Hospital and surgeon volume in relation to long-term survival after oesophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

The anastomotic leak triad: preoperative patient characteristics, intraoperative risk factors, and postoperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine perioperative risk factors associated with anastomotic leak (AL) after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and its association with cancer recurrence and overall survival.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study of electronic health record data included patients who underwent MIE for esophageal cancer between September 2013 and July 2023 at a tertiary center. The primary outcome was AL after esophagectomy, whereas the secondary outcomes included time to cancer recurrence and overall survival. Perioperative patient factors were evaluated to determine their associations with the primary and the secondary outcomes. Propensity score-matched logistic regression assessed the associations between perioperative factors and AL. Kaplan-Meier survival curves compared cancer recurrence and overall survival by AL.

RESULTS

A total of 251 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer were included in the analysis; 15 (6%) developed AL. Anemia, hospital complications, hospital length of stay, and 30-day readmissions significantly differed from those with and without AL (P = .037, <.001, <.001, and.016, respectively). Moreover, 30- and 90-day mortality were not statistically affected by the presence of AL (P = .417 and 0.456, respectively). Logistic regression modeling showed drug history and anemia were significantly associated with AL (P = .022 and.011, respectively). The presence of AL did not significantly impact cancer recurrence or overall survival (P = .439 and.301, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The etiology of AL is multifactorial. Moreover, AL is significantly associated with drug history, preoperative anemia, hospital length of stay, and 30-day readmissions, but it was not significantly associated with 30- or 90-day mortality, cancer recurrence, or overall survival. Patients should be optimized before undergoing MIE with special consideration for correcting anemia. Ongoing research is needed to identify more modifiable risk factors to minimize AL development and its associated morbidity.

Long-term survival is not affected by severity of complications following esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

Outcomes following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer have continued to improve over the last 30 years. Post-operative complications impact upon peri-operative and short-term survival but the effect on long-term survival remains debated. This study aims to investigate the effect of post-operative complications on long-term survival following esophagectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent an esophagectomy between January 2010 and January 2019 were included from a single high-volume center. Data was collected contemporaneously. Patients were separated into three groups; those who experienced no, or very minor complications (Clavien-Dindo 0 or 1), minor complications (Clavien-Dindo 2), and major complications (Clavien-Dindo 3-4), at 30 days. To correct for short-term mortality effects, those who died during the index hospital admission were excluded. Overall survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and log rank testing.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 721 patients. There were 42.4% (306/721), 29.5% (213/721) and 25.7% (185/721) in the Clavien-Dindo 0-1, Clavien-Dindo 2, and Clavien-Dindo 3-4 group respectively. Seventeen patients (2.4%) died during their index hospital admission and were therefore excluded. There was no significant difference between median survival across the 3 groups (50, 57 and 52 months). Across all 3 groups, overall long-term survival rates were equivalent at 1 (87.5%, 84.9%, 83.2%), 3 (59.7%, 59.6%, 54.2%), and 5 years (43.9%, 48.9%, 45.7%) (p = 0.806). The only factors independently associated with survival in this cohort, were male gender, Charlson comorbidity index, and overall pathological stage of disease.

CONCLUSION

Long-term survival is not affected by peri-operative complications, irrespective of severity, following esophagectomy. Further study into the long-term quality of life is required.

A Video-Based Procedure-Specific Competency Assessment Tool for Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy

Importance

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex procedure with substantial learning curves. In other complex minimally invasive procedures, suboptimal surgical performance has convincingly been associated with less favorable patient outcomes as assessed by peer review of the surgical procedure.

Objective

To develop and validate a procedure-specific competency assessment tool (CAT) for MIE.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this international quality improvement study, a procedure-specific MIE-CAT was developed and validated. The MIE-CAT contains 8 procedural phases, and 4 quality components per phase are scored with a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 4. For evaluation of the MIE-CAT, intraoperative MIE videos performed by a single surgical team in the Esophageal Center East Netherlands were peer reviewed by 18 independent international MIE experts (with more than 120 MIEs performed). Each video was assessed by 2 or 3 blinded experts to evaluate feasibility, content validity, reliability, and construct validity. MIE-CAT version 2 was composed with refined content aimed at improving interrater reliability. A total of 32 full-length MIE videos from patients who underwent MIE between 2011 and 2020 were analyzed. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to January 2023.

Exposure

Performance assessment of transthoracic MIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Feasibility, content validity, interrater and intrarater reliability, and construct validity, including correlations with both experience of the surgical team and clinical parameters, of the developed MIE-CAT.

Results

Experts found the MIE-CAT easy to understand and easy to use to grade surgical performance. The MIE-CAT demonstrated good intrarater reliability (range of intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs], 0.807 [95% CI, 0.656 to 0.892] for quality component score to 0.898 [95% CI, 0.846 to 0.932] for phase score). Interrater reliability was moderate (range of ICCs, 0.536 [95% CI, -0.220 to 0.994] for total MIE-CAT score to 0.705 [95% CI, 0.473 to 0.846] for quality component score), and most discrepancies originated in the lymphadenectomy phases. Hypothesis testing for construct validity showed more than 75% of hypotheses correct: MIE-CAT performance scores correlated with experience of the surgical team (r = 0.288 to 0.622), blood loss (r = -0.034 to -0.545), operative time (r = -0.309 to -0.611), intraoperative complications (r = -0.052 to -0.319), and severe postoperative complications (r = -0.207 to -0.395). MIE-CAT version 2 increased usability. Interrater reliability improved but remained moderate (range of ICCs, 0.666 to 0.743), and most discrepancies between raters remained in the lymphadenectomy phases.

Conclusions and Relevance

The MIE-CAT was developed and its feasibility, content validity, reliability, and construct validity were demonstrated. By providing insight into surgical performance of MIE, the MIE-CAT might be used for clinical, training, and research purposes.

Achieving Textbook Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer Surgery Is Associated with Improved Long-Term Survival: Results of the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Background: The outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer greatly depend on the quality of their surgical care. However, relying solely on a single quality indicator does not adequately capture the multifaceted nature of modern perioperative care. A new tool-"Textbook Outcome" (TO)-has been suggested to provide a comprehensive evaluation of surgical quality. This study aims to examine how TO affects the long-term outcomes of colorectal cancer patients who are scheduled for surgery. Methods: The data of all patients undergoing elective colorectal cancer resection with primary anastomosis at two major cancer treatment centers in Lithuania-Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos and National Cancer Institute-between 2014 and 2018 were entered into the prospectively maintained database. The study defined TO as a composite quality indicator that incorporated seven parameters: R0 resection, retrieval of ≥12 lymph nodes, absence of postoperative complications during the intrahospital period, hospital stay duration of fewer than 14 days, no readmission within 90 days after surgery, no reinterventions within 30 days after surgery, and no 30-day mortality. Long-term outcomes between patients who achieved TO and those who did not were compared. Factors associated with failure to achieve TO were identified. Results: Of the 1524 patients included in the study, TO was achieved by 795 (52.2%). Patients with a higher ASA score (III-IV) were identified to have higher odds of failure to achieve TO (OR 1.497, 95% CI 1.203-1.863), while those who underwent minimally invasive surgery had lower odds for similar failure (OR 0.570, 95% CI 0.460-0.706). TO resulted in improved 5-year overall-(80.2% vs. 65.5%, p = 0.001) and disease-free survival (76.6% vs. 62.6%; p = 0.001) rates. Conclusions: Elective colorectal resections result in successful TO for 52.5% of patients. The likelihood of failure to achieve TO is increased in patients with a high ASA score, while minimally invasive surgery is associated with higher TO rates. Patients who fail to achieve successful surgical outcomes experience reduced long-term outcomes.

Refining the thoracic surgical oncology regionalization standards for esophageal surgery in Ontario, Canada: Moving from good to better

BACKGROUND

The consolidation of surgical practices has been suggested to improve patient outcomes for complex surgeries. In 2005, Ontario Health-Cancer Care Ontario released the Thoracic Surgical Oncology Standards to facilitate the regionalization process at thoracic centers in Ontario, Canada. This work describes the quality-improvement process involved in updating the minimum surgical volume and supporting requirement recommendations for thoracic centers to further optimize patient care for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

We conducted a literature review to identify and synthesize evidence informing the volume-outcome relationship related to esophagectomy. The results of this review and esophageal cancer surgery common indicators (reoperation rate, unplanned visit rate, 30-day and 90-day mortality) from Ontario's Surgical Quality Indicator Report were presented and reviewed by a Thoracic Esophageal Standards Expert Panel and Surgical Oncology Program Leads at Ontario Health-Cancer Care Ontario. Hospital outliers were identified, and a subgroup analysis was conducted to determine the most appropriate minimum surgical volume threshold based on 30- and 90-day mortality rates data from the last 3 fiscal years.

RESULTS

Based on the finding that a significant decrease in mortality occurred at 12 to 15 esophagectomies per year, the Thoracic Esophageal Standards Expert Panel reached a consensus that thoracic centers should perform a minimum of 15 esophagectomies per year. The panel also recommended that any center performing esophagectomies have at least 3 thoracic surgeons to ensure continuity in clinical care.

CONCLUSIONS

We have described the process involved in updating the provincial minimum volume threshold and the appropriate support services for esophageal cancer surgery in Ontario.

Effect of Anastomotic Leak on Long-Term Survival After Esophagectomy: Multivariate Meta-analysis and Restricted Mean Survival Times Examination

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a serious complication after esophagectomy. It is associated with prolonged hospital stay, increased costs, and increased risk for 90-day mortality. Controversy exists concerning the impact of AL on survival. This study was designed to investigate the effect of AL on long-term survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through October 30, 2022. The included studies evaluated the effect of AL on long-term survival. Primary outcome was long-term overall survival. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies (7118 patients) were included. Overall, 727 (10.2%) patients experienced AL. The RMSTD analysis shows that at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months, patients not experiencing AL live an average of 0.7 (95% CI 0.2-1.2; p < 0.001), 1.9 (95% CI 1.1-2.6; p < 0.001), 2.6 (95% CI 1.6-3.7; p < 0.001), 3.4 (95% CI 1.9-4.9; p < 0.001), and 4.2 (95% CI 2.1-6.4; p < 0.001) months longer compared with those with AL, respectively. The time-dependent HRs analysis for AL versus no AL shows a higher mortality hazard in patients with AL at 3 (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.54-2.34), 6 (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.39-1.75), 12 (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.24-1.54), and 24 months (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02-1.31).

CONCLUSIONS

This study seems to suggest a modest clinical impact of AL on long-term OS after esophagectomy. Patients who experience AL seem to have a higher mortality hazard during the first 2 years of follow-up.

Textbook outcomes for oesophagectomy: A valid composite measure assessment tool for surgical performance in a specialist unit

INTRODUCTION

In 2017 the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit Group proposed a ten-item composite measure for a 'textbook outcome' (TBO) following oesophago-gastric resection. Studies have shown associations between TBO and improved conditional and overall survival. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of TBO to assess the outcomes from a single specialist unit in a country, with low incidence of disease, allowing comparisons with international specialist centres.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected oesophageal cancer surgery data at a single centre, in Australia, between 2013 and 2018. Multivariable logistical regression assessed association between baseline factors and TBO. Post-operative complications were analysed in two separate groups as Clavien-Dindo ≥2 (CD ≥ 2) and Clavien-Dindo ≥3 (CD ≥ 3). Cox-proportional hazards regression analysis determined the association between TBO and survival.

RESULTS

246 patients were analysed, with 50.8% (n = 125) achieving a TBO when complications were defined as CD ≥ 2 and 58.9% (n = 145) when using CD ≥ 3. Patients aged ≥75, and those with a pre-operative respiratory co-morbidity were less likely to achieve a TBO. Overall survival was not influenced by TBO when complications were defined as CD ≥ 2, however it was higher when a TBO was achieved, and complications were defined as CD ≥ 3 (HR 0.54, 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.84, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

TBO is a multi-parameter metric that allowed benchmarking of the quality of oesophageal cancer surgery in our unit, providing favourable outcomes compared with other published data. There was an association between TBO and improved overall survival when the definition of severe complications was CD ≥ 3.

Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: Unravelling differences in failure to rescue

INTRODUCTION

Failure to rescue (FTR) is an important outcome measure after esophagectomy and reflects mortality after postoperative complications. Differences in FTR have been associated with hospital resection volume. However, insight into how centers manage complications and achieve their outcomes is lacking. Anastomotic leak (AL) is a main contributor to FTR. This study aimed to assess differences in FTR after AL between centers, and to identify factors that explain these differences.

METHODS

TENTACLE - Esophagus is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. Differences in FTR were assessed between low-volume (<20 resections), middle-volume (20-60 resections) and high-volume centers (≥60 resections). Mediation analysis was performed using logistic regression, including possible mediators for FTR: case-mix, hospital resources, leak severity and treatment.

RESULTS

FTR after AL was 11.7%. After adjustment for confounders, FTR was lower in high-volume vs. low-volume (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.2-0.8), but not versus middle-volume centers (OR 0.67, 95%CI 0.5-1.0). After mediation analysis, differences in FTR were found to be explained by lower leak severity, lower secondary ICU readmission rate and higher availability of therapeutic modalities in high-volume centers. No statistically significant direct effect of hospital volume was found: high-volume vs. low-volume 0.86 (95%CI 0.4-1.7), high-volume vs. middle-volume OR 0.86 (95%CI 0.5-1.4).

CONCLUSION

Lower FTR in high-volume compared with low-volume centers was explained by lower leak severity, less secondary ICU readmissions and higher availability of therapeutic modalities. To reduce FTR after AL, future studies should investigate effective strategies to reduce leak severity and prevent secondary ICU readmission.

Association between hospital surgical case volume and postoperative mortality in patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative mortality is an important indicator for evaluating surgical safety. Postoperative mortality is influenced by hospital volume; however, this association is not fully understood. This study aimed to investigate the volume-outcome association between the hospital surgical case volume for gastrectomies per year (hospital volume) and the risk of postoperative mortality in patients undergoing a gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

Studies assessing the association between hospital volume and the postoperative mortality in patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric cancer were searched for eligibility. Odds ratios were pooled for the highest versus lowest categories of hospital volume using a random-effects model. The volume-outcome association between hospital volume and the risk of postoperative mortality was analyzed. The study protocol was registered with Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO).

RESULTS

Thirty studies including 586 993 participants were included. The risk of postgastrectomy mortality in patients with gastric cancer was 35% lower in hospitals with higher surgical case volumes than in their lower-volume counterparts (odds ratio: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.56-0.76; P <0.001). This relationship was consistent and robust in most subgroup analyses. Volume-outcome analysis found that the postgastrectomy mortality rate remained stable or was reduced after the hospital volume reached a plateau of 100 gastrectomy cases per year.

CONCLUSIONS

The current findings suggest that a higher-volume hospital can reduce the risk of postgastrectomy mortality in patients with gastric cancer, and that greater than or equal to 100 gastrectomies for gastric cancer per year may be defined as a high hospital surgical case volume.

A Population-Based Study Using Belgian Cancer Registry Data Supports Centralization of Esophageal Cancer Surgery in Belgium

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer surgery outcomes benefit from higher hospital volumes. Despite the evidence, organization of national health care often is complex and depends on various factors. The volume-outcome results of this population-based study supported national health policy measures regarding concentration of esophageal resections in Belgium.

METHODS

The Belgian Cancer Registry (BCR) database was linked to administrative data on cancer treatment. All Belgian patients with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer in 2008-2018 undergoing resection were allocated to the hospital at which surgery was performed. The study assessed hospital volume association with 90-day mortality and 5-year overall survival, classifying average annual hospital volume of resections as low (LV, <6), medium (MV, 6-19), or high (HV, ≥20) and as a continuous covariate in the regression models.

RESULTS

The study included 4156 patients who had surgery in 79 hospitals (2 HV hospitals [37% of all surgeries], 12 MV hospitals [30% of all surgeries], and 65 LV hospitals [33% of all surgeries]). Adjusted 90-day mortality in HV hospitals was lower than in LV hospitals (odds ratio [OR], 0.37; 95% CI, 0.21-0.65; p = 0.001). Case-mix adjusted 5-year survival was superior in HV versus LV (hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.31-0.60; p < 0.001). The continuous model demonstrated a lower 90-day mortality (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23-0.71; p = 0.002) and a superior 5-year survival (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.33-0.63; p < 0.001) in hospitals with volumes of 40 or more resections annually.

CONCLUSION

Population-based data from the BCR confirmed a strong volume-outcome association for esophageal resections. Improved 5-year survival in centers with annual volumes of 20 or more resections was driven mainly by the achievement of superior 90-day mortality. These findings supported centralization of esophageal resections in Belgium.

Geographical Disparities in Esophageal Cancer Incidence and Mortality in the United States

BACKGROUND

Our previous research on neuroendocrine and gastric cancers has shown that patients living in rural areas have worse outcomes than urban patients. This study aimed to investigate the geographic and sociodemographic disparities in esophageal cancer patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study on esophageal cancer patients between 1975 and 2016 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Both univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to evaluate overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) between patients residing in rural (RA) and urban (MA) areas. Further, we used the National Cancer Database to understand differences in various quality of care metrics based on residence.

RESULTS

N = 49,421 (RA [12%]; MA [88%]). The incidence and mortality rates were consistently higher during the study period in RA. Patients living in RA were more commonly males (p < 0.001), Caucasian (p < 0.001), and had adenocarcinoma (p < 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed that RA had worse OS (HR = 1.08; p < 0.01) and DSS (HR = 1.07; p < 0.01). Quality of care was similar, except RA patients were more likely to be treated at a community hospital (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identified geographic disparities in esophageal cancer incidence and outcomes despite the similar quality of care. Future research is needed to understand and attenuate such disparities.

What has the past taught us about the future in esophageal cancer? Personal reflections

Since the first successful esophagectomy for cancer in 1913 spectacular advancements have been made in diagnosis, staging, and therapy. Refinement of imaging, surgery, perioperative management together with multidisciplinary collaboration are the cornerstones. Today therapy with curative option is offered to more patients than ever. Further innovations in imaging, molecular biology, genetics, artificial intelligence, machine learning, robotics, nanotechnology will have an increasing impact. The end result being a unique therapeutic plan shaped on each patient's individual profile.

Effect of Thoracic Surgery Regionalization on 1- and 3-Year Survival after Cancer Esophagectomy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate whether our previously reported improvements in short-term cancer esophagectomy outcomes after large-scale regionalization in the United States translated to longer-term survival benefit.

BACKGROUND

Regionalization is associated with better early postoperative outcomes following cancer esophagectomy; however, data regarding its effect on long-term survival are mixed.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 461 patients undergoing cancer esophagectomy before (2009-2013, N = 272) and after (2014-2016, N = 189) regionalization. Kaplan-Meier curves and chi-square tests were used to describe 1- and 3-year survival in each era. Hierarchical logistic regression models examined the adjusted effect of regionalization on mortality.

RESULTS

Compared to pre-regionalization patients, post-regionalization patients had significantly higher 1-year survival (83.1% vs 73.9%, P = 0.02) but not 3-year survival (52.9% vs 58.2%, P = 0.26).Subgroup analysis by cancer stage revealed that 1-year survival benefit was only significant among mid-stage (IIB-IIIB) patients, whereas differences in 3-year survival only approached significance among early-stage (IA-IIA) patients.In multivariable analysis, only regionalization was a predictor of lower mortality at 1 year [odds ratio (OR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-1.00], and only thoracic specialty at 3years (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38-0.99). Older age, more advanced stage, and complications were associated with higher 1- and 3-year mortality. Comorbidity, minimally invasive approach, surgeon volume, facility volume, and neoadjuvant treatment were not significant in this model.

CONCLUSIONS

Regionalization was associated with improved 1-year survival after cancer esophagectomy, independent of factors such as morbidity or volume in our adjusted models. This survival benefit did not persist at 3 years, likely due to the aggressive nature of the disease.

Centralisation of oesophageal cancer services: experiences and outcomes of the first year of implementation at a Belgian non-academic teachinghospital

INTRODUCTION

Oesophageal surgery recently became centralised in Belgium. This study aims to evaluate surgical outcomes and service delivered one year after implementation of centralisation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing an oesophagectomy between the start of the centralisation; 1st of June 2019 and 31st of May 2020, were included from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

53 patients (41 male, 12 female) underwent an oesophagectomy during the study period. Most oesophagectomies were performed through an open left thoracoabdominal approach (64.2%), 30.2% via a minimally invasive approach and hybrid approaches were carried out in 5.7% of patients. In this study population, the 30 day mortality rate was 0% and the 90 day mortality rate was 3.8%, equating to 2 deaths. The overall 30 day readmission rate was 7.5%. Clinically significant anastomotic leaks occurred in 4 patients, (7.5%). Pneumonia and atrial fibrillation were the most frequent complications, both having a prevalence of 32.1%. The median length of stay was 11 days (IQR 9.5-14.5).

CONCLUSION

The results from our centre are comparable to those from international registers which demonstrate that centralisation of complex cancer services can be safely implemented.

Bariatric surgery volume by hospital and long-term survival: population-based NordOSCo data

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether annual hospital volume of bariatric surgery influences the long-term survival of individuals who undergo surgery for severe obesity. The hypothesis that higher annual hospital volume of bariatric surgery is associated with better long-term survival was evaluated.

METHODS

This retrospective population-based study included patients who underwent bariatric surgery in Sweden and Finland between 1989 and 2020. Annual hospital volume was analysed for risk of all-cause mortality. Multivariable Cox regression provided HRs with 95 per cent confidence intervals adjusted for age, sex, co-morbidity, country, and type of bariatric procedure.

RESULTS

Weight loss surgery was performed in 77 870 patients with a 0.5 per cent risk of postoperative death (mortality rate (MR) per 100 000 people 592.7, 95 per cent c.i. 575.0 to 610.9). Higher annual hospital volume of bariatric surgery was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality. The adjusted HRs were slightly more reduced for each quartile of annual hospital volume compared with the lowest quartile (MR per 100 000 people for lowest quartile 815.1, 95 per cent c.i. 781.7 to 849.9; for quartile II: HR 0.88, 95 per cent c.i. 0.81 to 0.96 (MR per 100 000 people 545.0, 512.0 to 580.1); for quartile III: HR 0.87, 0.78 to 0.97 (MR per 100 000 people 428.8, 395.5 to 465.0); for quartile IV: HR 0.82, 0.73 to 0.93 (MR per 100 000 people 356.0, 324.1 to 391.1)). In analyses restricted to laparoscopic surgery, volume and mortality were related only in the crude model (HR 0.86, 0.75 to 0.98), but not in the multivariable model (HR 0.97, 0.84 to 1.13) that compared highest and lowest quartiles.

CONCLUSION

If there was a survival benefit associated with hospital volume, it may have been due to a faster uptake of laparoscopic surgery in the busier hospitals.

Mohs micrographic surgery and dermatopathology concordance: An analysis of 1421 Mohs cases over 17 years

BACKGROUND

The success of Mohs micrographic surgery depends on the surgeon's ability to correctly interpret intraoperative frozen sections.

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective study analyzed the rate of concordance between Mohs surgeons and dermatopathologists in reading slides from Mohs surgery cases.

METHODS

A dermatopathologist reviewed all the frozen sections and the corresponding Mohs map for every 30th Mohs case at a practice employing 6 different Mohs surgeons during 2001-2017. Cases in which the dermatopathologist and the Mohs surgeon disagreed on the interpretation were noted.

RESULTS

The concordance rate between Mohs surgeons and dermatopathologists was 99.79%. The 3 discordant cases included a case of squamous cell carcinoma, a case of superficial basal cell carcinoma, and a case of hypertrophic squamous cell carcinoma in situ.

LIMITATIONS

This analysis is limited to fellowship-trained Mohs surgeons and, therefore, might not be applicable to all physicians who perform Mohs.

CONCLUSION

Fellowship-trained Mohs surgeons show high concordance with board-certified dermatopathologists in the accurate and precise interpretation of histology slides in the setting of Mohs micrographic surgery.

Annual surgeon and hospital volume of gastrectomy and gastric adenocarcinoma survival in a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

It is uncertain whether centralization of gastrectomy to fewer surgeons and larger centers improves survival in gastric adenocarcinoma in Western populations. The aim of this study was to examine if higher annual surgeon or hospital volumes of gastrectomy increase gastric adenocarcinoma survival in a population-based Swedish cohort.

METHODS

This study included almost all patients who underwent curatively intended gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma in Sweden between 2006 and 2015 with follow-up throughout 2020. Data were collected from medical records and national registries. Annual surgeon and hospital volumes of gastrectomies were analyzed by categorization into four equal-sized groups and as continuous variables. The outcomes were 5-year all-cause mortality (main) and 5-year disease-specific mortality. Cox regression produced hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), adjusted for sex, age, education, comorbidity, pathological tumor stage, pre-operative therapy, calendar period, and mutually for hospital or surgeon volume.

RESULTS

The study included 1774 patients. Higher annual surgeon volume did not decrease the risk of 5-year all-cause mortality when comparing the highest and lowest quartiles (HR = 1.07, 95% CI 0.86-1.34) or when analyzed as a continuous variable (HR = 1.03, 95% 1.00-1.06). Higher annual hospital volume did not significantly decrease the risk of 5-year all-cause mortality (highest versus lowest quartiles: HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.71-1.10; continuous variable: HR = 0.98, 95% CI 0.95-1.02). The results for 5-year disease-specific mortality were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

This study, mirroring routine clinical practices in an entire Western country, indicates that neither annual surgeon volume nor annual hospital volume of gastrectomy influences the long-term survival in gastric adenocarcinoma.

Esophagectomy versus definitive chemoradiotherapy as initial treatment for clinical stage I esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy and definitive chemoradiotherapy are commonly used in the treatment of stage I esophageal cancer (EC). The present study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of esophagectomy and definitive chemoradiotherapy as the initial treatment for clinical stage I EC.

METHODS

This study was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020197203). Relevant studies were identified through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from database inception to June 30, 2020. Hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was employed to compare overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Odds ratio (OR) with 95% CI was employed to compare treatment-related death, complications, and tumor recurrence.

RESULTS

A total of 13 non-randomized controlled studies involving 3,346 patients were included. Compared with definitive chemoradiotherapy, esophagectomy showed an improved OS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55-0.86; P < 0.001), PFS (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.33-0.67; P < 0.001), and a lower risk of tumor recurrence (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30-0.61; P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.75-1.65; P = 0.60) and treatment-related death (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.31-4.30; P = 0.84) between the two treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence shows esophagectomy has superior survival benefits as the initial treatment for clinical stage I EC. It is still the preferred choice for patients with clinical stage I EC. However, future high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to validate this conclusion.

Does hospital volume affect outcomes after abdominal cancer surgery: an analysis of Swiss health insurance claims data

Background

Medical treatment quality has been shown to be better in high volume than in low volume hospitals. However, this relationship has not yet been confirmed in abdominal cancer in Switzerland and is relevant for referral of patients and healthcare planning. Thus, the present study investigates the association between hospital volumes for surgical resections of colon, gastric, rectal, and pancreatic carcinomas and outcomes.

Methods

This retrospective analysis is based on anonymized claims data of patients with mandatory health insurance at Helsana Group, a leading health insurance in Switzerland. Outcome parameters were length of hospital stay, mortality and cost during the inpatient stay as well as at 1-year follow-up. Hospital volume information was derived from the Quality Indicators dataset provided by the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health. The impact of hospital volume on the different treatment outcomes was statistically tested using generalized estimating equations (GEE) models, taking into account the non-independence of observations from the same hospital.

Results

The studies included 2′859 resections in patients aged 18 years and older who were hospitalized for abdominal cancer surgery between 2014 and 2018. Colon resections were the most common procedures (n = 1′690), followed by rectal resections (n = 709). For rectal, colon and pancreatic resections, an increase in the mean number of interventions per hospital and a reduction of low volume hospitals could be observed. For the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes, we did not observe a clear dose-response relationship, as no significantly better outcomes were observed in the higher-volume category than in the lower-volume category. Even though a positive “routine effect” cannot be excluded, our results suggest that even hospitals with low volumes are able to achieve comparable treatment outcomes to larger hospitals.

Conclusion

In summary, this study increases transparency on the relationship between hospital volume and treatment success. It shows that simple measures such as defining a minimum number of procedures only might not lead to the intended effects if other factors such as infrastructure, the operating team or aggregation level of the available data are not taken into account.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07513-5.

Long-term effect of hospital volume on the postoperative prognosis of 158,618 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in China

Background

The impact of hospital volume on the long-term survival of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) has not been well assessed in China, especially for stage I-III stage ESCC. We performed a large sample size study to assess the relationships between hospital volume and the effectiveness of ESCC treatment and the hospital volume value at the lowest risk of all-cause mortality after esophagectomy in China.

Aim

To investigate the prognostic value of hospital volume for assessing postoperative long-term survival of ESCC patients in China.

Methods

The date of 158,618 patients with ESCC were collected from a database (1973-2020) established by the State Key Laboratory for Esophageal Cancer Prevention and Treatment, the database includes 500,000 patients with detailed clinical information of pathological diagnosis and staging, treatment approaches and survival follow-up for esophageal and gastric cardia cancers. Intergroup comparisons of patient and treatment characteristics were conducted with the X² test and analysis of variance. The Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test was used to draw the survival curves for the variables tested. A Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to analyze the independent prognostic factors for overall survival. The relationship between hospital volume and all-cause mortality was assessed using restricted cubic splines from Cox proportional hazards models. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality.

Results

In both 1973-1996 and 1997-2020, patients with stage I-III stage ESCC who underwent surgery in high volume hospitals had better survival than those who underwent surgery in low volume hospitals (both P<0.05). And high volume hospital was an independent factor for better prognosis in ESCC patients. The relationship between hospital volume and the risk of all-cause mortality was half-U-shaped, but overall, hospital volume was a protective factor for esophageal cancer patients after surgery (HR<1). The concentration of hospital volume associated with the lowest risk of all-cause mortality was 1027 cases/year in the overall enrolled patients.

Conclusion

Hospital volume can be used as an indicator to predict the postoperative survival of ESCC patients. Our results suggest that the centralized management of esophageal cancer surgery is meaningful to improve the survival of ESCC patients in China, but the hospital volume should preferably not be higher than 1027 cases/year.

Core tip

Hospital volume is considered to be a prognostic factor for many complex diseases. However, the impact of hospital volume on long-term survival after esophagectomy has not been well evaluated in China. Based on a large sample size of 158,618 ESCC patients in China spanning 47 years (1973-2020), We found that hospital volume can be used as a predictor of postoperative survival in patients with ESCC, and identified hospital volume thresholds with the lowest risk of death from all causes. This may provide an important basis for patients to choose hospitals and have a significant impact on the centralized management of hospital surgery.

Comparable Esophagectomy Outcomes by Surgeon Specialty: A NSQIP Analysis

BACKGROUND

A few observational studies have found that outcomes after esophagectomies by thoracic surgeons are better than those by general surgeons.

METHODS

Non-emergent esophagectomy cases were identified in the 2016-2017 American College of Surgeons NSQIP database. Associations between patient characteristics and outcomes by thoracic versus general surgeons were evaluated with univariate and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 1,606 cases, 886 (55.2%) were performed by thoracic surgeons. Those patients differed from patients treated by general surgeons in race (other/unknown 19.3% vs 7.8%; P<.001) but not in other baseline characteristics (age, sex, BMI, and comorbidities). Thoracic surgeons performed an open approach more frequently (48.9% vs 30.8%, P<.001) and had operative times that were 30 minutes shorter (P<.001). General surgeons had lower rates of reoperation (11.8% vs 17.2%; P=.003) and were more likely to treat postoperative leak with interventional means (6.3% vs 3.4%, P=.01). Thoracic surgeons were more likely to treat postoperative leak with reoperation (5.9% vs 3.6%, P=.01). There were no other differences in univariate comparison of outcomes between the two groups, including leak, readmission, and death. General surgery specialty was associated with lower risk of reoperation. Our multivariable model also found no relationship between general surgeon and risk of any complication (odds ratio 1.10; 95% CI .86 to 1.42).

DISCUSSION

In our large, national database study, we found that outcomes of esophagectomies by general surgeons were comparable with those by thoracic surgeons. General surgeons managed postoperative leaks differently than thoracic surgeons.

A thematic review of the use of electronic logbooks for surgical assessment in sub-Saharan Africa

INTRODUCTION

Ensuring that surgical training programmes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) provide high quality training, including adequate operative experience, is of crucial importance in meeting the goals set out in the Lancet Global Surgery 2030. Electronic logbooks (eLogbooks) have been adopted to monitor both individual trainee progression and the performance of surgical training programmes.

METHODS

We performed a thematic review of the current evidence base surrounding the use of eLogbooks for the assessment of surgeons in training in sub-Saharan Africa, with a view to identifying the learning to date and areas for future research.

RESULTS

Whilst there are multiple papers highlighting the use of surgical eLogbooks in high-income countries, we identified only three papers which discussed their use in sub-Saharan Africa. Four common themes emerged which related to the use of surgical eLogbooks throughout sub-Saharan Africa: ease of analysis, centralised databases, discrepancies in reporting and technology limitations.

CONCLUSIONS

Robust data to demonstrate trainee progression and the quality of surgical training programmes are of crucial importance in ensuring that surgical training programmes can rapidly scale up to deliver large numbers of well-trained surgical providers to address the unmet patient need in LMICs in the next decade. The limited data on the use of well designed, centralised electronic surgical logbooks indicate that this tool may play an important role in providing key data to underpin these training programmes.

Mortality, complications and failure to rescue after surgery for esophageal, gastric, pancreatic and liver cancer patients based on minimum caseloads set by the German Cancer Society

BACKGROUND

The German Cancer Society (DKG) board certifies hospitals in treating esophageal, gastric, liver and pancreatic cancer among others. There has been no systematic verification of the number of major surgical resections set by DKG certification with regards to in-house mortality and failure to rescue (FtR).

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of anonymized nationwide hospital billing data (DRG data, 2009-2017). Inclusion criteria were based on the annual surgical minimum caseload (SMC) in accordance with DKG certification.

RESULTS

171,429 datasets were identified, including 31,140 esophageal, 54,155 gastric, 57,343 pancreatic and 28,791 liver resections. In-house mortality ranged from 6.2% for gastric resections to 8.1% for pancreatic resections. Differences in in-house mortality between hospitals which fulfilled SMC on average and those which did not fulfill SMC on average were 40.8% (5.3% vs 8.2%) for esophageal, 32.3% (4.8% vs 6.8%) for gastric and 45.7% (6.1% vs 9.8%) for pancreatic resections, while it was 8.2% higher in SMC-hospitals (7.6% vs 7.0%) for liver resections. Complication occurrence rates for esophageal, gastric and pancreatic resections were similar in SMC- and non-SMC-hospitals while FtR in hospitals fulfilling SMC was significantly lower. Data for liver resections demonstrated the same trends only in a sub-analysis of complex procedures.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates an association between caseload threshold defined by DKG and lower mortality in esophageal, gastric, pancreatic and complex liver surgery. In these resections, FtR was reduced if SMC was fulfilled.

Short and Long-term Outcomes Among High-Volume vs Low-Volume Esophagectomy Surgeons at a High-Volume Center

To determine associations between surgeon volume and esophagectomy outcomes at a high-volume institution. All esophagectomies for esophageal cancer at our institution from August 2005 to August 2019 were reviewed. Cases were divided by surgeon into low, <7 cases/year, vs high volume, ≥7 cases/year, based on Leapfrog Group recommendations. Surgeons remained 'high-volume' after one year of ≥7 cases. Demographics, comorbidities, course of care, and long-term outcomes were compared. In total, 1029 cases were evaluated; 120 performed by low-volume surgeons vs 909 by high-volume surgeons. Never-smokers, atrial fibrillation, and clinical Stage IVa patients were associated with high-volume surgeons. Other demographics were similar. Low-volume surgeons did more open cases, 45.8% vs 14.5%, P < 0.01. Low-volume surgeons had more complications than high-volume surgeons (71.7% vs 57.6%, P < 0.01), specifically Grade II and III (59.2% vs 46.8%, P = 0.01, and 44.2% vs 27.0%, P <0.01). No differences were seen in anastomotic leak rate, 90-day mortality, recurrences, 5-year overall survival (46.7% low-volume vs 49.3% high-volume, P = 0.64), or 5-year disease-free survival (35.7% low-volume vs 42.2% high-volume, P = 0.27). In multivariable logistic regression for Grade III or higher complications, high-volume surgeons had an odds ratio of 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.36-0.87) for complications. Our study found higher rates of open esophagectomies and complications in low-volume esophagectomy surgeons compared to high-volume surgeons at the same, high-volume institution. However, low-volume surgeons were not associated with worse survival outcomes compared to high-volume surgeons. Low-volume esophagectomy surgeons may benefit from mentoring and support to improve perioperative outcomes; these efforts are underway at our institution.

Consensus recommendations for the standardized histopathological evaluation and reporting after radical oesophago-gastrectomy (HERO consensus)

BACKGROUND

Variation in the approach, radicality, and quality of gastroesophageal surgery impacts patient outcomes. Pathological outcomes such as lymph node yield are routinely used as surrogate markers of surgical quality, but are subject to significant variations in histopathological evaluation and reporting. A multi-society consensus group was convened to develop evidence-based recommendations for the standardized assessment of gastroesophageal cancer specimens.

METHODS

A consensus group comprised of surgeons, pathologists, and oncologists was convened on behalf of the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain & Ireland. Literature was reviewed for 17 key questions. Draft recommendations were voted upon via an anonymous Delphi process. Consensus was considered achieved where >70% of participants were in agreement.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved on 18 statements for all 17 questions. Twelve strong recommendations regarding preparation and assessment of lymph nodes, margins, and reporting methods were made. Importantly, there was 100% agreement that the all specimens should be reported using the Royal College of Pathologists Guidelines as the minimum acceptable dataset. In addition, two weak recommendations regarding method and duration of specimen fixation were made. Four topics lacked sufficient evidence and no recommendation was made.

CONCLUSIONS

These consensus recommendations provide explicit guidance for gastroesophageal cancer specimen preparation and assessment, to provide maximum benefit for patient care and standardize reporting to allow benchmarking and improvement of surgical quality.

The association between hospital case-volume and postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer surgery: A population-based retrospective cohort study

Background

Recent advances in esophageal cancer treatment require a reevaluation of the relationship between institutional case‐volume and patient outcome. The aim of this study was to analyze and update the association between surgical case‐volume and both in‐hospital and long‐term mortality after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Methods

Data of all adult patients who received esophageal cancer surgery in Korea between 2004 and 2017 were extracted from the database of the National Health Insurance Service. Hospitals were categorized into three groups according to the average annual number of esophageal cancer surgery: low‐volume (<12 cases/year), medium‐volume (12–48 cases/year), and high‐volume centers (>48 cases/year). Postoperative in‐hospital and 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year mortality were analyzed according to the categorized groups using logistic regression.

Results

In total, 11, 346 esophageal cancer surgeries in 122 hospitals were analyzed. In‐hospital mortality in the high‐, medium‐, and low‐volume centers were 3.4%, 6.4%, and 11.1%, respectively. In‐hospital mortality was significantly higher in low‐ volume (adjusted odds ratio, 3.91; confidence interval, 3.18–4.80; p < 0.001) and medium volume (adjusted odds ratio, 2.21; confidence interval, 1.80–2.74, p < 0.001) centers compared to high‐volume centers. Patients who received esophageal cancer surgery in a low‐or medium‐volume center also had higher 1‐, 3‐, and 5‐year mortality compared to patients who received the surgery in a high‐volume center.

Conclusions

Centers with lower case‐volume showed higher in‐hospital mortality and long‐term mortality after esophageal cancer surgery.

Minimally invasive total adventitial resection of the cardia for tumours of the oesophagogastric junction

PURPOSE

A cohort study analysing phases and outcomes of the learning curve required to master minimally invasive total adventitial resection of the cardia.

METHODS

Data from 198 consecutive oesophagectomies performed by a single surgeon was collected prospectively. Patients' stratification reflected chronologically and technically the four main phases of the learning curve: open surgery (open total adventitial resection of the cardia (TARC), n = 45), hybrid Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy (HILO, n = 50), laparoscopic-thoracoscopic assisted (LTA, n = 56) and totally minimally invasive TARC (TMI TARC, n = 47). Operating time, hospital stay, specimen lymph nodes and resection margins were analysed. Five-year survival was the main long-term outcome measured.

RESULTS

Overall 5-year survival was 45%. Perioperative mortality was 1.5% (n = 3). Hospital stay was 22 ± 23 days. Specimen lymph node median was 20 (range: 15-26). Resection margins were negative (R = 0, American College of Pathologists) in 193 cases (97.4%). Five-year survival in the four phases was 37.8%, 44.9%, 42.9% and 55.3%, showing a positive trend towards the end of the learning curve (p = 0.024). Median specimen lymph nodes was 20 (range: 15-22) for open TARC, 18.5 (13-25) for HILO, 19.5 (15-25) for LTA and 23 (18-30) for TMI TARC (p = 0.006). TMI TARC, adenocarcinoma, R >0, T >2, N >0 and LyRa (ratio positive/total specimen nodes) were associated with survival on univariate analysis. T >2 and LyRa independently predicted worse survival on multivariate analysis. CUSUM analysis showed surgical proficiency gain since laparoscopy was introduced.

CONCLUSION

Mastering minimally invasive TARC requires a long learning curve. TMI TARC is safe and oncologically appropriate and may benefit long-term survival: it should be validated by randomised trials as a standardised anatomical resection for tumours of the oesophagogastric junction.

Impact of Time to Endoscopic Resection on Outcomes for Stage I Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic resection (ER) is the preferred treatment for superficial esophageal cancer; however, a safe timeframe for performing ER has not been established. The aim of this study was to evaluate the period in which ER can be performed for patients with stage I esophageal adenocarcinoma without compromising outcomes.

METHODS

The 2004-2015 National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with cT1N0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent upfront ER. The primary outcome was overall survival, which was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox Proportional Hazards methods. The secondary outcome was rate of margin-positive resection, which was evaluated using a multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 983 patients met study criteria. The median time from diagnosis to ER was 34 days (IQR 5-70). Patients in the highest quartile of time to ER were more likely to be treated at a high-volume center and at a center different from that of diagnosis compared to those in the lowest quartile. Increasing time to ER was not independently associated with survival (adjusted HR per 10 days 1.02; 95% CI 0.98-1.05; p=0.32) nor margin-positive resection (OR per 10 days 1.01; 95% CI 0.96-1.06; p=0.60) CONCLUSIONS: In this NCDB analysis, increasing time to endoscopic resection, up to 180 days from diagnosis, was not associated with worsened survival or increased odds of margin-positive resection in patients with cT1N0M0 esophageal adenocarcinoma. Given these findings, patients may be afforded time to be seen in specialty centers without risk of tumor progression.

European consensus on essential steps of Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis and McKeown Esophagectomy through Delphi methodology

Background

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex and technically demanding procedure with a long learning curve, which is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. To master MIE, training in essential steps is crucial. Yet, no consensus on essential steps of MIE is available. The aim of this study was to achieve expert consensus on essential steps in Ivor Lewis and McKeown MIE through Delphi methodology.

Methods

Based on expert opinion and peer-reviewed literature, essential steps were defined for Ivor Lewis (IL) and McKeown (McK) MIE. In a round table discussion, experts finalized the lists of steps and an online Delphi questionnaire was sent to an international expert panel (7 European countries) of minimally invasive upper GI surgeons. Based on replies and comments, steps were adjusted and rephrased and sent in iterative fashion until consensus was achieved.

Results

Two Delphi rounds were conducted and response rates were 74% (23 out of 31 experts) for the first and 81% (27 out of 33 experts) for the second round. Consensus was achieved on 106 essential steps for both the IL and McK approach. Cronbach’s alpha in the first round was 0.78 (IL) and 0.78 (McK) and in the second round 0.92 (IL) and 0.88 (McK).

Conclusions

Consensus among European experts was achieved on essential surgical steps for both Ivor Lewis and McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Supplementary Information

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00464-021-08304-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

After-hours esophagectomy may pose additional risk to patients with esophageal cancer

Background

The increase in the incidence of esophageal cancers (ECs) combined with fewer surgeons working at large centers will increase the likelihood of surgery for ECs being performed during later hours. This study aimed to compare esophagectomies’ operative outcomes for EC performed at different surgical starting times.

Methods

This was a single-center, retrospective study. Risk-adjusted cumulative sum curve analysis and Cox regression analysis were used to identify the potential change-point of surgical starting times. The participants were then divided into 2 groups according to the change-point time. Propensity score matching was used to control confounding factors between the 2 groups. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes in both groups.

Results

A total of 702 patients who underwent potentially radical esophagectomy from 7 May 2014 to 31 December 2017 in our institute were included. The 3-year all-cause mortality showed a significant change-point at 16:42, with an increment from 56.5% to 76.9% (P=0.043). Esophagectomy that commenced between 17:00–18:59 was associated with significantly lower overall survival (OS) [multivariate hazard ratio (HR): 2.47; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.25 to 4.90; P=0.010] and disease-free survival (DFS) (multivariate HR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.08 to 4.21; P=0.028). The participants were allocated to the during-hours group and the after-hours group according to the change-point of 17:00. A total of 84 participants in the during-hours group were matched to 33 participants in the after-hours group. The median operative time was shorter in the after-hours group [309 (during-hours) vs. 239 (after-hours) minutes, P=0.014); the after-hours group had a greater incidence of respiratory complications (22.63% vs. 45.45%, P=0.023) and 90-day mortality (0 vs. 9.09%, P=0.021). The 5-year OS (P=0.042) and DFS (P=0.030) were significantly higher in the during-hours group.

Conclusions

Esophagectomies started during after-hours are correlated with poorer surgical outcomes. It is recommended to cancel selective esophagectomies due to commence after 17:00.

Hospital volume of esophageal cancer surgery in relation to outcomes from primary anti-reflux surgery

No previous study has sought to identify the effect of hospital volume of esophagectomy on anti-reflux surgery outcomes. The hypothesis under investigation was hospitals performing esophagectomies, particularly those of higher annual volume, have better outcomes from primary anti-reflux surgery. This population-based cohort study included adult individuals (≥18 years) in Sweden receiving primary anti-reflux surgery for a recorded gastro-esophageal reflux disease in 1997-2010, with follow-up until 2013 The 'exposure' was hospital volume of esophagectomy, with hospitals conducting esophagectomies divided into 0, >0-1, >1-3 and ≥ 4 based on annual volume, and hospitals not conducting esophagectomies were the reference category. The outcomes were 30-day re-intervention and surgical re-intervention during the entire follow-up after anti-reflux surgery. Multivariable Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), adjusted for age, sex, comorbidity, type of anti-reflux surgery, and year of anti-reflux surgery. Among 10,959 participants having undergone primary anti-reflux surgery, the 30-day re-intervention rate was 1.1%, and the rate of surgical re-intervention during the entire follow-up was 6.8%. Compared with hospitals not performing esophagectomy, hospitals in the highest volume group of esophagectomy showed no decreased risks of 30-day re-intervention (HR = 1.46, 95% CI 0.89-2.39) or surgical re-intervention (HR = 1.21, 95%CI 0.91-1.60) during follow-up. Similarly, the intermediate hospital volume categories of esophageal cancer surgery had no decreased risk of surgical re-interventions after anti-reflux surgery. This study provides no evidence for centralization of primary anti-reflux surgery to centers for esophageal cancer surgery.

Hospital Surgical Volume and 3-Year Mortality in Severe Prognosis Cancers: A Population-Based Study Using Cancer Registry Data

BACKGROUND

The impact of hospital surgical volume on long-term mortality has not been well assessed in Japan, especially for esophageal, biliary tract, and pancreatic cancer, although these three cancers need a high level of medical-technical skill. The purpose of this study was to examine associations between hospital surgical volume and 3-year mortality for these severe-prognosis cancer patients.

METHODS

Patients who received curative surgery for esophageal, biliary tract, and pancreatic cancers were analyzed using the Osaka Cancer Registry data from 2006-2013. Hospital surgical volume was categorized into tertiles (high/middle/low) according to the average annual number of curative surgeries per hospital for each cancer. Three-year survivals were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HRs) of 3-year mortality were calculated using Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Three-year survival was higher with increased hospital surgical volume for all three cancers, but the relative importance of volume varied across sites. After adjustment for all confounding factors, HRs in middle- and low-volume hospitals were 1.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-1.58) and 1.57 (95% CI, 1.33-1.86) for esophageal cancer; 1.39 (95% CI, 1.15-1.67) and 1.57 (95% CI, 1.30-1.89) for biliary tract cancer; 1.38 (95% CI, 1.16-1.63) and 1.90 (95% CI, 1.60-2.25) for pancreatic cancer, respectively. In particular for localized pancreatic cancer, the impact of hospital surgical volume on 3-year mortality was strong (HR 2.66; 95% CI, 1.61-4.38).

CONCLUSION

We suggest that patients who require curative surgery for esophageal, biliary tract, and pancreatic cancer may benefit from referral to high-volume hospitals.

Hospital characteristics associated with better 'quality of surgery' and survival following oesophagogastric cancer surgery in Queensland: a population-level study

BACKGROUND

The impact of hospital characteristics on the quality of surgery and survival following oesophagogastric cancer surgery has not been well established in Australia. We assessed the interaction between hospital volume, service capability and surgical outcomes, with the hypothesis that both the quality of surgery and survival are better following treatment in high-volume, high service capability hospitals.

METHODS

All patients undergoing oesophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer in Queensland, between 2001 and 2015, were included. Demographic, pathology and outcome data were collected. Hospitals were categorized into high (HV) (≥5 gastrectomies; ≥6 oesophagectomies) and low volume (LV). Hospital service capability was defined as high (HS) and low (LS), and then linked to hospital volume: HVHS, LVHS and LVLS. Higher quality surgery was defined using six perioperative parameters. Univariable comparisons of quality of surgery between hospital groups used chi-squared tests. The 5-year overall survival was compared using log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

For both gastrectomy and oesophagectomy, higher quality surgery occurred more frequently in HVHS hospitals (gastrectomy: HVHS = 44.2%, LVHS = 23.1%, LVLS = 29.1% (P < 0.01); oesophagectomy: HVHS = 34.5%, LVHS = 24.4%, LVLS = 21.7% (P = 0.01)). Following oesophagectomy, the 3- and 5-year overall survival was better following treatment in HVHS (P < 0.01). There was no difference between the groups following gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

In Queensland, the quality of surgery was higher in HVHS hospitals performing gastrectomy and oesophagectomy; however, the impact on cancer survival was only seen following oesophagectomy.

Comparative outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-weighted analysis

Robots are increasingly used in minimally invasive surgery. We evaluated the clinical benefits of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in comparison with the conventional open esophageal surgery. From 2012 to 2016, 371 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent an Ivor Lewis or McKeown procedure at our institution. Of these, 130 patients underwent laparoscopic gastric conduit formation followed by RAMIE, whereas 241 patients underwent conventional esophageal surgery, including laparotomy and open esophagectomy (OE). We compared the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of these patients using the propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting technique (IPTW). Among the early outcomes, the OE group showed a higher incidence of pneumonia (P = 0.035) and a higher requirement for vasopressors (P = 0.001). Regarding the long-term outcomes, all-cause mortality was significantly higher (P = 0.001) and disease-free survival was lower (P = 0.006) in the OE group. Wound-related problems also occurred more frequently in the OE group (P = 0.020) during the long-term follow-up. There was no statistical intergroup difference in the recurrence rates (P = 0.191). The Cox proportional-hazard analysis demonstrated that wound problems (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02-0.57; P = 0.017), pneumonia (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06-0.68; P = 0.019), and use of vasopressors (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.08-0.25; P = 0.001) were independent predictors of mortality. RAMIE could be a better surgical option for selected patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

The effect of time between procedures upon the proficiency gain period for minimally invasive esophagectomy

Background

Complex surgical procedures including minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) are commonly associated with a period of proficiency gain. We aim to study the effect of reduced procedural interval upon the number of cases required to gain proficiency and adverse patient outcomes during this period from MIE.

Methods

All adult patients undergoing MIE for esophageal cancer in England from 2002 to 2012 were identified from Hospital Episode Statistics database. Outcomes evaluated included conversion rate from MIE to open esophagectomy, 30-day re-intervention, 30-day and 90-day mortality. Regression models investigated relationships between procedural interval and the number of cases and clinical outcomes during proficiency gain period.

Results

The MIE dataset comprised of 1696 patents in total, with procedures carried out by 148 surgeons. Thresholds for procedural interval extracted from change-point modeling were found to be 60 days for conversion, 80 days for 30-day re-intervention, 80 days for 30-day mortality and 110 days for 90-day mortality. Procedural interval of MIEs did not influence the number of cases required for proficiency gain. However, reduced MIE procedural interval was associated with significant reductions in conversions (0.16 vs. 0.07; P < 0.001), re-interventions (0.15 vs. 0.09; P < 0.01), 30-day (0.12 vs. 0.05; P < 0.01) and 90-day (0.14 vs. 0.06; P < 0.01) mortality during the period of proficiency gain.

Conclusions

This national study has demonstrated that the introduction of MIE is associated with a period of proficiency gain and adverse patient outcomes. The absolute effect of this period of proficiency gain upon patient morbidity and mortality may be reduced by reduced procedural interval of MIE practice within specialized esophageal cancer centers.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-019-06692-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Safety and feasibility of minimally invasive surgical interventions for esophageal and gastric cancer in the acute setting: a nationwide cohort study

Background

Minimally invasive esophagectomy and gastrectomy are increasingly performed and might be superior to their open equivalents in an elective setting. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether minimally invasive approaches can be safely applied in the acute setting as well.

Methods

All patients who underwent an acute surgical intervention for primary esophageal or gastric cancer between 2011 and 2017 were identified from the nationwide database of the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA). Conversion rates, postoperative complications, re-interventions, postoperative mortality, hospital stay and oncological outcomes (radical resection rates and median lymph node yield) were evaluated.

Results

Between 2011 and 2017, surgery for esophagogastric cancer was performed in an acute setting in 2% (190/8861) in The Netherlands. A total of 14 acute resections for esophageal cancer were performed, which included 7 minimally invasive esophagectomies and 7 open esophagectomies. As these numbers were very low, no comparison between minimally invasive and open esophagectomies was made. A total of 122 acute resections for gastric cancer were performed, which included 39 minimally invasive gastrectomies and 83 open gastrectomies. Conversion occurred in 9 patients (23%). Minimally invasive gastrectomy was at least comparable to open gastrectomy regarding postoperative complications (36% versus 51%), median hospital stay (9 days [IQR: 7–16 days] versus 11 days [IQR: 7–17 days]), readmissions (8% versus 11%) and oncological outcomes (radical resection rate: 87% versus 66%, median lymph node yield: 21 [IQR: 15–32 days] versus 16 [IQR: 11–24 days]).

Conclusions

Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer is safe and feasible in the acute setting, with at least comparable postoperative clinical and short-term oncological outcomes compared to open surgery but a relatively high conversion rate.

Reconceptualising Rural Cancer Inequalities: Time for a New Research Agenda

Evidence has shown for over 20 years that patients residing in rural areas face poorer outcomes for cancer. The inequalities in survival that rural cancer patients face are observed throughout the developed world, yet this issue remains under-examined and unexplained. There is evidence to suggest that rural patients are more likely to be diagnosed as a result of an emergency presentation and that rural patients may take longer to seek help for symptoms. However, research to date has been predominantly epidemiological, providing us with an understanding of what is occurring in these populations, yet failing to explain why. In this paper we outline the problems inherent in current research approaches to rural cancer inequalities, namely how ‘cancer symptoms’ are conceived of and examined, and the propensity towards a reductionist approach to rural environments and populations, which fails to account for their heterogeneity. We advocate for a revised rural cancer inequalities research agenda, built upon in-depth, community-based examinations of rural patients’ experiences across the cancer pathway, which takes into account both the micro and macro factors which exert influence on these experiences, in order to develop meaningful interventions to improve cancer outcomes for rural populations.

Anastomotic Leak Does Not Impact on Long-Term Outcomes in Esophageal Cancer Patients

Background

Esophagectomy is a technically demanding procedure associated with high levels of morbidity. Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common complication with potentially major ramifications for patients. It has also been associated with poorer long-term overall survival (OS) and disease recurrence.

Objective

The aim of this study was to determine whether AL contributes to poor OS and recurrence-free survival (RFS) for patients with esophageal cancer.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing a two-stage, two-field transthoracic esophagectomy from a single high-volume unit between 1997 and 2016 were evaluated. Clinicopathologic characteristics, along with oncological and postoperative outcomes, were stratified by no AL versus non-severe leak (NSL) versus severe esophageal AL (SEAL). SEAL was defined as ALs associated with Clavien–Dindo grade III/IV complications.

Results

This study included 1063 patients, of whom 8% (87/1063) developed AL; 45% of those who developed AL were SEALs (39/87). SEAL was associated with a prolonged critical care stay (median 8 vs. 3 vs. 2 days; p < 0.001) and prolonged hospital stay (median 43 vs. 27 vs. 15 days; p < 0.001) compared with NSL or no AL. There were no significant differences in number of lymph nodes harvested and rates of R1 resection between groups. OS and RFS were not affected by either NSL or SEAL, and Cox multivariate regression showed NSL and SEAL were not independently associated with OS and RFS. Sensitivity analysis in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy followed by esophagectomy demonstrated similar findings.

Conclusion

These results demonstrate that AL leads to prolonged critical care and in-hospital length of stay; however, contrary to previous reports, our results do not compromise long-term outcomes and are unlikely to have a detrimental oncological impact.

The Effect of Postoperative Complications After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy on Long-term Survival: An International Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is a technically challenging procedure, associated with significant morbidity. The introduction of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has reduced postoperative morbidity.

OBJECTIVE

Although the short-term effect on complications is increasingly being recognized, the impact on long-term survival remains unclear. This study aims to investigate the association between postoperative complications following MIE and long-term survival.

METHODS

Data were collected from the EsoBenchmark Collaborative composed by 13 high-volume, expert centers routinely performing MIE. Patients operated between June 1, 2011 and May 31, 2016 were included. Complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo (CD) classification. To correct for short-term effects of postoperative complications on mortality, patients who died within 90 days postoperative were excluded. Primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival.

RESULTS

A total of 915 patients were included with a mean follow-up time of 30.8 months (standard deviation 17.9). Complications occurred in 542 patients (59.2%) of which 50.2% had a CD grade ≥III complication [ie, (re)intervention, organ dysfunction, or death]. The incidence of anastomotic leakage (AL) was 135 of 915 patients (14.8%) of which 84 patients were classified as a CD grade ≥III. Multivariable analysis showed a significantly deteriorated long-term survival in all patients with AL [hazard ratio (HR) 1.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.24]. This inverse relation was most distinct when AL was scored as a CD grade ≥III (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.30-2.58). For all other complications, no significant association with long-term survival was found.

CONCLUSION

The occurrence and severity of AL, but not overall complications, after MIE negatively affect long-term survival of esophageal cancer patients.

Impact of hospital nephrectomy volume on intermediate- to long-term survival in renal cell carcinoma

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the relationship between hospital volume and intermediate- and long-term patient survival for patients undergoing nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Adult patients with RCC treated with nephrectomy between 2000 and 2010 were identified from the English Hospital Episode Statistics database and National Cancer Data Repository. Patients with nodal or metastatic disease were excluded. Hospitals were categorised into low- (LV; <20 cases/year), medium- (20-39 cases/year) and high-volume (HV; ≥40 cases/year), based on annual cases of RCC nephrectomy. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause mortality by hospital volume, adjusting for patient, tumour and surgical characteristics. We assessed conditional survival over three follow-up periods: short (30 days to 1 year), intermediate (1-3 years) and long (3-5 years). We additionally explored whether associations between volume and outcomes varied by tumour stage.

RESULTS

A total of 12 912 patients were included. Patients in HV hospitals had a 34% reduction in mortality risks up to 1 year compared to those in LV hospitals (HR 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.53-0.83; P < 0.01). Assuming causality, treatment in HV hospitals was associated with one fewer death in every 71 patients treated. Benefit of nephrectomy centralisation did not change with higher T stage (P = 0.17). No significant association between hospital volume and survival was observed beyond the first year.

CONCLUSIONS

Nephrectomy for RCC in HV hospitals was associated with improved survival for up to 1 year after treatment. Our results contribute new insights regarding the value of nephrectomy centralisation.