cancer surgery and characterize the impact of readmission on long-term survival. The study will also identify whether the location of readmission to either the hospital that performed the primary surgery (index hospital) or another institution (nonindex hospital) has an impact on postoperative mortality.

Background

Over the past decade, the center-volume relationship has driven the centralization of major cancer surgery, which has led to improvements in perioperative mortality. However, the impact of readmission, especially to nonindex centers, on long-term mortality remains unclear.

Methods

This was a national population-based cohort study using Hospital Episode Statistics of adult patients undergoing esophagectomy and gastrectomy in England between January 2008 and December 2019.

Results

This study included 27,592 patients, of which overall readmission rates were 25.1% (index 15.3% and nonindex 9.8%). The primary cause of readmission to an index hospital was surgical in 45.2% and 23.7% in nonindex readmissions. Patients with no readmissions had significantly longer survival than those with readmissions (median: 4.5 vs 3.8 years; P < 0.001). Patients readmitted to their index hospital had significantly improved survival as compared to nonindex readmissions (median: 3.3 vs 4.7 years; P < 0.001). Minimally invasive surgery and surgery performed in high-volume centers had improved 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.75; P < 0.001; odds ratio, 0.60; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Patients requiring readmission to the hospital after surgery have an increased risk of mortality, which is worsened by readmission to a nonindex institution. Patients requiring readmission to the hospital should be assessed and admitted, if required, to their index institution.

Association of clonal haematopoiesis with severe postoperative complications in patients undergoing radical oesophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Clonal haematopoiesis (CH) is an age-associated clonal expansion of blood cells driven by leukaemia-associated somatic mutations. Although CH has been reported to be a risk factor for leukaemia and a number of non-haematopoietic diseases, its role in perioperative medicine remains unexplored.

METHODS

This was a single-centre, prospective, observational study. Patients undergoing radical oesophagectomy were enrolled, and peripheral blood samples were collected for DNA sequencing. Patients with haematopoietic somatic mutations (variant allele frequencies ≥1%) in the DNMT3A gene, TET2 gene, or both were defined as CH carriers. The primary outcome was the incidence of severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3). The secondary outcomes included the major types of postoperative complications, mortality, and other common perioperative variables.

RESULTS

Clonal haematopoiesis was found in 21.2% (33/156) of the patients (mean age: 66 yr [range: 26-79 yr]; 83% males). Some 14/33 (42.4%) patients with CH had severe postoperative complications, compared with patients without CH carriers (28/123 [22.8%]; P=0.024). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that CH was associated with an increased risk of developing severe postoperative complications (odds ratio, 3.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.37-9.66; P=0.010). Among the major postoperative complications, the incidence of pulmonary complications was significantly higher in the patients with CH than in those without CH (15 in 33 [45.5%] vs 30 in 123 [24.4%], P=0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Clonal haematopoiesis was associated with a higher incidence of severe postoperative complications in patients undergoing radical oesophagectomy, suggesting that clonal haematopoiesis can play an important role in perioperative medicine.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2100044175 (Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=123193).

Epidemiology of Postoperative Complications After Esophagectomy: Implications for Management

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in operative techniques and postoperative care, esophagectomy remains a morbid operation. Leveraging complication epidemiology and the correlation of these complications may improve rescue and refine early recovery pathways.

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed all esophagectomies performed at a tertiary academic center from 2014 to 2021 and quantified the timing of the most common complications. Daily incidence values for index complications were calculated, and a covariance matrix was created to examine the correlation of the complications with each other. Study investigators performed a Cox proportional hazards analysis to clarify the association between early diagnosis of postoperative atrial fibrillation and pneumonia with subsequent anastomotic leak.

RESULTS

The study analyzed 621 esophagectomies, with 580 (93.4%) cervical anastomoses and 474 (76%) patients experiencing complications. A total of 159 (25.6%) patients had postoperative atrial fibrillation, and 155 (25.0%) had an anastomotic leak. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) postoperative day of these complications was day 2 (IQR, days 2-3) and day 8 (IQR, days 7-11), respectively. Our covariance matrix found significant associations in the variance of the most common postoperative complications, including pneumonia, atrial fibrillation, anastomotic leak, and readmissions. Early postoperative atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio, 8.1; 95% CI, 5.65-11.65) and postoperative pneumonia (hazard ratio, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.98-7.38) were associated with anastomotic leak.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining a high index of suspicion for early postoperative complications is crucial for rescuing patients after esophagectomy. Early postoperative pneumonia and atrial fibrillation may be sentinel complications for an anastomotic leak, and their occurrence may be used to prompt further clinical investigation. Early recovery protocols should consider the development of early complications into postoperative feeding and imaging algorithms.

Characterization of Epidural Analgesia Interruption and Associated Outcomes After Esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

Interruption of thoracic epidural analgesia may impact the postoperative course following esophagectomy. This study investigates the incidence and causes of epidural interruption in esophagectomy patients along with associated postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

This single-institution retrospective analysis examined patients undergoing esophagectomy who received a thoracic epidural catheter from 2016 to 2020. Patients were stratified according to whether epidural catheter infusion was interrupted or not postoperatively. Outcomes were compared between the two groups, and predictors of epidural interruption and postoperative complications were estimated using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 168 patients who received a thoracic epidural before esophagectomy, 60 (35.7%) required epidural interruption and 108 (64.3%) did not. Interruption commonly occurred on postoperative day 1 and was due to hypotension 80% of the time. Heart failure (10.0% versus 0.9%, P = 0.009), atrial fibrillation (20.0% versus 3.7%, P = 0.002), preoperative opioid use (30.0% versus 16.7%, P = 0.043), and higher American Society of Anesthesiology classification (88.4% versus 70.4%, P = 0.008) were more prevalent in the epidural interruption cohort. The female gender was associated with epidural interruption on multivariable logistic regression (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 2.45, P = 0.039). Patients in the epidural interruption cohort had a higher incidence of delirium (30.5% versus 13.9%, P = 0.010), sepsis (13.6% versus 3.7%, P = 0.028), and severe anastomotic leak (18.3% versus 7.4%, P = 0.032). On adjusted analysis, heart disease (AOR 4.26, P = 0.027), BMI <18.5 (AOR 9.83, P = 0.031), and epidural interruption due to hypotension (AOR 3.51, P = 0.037) were associated with severe anastomotic leak.

CONCLUSIONS

Early epidural interruption secondary to hypotension in esophagectomy patients may be a harbinger of postoperative complications such as sepsis and severe anastomotic leak. Patients requiring epidural interruption due to hypotension should have a low threshold for additional workup and early intervention.

Risk stratification of postoperative cardiopulmonary toxicity after trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer

Purpose/objective

Postoperative toxicity for esophageal cancer impacts patient quality of life and potentially overall survival (OS). We studied whether patient and toxicity parameters post-chemoradiation therapy predict for post-surgical cardiopulmonary total toxicity burden (CPTTB) and whether CPTTB was associated with short and long-term outcomes.

Materials/methods

Patients had biopsy-proven esophageal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation and esophagectomy. CPTTB was derived from total perioperative toxicity burden (Lin et al. JCO 2020). To develop a CPTTB risk score predictive for major CPTTB, recursive partitioning analysis was used.

Results

From 3 institutions, 571 patients were included. Patients were treated with 3D (37%), IMRT (44%), and proton therapy (19%). 61 patients had major CPTTB (score ≥ 70). Increasing CPTTB was predictive of decreased OS (p<0.001), lengthier post-esophagectomy length of stay (LOS, p<0.001), and death or readmission within 60 days of surgery (DR60, p<0.001). Major CPTTB was also predictive of decreased OS (hazard ratio = 1.70, 95% confidence interval: 1.17-2.47, p=0.005). The RPA-based risk score included: age ≥ 65, grade ≥ 2 nausea or esophagitis attributed to chemoradiation, and grade ≥ 3 hematologic toxicity attributed to chemoradiation. Patients treated with 3D radiotherapy had inferior OS (p=0.010) and increased major CPTTB (18.5% vs. 6.1%, p<0.001).

Conclusion

CPTTB predicts for OS, LOS, and DR60. Patients with 3D radiotherapy or age ≥ 65 years and chemoradiation toxicity are at highest risk for major CPTTB, predicting for higher short and long-term morbidity and mortality. Strategies to optimize medical management and reduce toxicity from chemoradiation should be strongly considered.

Examining the Effectiveness of the Discharge Plan Model on the South Korean Patients with Cancer Completed Cancer Treatment and Are Returning to the Community: A Pilot Study

This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of a discharge plan model for South Korean patients with cancer who had completed treatment and were returning to the community. Overall, 23 patients with cancer were recruited at the National Cancer Center in Goyang-si. The effectiveness of the discharge plan was examined using four methods: Social Needs Screening Toolkit (2018), early screening for discharge plan, current life situation v.2.0, and a questionnaire regarding problems after discharge from the hospital. Subsequently, the results were analyzed using descriptive statistical analysis methods with the Stata 14.0 program. The largest age group of study participants was between 45 and 64 years. No participants responded to urgent needs, whereas nine (39.13%) participants needed support for their social needs. According to the in-depth evaluation of participants, more than 80% of the respondents answered that patients with cancer needed no help in self-management, daily living activities, or mental health. The satisfaction survey results showed that the degree to which the "discharge plan" was helpful for health management at home after discharge was 4.41 of 5, and the degree to which it helped return to daily life was 3.86 of 5.

Factors Affecting the Readmission of Patients with Pancreatic Cancer after Surgery

Objective

Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest solid malignancies. Its surgical resection is technically very challenging and has a high risk of complications even after discharge. This study analyzed the risk factors associated with unplanned readmission after pancreatic cancer surgery.

Methods

Pancreatic cancer patients who were readmitted within 30 days after surgery were classified as the observation group, while those not readmitted within 30 days postsurgery were classified as the control group. The serum levels of gastrointestinal hormones, stress hormones, and peripheral immune cells of the two groups were compared at different intervals.

Results

No significant differences in gender and age were observed between the two groups. At 7, 14, and 21 days postsurgery, the levels of gastrointestinal hormones motilin, gastrin, calcitonin gene-related peptide, and growth hormone-releasing peptide of the observation group were lower than the control group, while the levels of adrenocorticotropin, renin, angiotensin, and plasma aldosterone of the observation group were significantly higher than the control group. In addition, compared to the control group, lower levels of CD4+T cells, CD8+T cells, and NKT cells and higher levels of Treg, Breg, and MDSC cells were observed in the peripheral blood of the observation group.

Conclusion

The serum levels of gastrointestinal hormones, stress hormones, and peripheral immune cells could be associated with the risk of unplanned readmission within 30 days after pancreatic cancer surgery.

Evaluation of International Contemporary Operative Outcomes and Management Trends Associated With Esophagectomy: A 4-Year Study of >6000 Patients Using ECCG Definitions and the Online Esodata Database

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to verify the utility of international online datasets to benchmark and monitor treatment and outcomes in major oncologic procedures.

BACKGROUND

The Esophageal Complication Consensus Group (ECCG) has standardized the reporting of complications after esophagectomy within the web-based Esodata.org database. This study will utilize the Esodata dataset to update contemporary outcomes and to monitor trends in practice in an era of rapid technical change.

METHODS

This observational study, based on a prospectively developed specific database, updates esophagectomy outcomes collected between 2015 and 2018. Evolution in patient and operative demographics, treatment, complications, and quality outcome measures were compared between patients undergoing surgery in 2015 to 2016 and 2017 to 2018.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2018, 6022 esophagectomies from 39 centers were entered into Esodata. Most patients were male (78.3%) with median age 63. Patients having minimally invasive esophagectomy constituted 3177 (52.8%), a chest anastomosis 3838 (63.7%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy 2834 (48.7%), and R0 resections 5441 (93.5%). For quality measures, 30- and 90-day mortality was 2.0% and 4.5%, readmissions 9.7%, transfusions 12%, escalation in care 22.1%, and discharge home 89.4%. Trends in quality measures between 2015 and 2016 (2407 patients) and 2017 and 2018 (3318 patients) demonstrated significant (P < 0.05) improvements in readmissions 11.1% to 8.5%, blood transfusions 14.3% to 10.2%, and escalation in care from 24.5% to 20% A significantly (P < 0.05) reduced incidence in pneumonia (15.3%-12.8%) and renal failure (1.0%-0.4%) was observed. Anastomotic leak rates increased from 11.7% to 13.1%, whereas leaks requiring surgery decreased 3.3% and 3.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The Esodata database provides a valuable resource for assessing contemporary international outcomes. This study highlights an increased application of minimally invasive approaches, a high percentage of complications, improvements in pneumonia and key quality metrics, but with anastomotic leak rates still >10%.

Impact of standardized clinical pathways on esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Esophageal surgery is historically associated with adverse postoperative outcomes. Selected high-volume centers have previously reported the effect on clinical outcomes following the adoption of a standardized clinical pathway (SCP). This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the current literature to document the effect of SCP and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) on esophagectomy outcomes. A literature search was conducted through the main search engines (PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Cochrane database) in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. All eligible comparative studies (randomized control trial, prospective, retrospective, and combined) were identified and assessed based on Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies and Jadad quality criteria. Data concerning overall morbidity, early mortality, and length of stay (LOS) were primarily collected and compared. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leaks, pulmonary complications, and readmission rate. Twenty-six articles (including five randomized controlled trials and six prospective trials) were included in the analysis. Overall study quality was moderate and the included studies utilized a variable approach to SCP. No statistically significant differences were found between groups in terms of overall morbidity, postoperative mortality, anastomotic leak, and readmission rates. Significant improvements included pulmonary complications (odds ratios [OR] 0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49-0.94) and hospital LOS (OR -3.68, 95% CI -4.49 to -2.87). Previous reports of SCP within esophagectomy programs have demonstrated clinical improvements in postoperative pulmonary complications and LOS. Given the high heterogeneity historically demonstrated within SCPs, further improvement in outcomes should be expected following the adoption of standardized ERAS guidelines.

Electronic self-reporting of adverse events for patients undergoing cancer treatment: the eRAPID research programme including two RCTs

Background

Cancer is treated using multiple modalities (e.g. surgery, radiotherapy and systemic therapies) and is frequently associated with adverse events that affect treatment delivery and quality of life. Regular adverse event reporting could improve care and safety through timely detection and management. Information technology provides a feasible monitoring model, but applied research is needed. This research programme developed and evaluated an electronic system, called eRAPID, for cancer patients to remotely self-report adverse events.

Objectives

The objectives were to address the following research questions: is it feasible to collect adverse event data from patients’ homes and in clinics during cancer treatment? Can eRAPID be implemented in different hospitals and treatment settings? Will oncology health-care professionals review eRAPID reports for decision-making? When added to usual care, will the eRAPID intervention (i.e. self-reporting with tailored advice) lead to clinical benefits (e.g. better adverse event control, improved patient safety and experiences)? Will eRAPID be cost-effective?

Design

Five mixed-methods work packages were conducted, incorporating co-design with patients and health-care professionals: work package 1 – development and implementation of the electronic platform across hospital centres; work package 2 – development of patient-reported adverse event items and advice (systematic and scoping reviews, patient interviews, Delphi exercise); work package 3 – mapping health-care professionals and care pathways; work package 4 – feasibility pilot studies to assess patient and clinician acceptability; and work package 5 – a single-centre randomised controlled trial of systemic treatment with a full health economic assessment.

Setting

The setting was three UK cancer centres (in Leeds, Manchester and Bristol).

Participants

The intervention was developed and evaluated with patients and clinicians. The systemic randomised controlled trial included 508 participants who were starting treatment for breast, colorectal or gynaecological cancer and 55 health-care professionals. The radiotherapy feasibility pilot recruited 167 patients undergoing treatment for pelvic cancers. The surgical feasibility pilot included 40 gastrointestinal cancer patients.

Intervention

eRAPID is an online system that allows patients to complete adverse event/symptom reports from home or hospital. The system provides immediate severity-graded advice based on clinical algorithms to guide self-management or hospital contact. Adverse event data are transferred to electronic patient records for review by clinical teams. Patients complete an online symptom report every week and whenever they experience symptoms.

Main outcome measures

In systemic treatment, the primary outcome was Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy – General, Physical Well-Being score assessed at 6, 12 and 18 weeks (primary end point). Secondary outcomes included cost-effectiveness assessed through the comparison of health-care costs and quality-adjusted life-years. Patient self-efficacy was measured (using the Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Diseases 6-item Scale). The radiotherapy pilot studied feasibility (recruitment and attrition rates) and selection of outcome measures. The surgical pilot examined symptom report completeness, system actions, barriers to using eRAPID and technical performance.

Results

eRAPID was successfully developed and introduced across the treatments and centres. The systemic randomised controlled trial found no statistically significant effect of eRAPID on the primary end point at 18 weeks. There was a significant effect at 6 weeks (adjusted difference least square means 1.08, 95% confidence interval 0.12 to 2.05; p = 0.028) and 12 weeks (adjusted difference least square means 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 1.98; p = 0.0395). No between-arm differences were found for admissions or calls/visits to acute oncology or chemotherapy delivery. Health economic analyses over 18 weeks indicated no statistically significant difference between the cost of the eRAPID information technology system and the cost of usual care (£12.28, 95% confidence interval –£1240.91 to £1167.69; p > 0.05). Mean differences were small, with eRAPID having a 55% probability of being cost-effective at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-recommended cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Patient self-efficacy was greater in the intervention arm (0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.13 to 0.83; p = 0.0073). Qualitative interviews indicated that many participants found eRAPID useful for support and guidance. Patient adherence to adverse-event symptom reporting was good (median compliance 72.2%). In the radiotherapy pilot, high levels of consent (73.2%) and low attrition rates (10%) were observed. Patient quality-of-life outcomes indicated a potential intervention benefit in chemoradiotherapy arms. In the surgical pilot, 40 out of 91 approached patients (44%) consented. Symptom report completion rates were high. Across the studies, clinician intervention engagement was varied. Both patient and staff feedback on the value of eRAPID was positive.

Limitations

The randomised controlled trial methodology led to small numbers of patients simultaneously using the intervention, thus reducing overall clinician exposure to and engagement with eRAPID. Furthermore, staff saw patients across both arms, introducing a contamination bias and potentially reducing the intervention effect. The health economic results were limited by numbers of missing data (e.g. for use of resources and EuroQol-5 Dimensions).

Conclusions

This research provides evidence that online symptom monitoring with inbuilt patient advice is acceptable to patients and clinical teams. Evidence of patient benefit was found, particularly during the early phases of treatment and in relation to self-efficacy. The findings will help improve the intervention and guide future trial designs.

Future work

Definitive trials in radiotherapy and surgical settings are suggested. Future research during systemic treatments could study self-report online interventions to replace elements of traditional follow-up care in the curative setting. Further research during modern targeted treatments (e.g. immunotherapy and small-molecule oral therapy) and in metastatic disease is recommended.

Trial registration

The systemic randomised controlled trial is registered as ISRCTN88520246. The radiotherapy trial is registered as ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02747264.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 10, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Short-term and intermediate-term readmission after esophagectomy

Background

The objective of this study was to characterize short- and intermediate-term readmissions following esophagectomy and to identify predictors of readmission in these two groups.

Methods

Patients who underwent esophagectomy in the National Readmissions Database (2013–2014) were grouped according to whether first readmission was “short-term” (readmitted <30 days) or “intermediate-term” (readmitted 31–90 days) following index admission for esophagectomy. Predictors of readmission were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression modeling.

Results

Of the 3,005 patients who underwent esophagectomy, 544 (18.1%) had a short-term readmission and 305 (10.1%) had an intermediate-term readmission. The most frequent reasons for short-term readmission were post-operative infection (7.5%), dysphagia (6.3%) and pneumonia (5.1%). The most common intermediate-term complications were pneumonia (7.2%), gastrointestinal stricture/stenosis (6.9%) and dysphagia (5.9%). In multivariable analysis, being located in a micropolitan area, increasing number of comorbidities and higher severity of illness score were associated with an increased likelihood of having a short-term readmission while being discharged to a facility (as opposed to directly home) was associated with increased likelihood of both short- and intermediate-term readmission (all P<0.05).

Conclusions

In this analysis, postoperative infection was the most common reason for short-term readmission. Dysphagia and pneumonia were common reasons for both short- and intermediate-term readmission of patients following esophagectomy. Interventions focused on reducing the risk of postoperative infection and pneumonia may reduce hospital readmissions. Gastrointestinal stricture and dysphagia were associated with increased risk of intermediate readmission and should be examined in the context of morbidity associated with pyloric procedures (e.g., pyloromyotomy) at the time of esophagectomy.

Salvage surgery, chylothorax and pneumonia are the main drivers of unplanned readmissions after oesophagectomy for cancer

OBJECTIVES

Unplanned readmissions after surgery can be cumbersome to patients and costly on healthcare resources. The aim of this single-centre study was to identify the independent risk factors for unplanned readmissions in patients who had undergone oesophagectomy for cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 526 consecutive patients with oesophageal cancer who received transthoracic oesophagectomy and were discharged home between 2006 and 2017. Risk factors for unplanned readmission within the first 30 days from discharge were identified by multivariable competing risk analysis.

RESULTS

The mean age of the study patients was 55.14 years and 93.7% were men. Squamous cell carcinoma was identified in 94.1% of the participants, and 68.0% received chemoradiotherapy. There were 299 (56.8%) patients who experienced at least 1 postoperative complication. Fifty-five patients (10.5%) experienced an unplanned readmission. The postoperative 90-day mortality rate among patients who experienced an unplanned readmission was significantly higher than that of cases who did not (9.1% vs 0.2%, respectively, P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis identified chylothorax [hazard ratio (HR): 3.86, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.89-7.91, P < 0.001], pneumonia (HR: 1.98, 95% CI 1.03-3.82, P = 0.042) and salvage surgery (HR: 2.27, 95% CI: 1.10-4.69, P = 0.027) as independent risk factors for unplanned readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage surgery, postoperative chylothorax and pneumonia are the main drivers of 30-day unplanned readmissions in patients who had undergone oesophagectomy for cancer. Patients who required unplanned readmissions showed increased early mortality rates.

Fit-for-Discharge Criteria after Esophagectomy: An International Expert Delphi Consensus

There are no internationally recognized criteria available to determine preparedness for hospital discharge after esophagectomy. This study aims to achieve international consensus using Delphi methodology. The expert panel consisted of 40 esophageal surgeons spanning 16 countries and 4 continents. During a 3-round, web-based Delphi process, experts voted for discharge criteria using 5-point Likert scales. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Consensus was reached if agreement was ≥75% in round 3. Consensus was achieved for the following basic criteria: nutritional requirements are met by oral intake of at least liquids with optional supplementary nutrition via jejunal feeding tube. The patient should have passed flatus and does not require oxygen during mobilization or at rest. Central venous catheters should be removed. Adequate analgesia at rest and during mobilization is achieved using both oral opioid and non-opioid analgesics. All vital signs should be normal unless abnormal preoperatively. Inflammatory parameters should be trending down and close to normal (leucocyte count ≤12G/l and C-reactive protein ≤80 mg/dl). This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for consensus criteria to determine 'fit-for-discharge' status after esophagectomy. Results of this Delphi survey may be applied to clinical outcomes research as an objective measure of short-term recovery. Furthermore, standardized endpoints identified through this process may be used in clinical practice to guide decisions regarding patient discharge and may help to reduce the risk of premature discharge or prolonged admission.

Length of hospital stay after uncomplicated esophagectomy. Hospital variation shows room for nationwide improvement

BACKGROUND

Within the scope of value-based health care, this study aimed to analyze Dutch hospital performance in terms of length of hospital stay after esophageal cancer surgery and its association with 30-day readmission rates. Since both parameters are influenced by the occurrence of complications, this study only included patients with an uneventful recovery after esophagectomy.

METHODS

All patients registered in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) who underwent a potentially curative esophagectomy between 2015 and 2018 were considered for inclusion. Patients were excluded in case of an intraoperative/post-operative complication, readmission to the intensive care unit, or any re-intervention. Length of hospital stay was dichotomized around the national median into 'short admissions' and 'long admissions'. Hospital variation was evaluated using a case-mix-corrected funnel plot based on multivariable logistic regression analyses. Association of length of hospital stay with 30-day readmission rates was investigated using the χ2-statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 1007 patients was included. National median length of hospital stay was 9 days, ranging from 6.5 to 12.5 days among 17 hospitals. The percentage of 'short admissions' per hospital ranged from 7.7 to 93.5%. After correction for case-mix variables, 3 hospitals had significantly higher 'short admission' rates and 4 hospitals had significantly lower 'short admission' rates. Overall, 6.2% [hospital variation (0.0-13.2%)] of patients were readmitted. Hospital 30-day readmission rates were not significantly different between patients with a short length of hospital stay and those with a long length of hospital stay (5.5% versus 7.6%; p = 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on these nationwide audit data, median length of hospital stay after an uncomplicated esophagectomy was 9 days ranging from 6.5 to 12.5 days among Dutch hospitals. There was no association between length of hospital stay and readmission rates. Nationwide improvement might lead to a substantial reduction of hospital costs.

Late-onset anastomotic leak following sweet esophagectomy: A case report and review of the literature

RATIONALE

Late-onset anastomotic leak (AL) is an uncommon but potentially lethal complication after esophagectomy.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 74-year-old male patient was readmitted due to chest distress and chills about 3 months after initial esophagectomy for cancer.

DIAGNOSES

The previous endoscopic biopsy revealed primary esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, and sweet esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction was therefore performed. The patient developed AL 3 months after the surgery.

INTERVENTIONS

Naso-leakage extraluminal drainage tube was utilized because the symptoms of the patient were aggravated 1 month after the chest tube drainage since his second admission for AL.

OUTCOMES

Twenty-one days after naso-leakage extraluminal drainage, the computed tomography images showed the healing of the leakage. Then the patient was discharged from the hospital.

LESSONS

Late-onset AL should be kept in mind when the patient complained of chest distress and fever during the follow up after esophagectomy. In addition, naso-leakage extraluminal drainage could be considered for the treatment of AL. Further trials for better evidence are warranted.

Perioperative immunonutrition in esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy: the first meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Although several randomized controlled trials have been published in recent years, the effect of perioperative immunonutrition in esophageal cancer (EC) patients remains unclear. This initial meta-analysis was conducted to assess whether perioperative enteral immunonutrition reduces postoperative complications in patients undergoing esophagectomy for EC. Relevant randomized controlled trials published before 1st September 2019 were retrieved from the Cochrane Library, PubMed, and EMBASE databases. After the literature was screened, two researchers extracted the information and data from eligible studies according to predefined selection criteria. Obtained data were pooled and analyzed by RevMan 5.3 software. The results were presented as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The heterogeneity among studies was tested by I2 test. Seven high-quality randomized controlled trials were included, with a total of 606 patients, 311 of whom received immunonutrition before and after surgery, while 295 received perioperative standard nutrition. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in the incidence of postoperative infection complications, including total infection complications (RR = 0.97, CI: 0.78-1.20, P = 0.76), pneumonia (RR = 0.97, CI: 0.71-1.33, P = 0.84), wound infection (RR = 0.80, CI: 0.46-1.40, P = 0.44), sepsis (RR = 1.35, CI: 0.67-2.71, P = 0.40), and urinary tract infection (RR = 0.87, CI: 0.54-1.40, P = 0.56). The prevalence of anastomotic leakage in the two groups was 9.4 and 5.4%, but the difference was not statistically significant (RR = 0.59, CI: 0.33-1.04, P = 0.07). Perioperative enteral immunonutrition provided no benefit in terms of the incidence of infection complications and anastomotic leakage in EC patients undergoing esophagectomy. Further large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this conclusion.

Regionalization of esophagectomy: where are we now?

The morbidity and mortality benefits of performing high-risk operations in high-volume centers by high-volume surgeons are evident. Regionalization is a proposed strategy to leverage high-volume centers for esophagectomy to improve quality outcomes. Internationally, regionalization occurs under national mandates. Those mandates do not exist in the United States and spontaneous regionalization of esophagectomy has only modestly occurred in the U.S. Regionalization must strike a careful balance and not limit access to optimal oncologic care to our most vulnerable cancer patient populations in rural and disadvantaged socioeconomic areas. We reviewed the recent literature highlighting: the justification of hospital and surgeon annual esophagectomy volumes for regionalization; how safety performance metrics could influence regionalization; whether regionalization is occurring in the US; what impact regionalization may have on esophagectomy costs; and barriers to patients traveling to receive oncologic treatment at regionalized centers of excellence.

Optimizing health before elective thoracic surgery: systematic review of modifiable risk factors and opportunities for health services research

Despite progress in many different domains of surgical care, we are still striving toward practices which will consistently lead to the best care for an increasingly complex surgical population. Thoracic surgical patients, as a group, have multiple medical co-morbidities and are at increased risk for developing complications after surgical intervention. Our healthcare systems have been focused on treating complications as they occur in the hopes of minimizing their impact, as well as aiding in recovery. In recent years there has emerged a body of evidence outlining opportunities to optimize patients and likely prevent or decrease the impact of many complications. The purpose of this review article is to summarize four major domains-optimal pain control, nutritional status, functional fitness, and smoking cessation-all of which can have a substantial impact on the thoracic surgical patient's course in the hospital-as well as to describe opportunities for improvement, and areas for future research efforts.

Very Early Versus Early Readmissions in General Surgery Patients

BACKGROUND

Hospital readmission rates are an important quality metric. A readmission very soon after discharge may be related to a different cause than readmissions that occur later in the first 30 d.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data sets from 2014 to 2015 were used to identify patients undergoing general surgery procedures. Demographics, comorbidities, and morbidity were analyzed. Stepwise regression was used to determine statistical predictors for any readmission. The final model variables were a combination of selected clinical variables and statistically significant variables. Multinomial logistic regression was then used with these variables to develop models for "very early" (days 0-3 after discharge) and "early" (days 4-30) readmissions.

RESULTS

A total of 744,492 patients were included with 5.9% readmitted within 30 d and 1.5% readmitted within 3 d of discharge (26.1% of all readmissions). Significant risk factors for any readmission included ≥3 comorbidities, major surgery (operative time >1 h, length of stay greater >2 d), and American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥3. When examining "very early" readmissions, the greatest risk factor was experiencing a severe complication (≥Grade III) before discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Readmissions within 3 d of discharge constitute a large portion of all 30 d readmissions. The greatest risk factor for "very early" readmission was a severe complication before discharge. Better understanding of the reason for this association is needed to develop effective prevention strategies.

Robotic oesophago-gastric cancer surgery

A postoperative complications rate of nearly 50% has compelled oesophago-gastric practice to adopt minimally invasive techniques such as robotic surgery

Mediastinoscopy-assisted esophagectomy for T2 middle and lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare mediastinoscopy-assisted esophagectomy (MAE) with the Ivor Lewis procedure in T2 middle and lower thoracic esophageal carcinoma patients in fields of perioperative complications and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

The clinical data of 112 T2 esophageal cancer patients who received MAE (n = 31) or Ivor Lewis procedure (n = 81) from January 2010 to December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed in propensity score analysis. Thirty-eight T2 esophageal cancer patients who underwent MAE (n = 19) and Ivor Lewis procedure (n = 19) were included in this study. The perioperative conditions and OS were analyzed.

RESULTS

The MAE group showed shorter operation time (143.2 ± 20.6 vs 176.8 ± 31.1 min, P = 0.001), less drainage in 24 h (119.2 ± 235.1 vs 626.3 ± 396.3 mL, P < 0.001), less retention time of thoracic tube (27.8 ± 24.0 vs 101.2 ± 54.6 h, P < 0.001), and less hemorrhage during operation (255.4 ± 159.8 vs 367.4 ± 150.9 mL, P = 0.059) compared with the Ivor Lewis group. Less dissected lymph nodes were detected in the MAE group (12.2 ± 5.4 vs 16.8 ± 5.8, P = 0.044) than in the Ivor Lewis group, especially in the upper mediastinum (1.8 ± 2.1 vs 3.5 ± 2.3, P < 0.001) and middle mediastinum (2.5 ± 2.0 vs 5.3 ± 3.2, P = 0.027). The mean survival time was 59.1 and 53.3 months for the MAE group and Ivor Lewis group, respectively (P = 0.635). The results of Cox regression indicated that the nodal stage (P = 0.016) was an independent prognostic factor and the surgical method was not an independent prognostic factor for these patients (P = 0.290).

CONCLUSIONS

MAE procedure showed less surgical trauma compared with the Ivor Lewis procedure. The mediastinal lymphadenectomy of T2 esophageal carcinoma patients who underwent MAE was inferior to those who underwent Ivor Lewis procedure. The perioperative complications and OS of the MAE group were no worse than that of the Ivor Lewis group.