Risk model for mortality associated with esophagectomy via a thoracic approach based on data from the Japanese National Clinical Database on malignant esophageal tumors

PURPOSE

Postoperative complications after esophagectomy can be severe or fatal and impact the patient's postoperative quality of life and long-term outcomes. The aim of the present study was to develop the best possible model for predicting mortality and complications based on the Japanese Nationwide Clinical Database (NCD).

METHODS

Data registered in the NCD, on 32,779 patients who underwent esophagectomy via a thoracic approach for malignant esophageal tumor between January, 2012 and December, 2017, were used to create a risk model.

RESULTS

The 30-day mortality rate after esophagectomy was 1.0%, and the operative mortality rate was 2.3%. Postoperative complications included pneumonia (13.8%), anastomotic leakage (13.2%), recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (11.1%), atelectasis (4.9%), and chylothorax (2.5%). Postoperative artificial respiration for over 48 h was required by 7.8% of the patients. Unplanned intubation within 30 postoperative days was performed in 6.2% of the patients. C-indices evaluated using the test data were 0.694 for 30-day mortality and 0.712 for operative mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a good risk model for predicting 30-day mortality and operative mortality after esophagectomy based on the NCD. This risk model will be useful for the preoperative prediction of 30-day mortality and operative mortality, obtaining informed consent, and deciding on the optimal surgical procedure for patients with preoperative risks for mortality.

Short-term outcome for high-risk patients after esophagectomy

Transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) for esophageal cancer facilitates mediastinal dissection; however, it has a significant impact on cardiopulmonary status. High-risk patients may therefore be better candidates for transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) in order to prevent serious complications. This study addressed short-term outcome following TTE and THE in patients that are considered to have a higher risk of surgery-related morbidity. This population-based study included patients who underwent a curative esophagectomy between 2011 and 2018, registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit. The Charlson comorbidity index was used to assign patients to a low-risk (score ≤ 1) and high-risk group (score ≥ 2). Propensity score matching was applied to produce comparable groups between high-risk patients receiving TTE and THE. Primary endpoint was mortality (in-hospital/30-day mortality), secondary endpoints included morbidity and oncological outcomes. Additionally, a matched subgroup analysis was performed, including only cervical reconstructions. Of 5,438 patients, 945 and 431 high-risk patients underwent TTE and THE, respectively. After propensity score matching, mortality (6.3 vs 3.3%, P = 0.050), overall morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications, pulmonary complications, cardiac complications and re-interventions were significantly more observed after TTE compared to THE. A significantly higher mortality after TTE with a cervical reconstruction was found compared to THE (7.0 vs. 2.2%, P = 0.020). Patients with a high Charlson comorbidity index predispose for a complicated postoperative course after esophagectomy, this was more outspoken after TTE compared to THE. In daily practice, these outcomes should be balanced with the lower lymph node yield, but comparable positive node count and radicality after THE.

Peri-operative approach to esophagectomy: a narrative review from the anesthesiological standpoint

Objective

This review summarizes the peri-operative anesthesiological approaches to esophagectomy considering the best up-to-date, evidence-based medicine, discussed from the anesthesiologist’s standpoint.

Background

Esophagectomy is the only curative therapy for esophageal cancer. Despite the many advancements made in the surgical treatment of this tumour, esophagectomy still carries a morbidity rate reaching 60%. Patients undergoing esophagectomy should be referred to high volume centres where they can receive a multidisciplinary approach to treatment, associated with better outcomes. The anesthesiologist is the key figure who should guide the peri-operative phase, from diagnosis through to post-surgery rehabilitation. We performed an updated narrative review devoted to the study of anesthesia management for esophagectomy in cancer patients.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Scopus and Google Scholar databases from inception to May 2021. We used the following terms: “esophagectomy”, “esophagectomy AND pre-operative evaluation”, “esophagectomy AND protective lung ventilation”, “esophagectomy AND hemodynamic monitoring” and “esophagectomy AND analgesia”. We considered only articles with abstract written in English and available to the reader. We excluded single case-reports.

Conclusions

Pre-operative anesthesiological evaluation is mandatory in order to stratify and optimize any medical condition. During surgery, protective ventilation and judicious fluid management are the cornerstones of intraoperative “protective anesthesia”. Post-operative care should be provided by an intensive care unit or high-dependency unit depending on the patient’s condition, the type of surgery endured and the availability of local resources. The provision of adequate post-operative analgesia favours early mobilization and rapid recovery. Anesthesiologist has an important role during the peri-operative care for esophagectomy. However, there are still some topics that need to be further studied to improve the outcome of these patients.

The Era of the Large Databases: Outcomes After Gastroesophageal Surgery According to NSQIP, NIS, and NCDB Databases. Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

The term big data refers to databases that include large amounts of information used in various areas of knowledge. Currently, there are large databases that allow the evaluation of postoperative evolution, such as the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP), the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) National Inpatient Sample (NIS), and the National Cancer Database (NCDB). The aim of this review was to evaluate the clinical impact of information obtained from these registries regarding gastroesophageal surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review using the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines was performed. The research was carried out using the PubMed database identifying 251 articles. All outcomes related to gastroesophageal surgery were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 34 articles published between January 2007 and July 2017 were included, for a total of 345 697 patients. Studies were analyzed and divided according to the type of surgery and main theme in (1) esophageal surgery and (2) gastric surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The information provided by these databases is an effective way to obtain levels of evidence not obtainable by conventional methods. Furthermore, this information is useful for the external validation of previous studies, to establish benchmarks that allow comparisons between centers and have a positive impact on the quality of care.

Robotic surgery for esophageal cancer: Merits and demerits

Since the introduction of robotic systems in esophageal surgery in 2000, the number of robotic esophagectomies has been gradually increasing worldwide, although robot‐assisted surgery is not yet regarded as standard treatment for esophageal cancer, because of its high cost and the paucity of high‐level evidence. In 2016, more than 1800 cases were operated with robot assistance. Early results with small series demonstrated feasibility and safety in both robotic transhiatal (THE) and transthoracic esophagectomies (TTE). Some studies report that the learning curve is approximately 20 cases. Following the initial series, operative results of robotic TTE have shown a tendency to improve, and oncological long‐term results are reported to be effective and acceptable: R0 resection approaches 95%, and locoregional recurrence is rare. Several recent studies have demonstrated advantages of robotic esophagectomy in lymphadenectomy compared with the thoracoscopic approach. Such technical innovations as three‐dimensional view, articulated instruments with seven degrees of movement, tremor filter etc. have the potential to outperform any conventional procedures. With the aim of preventing postoperative pulmonary complications without diminishing lymphadenectomy performance, a nontransthoracic radical esophagectomy procedure combining a video‐assisted cervical approach for the upper mediastinum and a robot‐assisted transhiatal approach for the middle and lower mediastinum, transmediastinal esophagectomy, was developed; its short‐term outcomes are promising.

Thus, the merits or demerits of robotic surgery in this field remain quite difficult to assess. However, in the near future, the merits will definitely outweigh the demerits because the esophagus is an ideal organ for a robotic approach.

Surgical Apgar score (SAS) predicts perioperative morbidity, mortality, and length of stay in patients undergoing esophagectomy at a high-volume center

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy carries considerable morbidity. Many studies have evaluated factors to predict patients at risk. This study aimed to determine whether the surgical Apgar score (SAS) predicts complications and length of stay (LOS) for patients undergoing esophagectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

We evaluated 212 patients undergoing esophagectomy. Postoperative complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo scale and the SAS was determined. Association of SAS with incidence of complications was evaluated using the Cochran-Armitage trend test between grouped SAS scores (0-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8, 9-10) and each of the outcomes. Correlation of SAS with LOS was evaluated using competing risks proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

The average patient age was 63.5 years (range 31-86), and the average blood loss was 284 mL (range 50-4000). The median LOS was 10 days. There was a significant association between SAS and grade 2 or higher (P = 0.0002) and grade 3 or higher (P < 0.0001) complications. The perioperative mortality rate was 5.2% (n = 11) with lower SAS being associated with greater mortality. LOS was also associated with SAS (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate that SAS is a significant predictor of complications and LOS for patients undergoing esophagectomy. SAS should be used to identify lower risk patients to prioritize use of critical care beds and hospital resources.

Transthoracically or transabdominally: how to approach adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and cardia. A meta-analysis

Esophageal carcinoma is the eighth most frequent cancer worldwide and the sixth cancer-related cause of death. Here we propose a new meta-analysis to identify the most appropriate approach for resectable adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and cardia (Siewert 1-2). A systematic literature search was performed independently by 2 of the manuscript's authors using PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and the Cochrane Library Central. The following criteria were set for inclusion in this meta-analysis: 1) studies comparing transthoracic esophagectomy and transhiatal esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus; 2) studies reporting at least 1 perioperative outcome; and 3) if more than 1 study was reported by the same institute, only the most recent or the highest quality study was included. A total of 6 articles dated between 1996 and 2012 fulfilled the selection criteria and were therefore included in this meta-analysis; this pool of articles consisted of 2 prospective and 4 retrospective studies. A statistically significant difference favoring the transthoracic procedure was noted regarding the number of retrieved lymph nodes, 5-year disease-free survival rate and 5-year overall survival rate (p = 0.001, p = 0.05 and p = 0.03, respectively). In conclusion, transthoracic esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and esophagogastric junction (Siewert 1-2) appears to be superior to the transhiatal approach in terms of oncological outcomes.

Drain amylase aids detection of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak following esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. As hospital length of stay decreases, the timely diagnosis of leak becomes more important. We evaluated CT esophagram, white blood count (WBC), and drain amylase levels in the early detection of anastomotic leak.

METHODS

The diagnostic performance of CT esophagram, drain amylase >800 IU/L, and WBC >12,000/µL within the first 10 days after surgery in predicting leak at any time after esophagectomy was calculated.

RESULTS

Anastomotic leak occurred in 13 patients (13%). CT esophagram performed within 10 days of surgery diagnosed six of these leaks with a sensitivity of 0.54. Elevation in drain amylase level within 10 days of surgery diagnosed anastomotic leak with a sensitivity of 0.38. When the CT esophagram and drain amylase were combined, the sensitivity rose to 0.69 with a specificity of 0.98. WBC elevation had a sensitivity of 0.92, with a specificity of 0.34. Among 30 patients with normal drain amylase and a normal WBC, one developed an anastomotic leak.

CONCLUSIONS

Drain amylase adds to the sensitivity of CT esophagram in the early detection of anastomotic leak. Selected patients with normal drain amylase levels and normal WBC may be able to safely forgo CT esophagram.

Risk factors and consequences of anastomotic leakage after Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy†

OBJECTIVES

Oesophageal carcinoma (EC) remains an aggressive disease. Despite extensive changes in therapeutic modalities, surgical resection remains the first choice therapy for curable oesophageal cancer patients. Anastomotic sites are prone to serious complications such as leakage, fistula, bleeding and stricture. Leakage of the anastomosis (AL) remains one of the main causes of postoperative morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to identify predictors associated with postoperative leakage after Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy and its consequences in a single centre.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 412 Ivor Lewis oesophageal resections in a single institute between 2005 and 2014. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression have been used to identify predictors of AL and its impact on postoperative outcome and overall survival. Kaplan-Meier curve was used to analyse overall survival and log-rank analysis to determine odds ratio.

RESULTS

A total of 412 patients were evaluated. Mean age was 62 ± 11 years (77% male). Overall leak rate was 2.9%. In-hospital or 30-day mortality was 4.4%. Mean intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 1 day and mean hospital stay was 19 days. A history of renal failure, diabetes, higher American Society of Anaesthesiologists score and current cigarette and corticosteroid use were identified as predictors of AL on univariable analysis. Multivariable analysis identified active smoking [P = 0.05, odds ratio (OR) 4.34, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.98-19.28] and active corticosteroid use (P < 0.001, OR 15.8, 95% CI: 3.25-76.7) as independent significant predictors. A history of diabetes tended to be associated with a higher leakage rate but failed to reach statistical significance. AL was associated with a longer ICU and hospital stay and a significantly higher mortality (42% in the AL group vs 3% in the control group, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Anastomotic leakage after oesophagectomy is a major cause of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Identifying risk factors preoperatively can contribute to the prevention of postoperative complications.

Transthoracic versus transhiatal resection for esophageal adenocarcinoma of the lower esophagus: A value-based comparison

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to compare clinical outcomes, costs, and resource use based on operative approach, transthoracic (TT) or transhiatal (TH), for resection of esophageal cancer.

METHODS

This cohort analysis utilized the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results--Medicare linked data from 2002 to 2009. Only adenocarcinomas of the lower esophagus were examined to minimize confounding. Medicare data was used to determine episode of care costs and resource use. Propensity score matching was used to control for identified confounders. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox-proportional hazard modeling were used to compare long-term survival.

RESULTS

537 TT and 405 TH resections were identified. TT and TH esophagectomy had similar complication rates (46.7% vs. 50.8%), operative mortality (7.9% vs 7.1%), and 90 days readmission rates (30.5% vs. 32.5%). However, TH was associated with shorter length of stay (11.5 vs. 13.0 days, P = 0.006) and nearly $1,000 lower cost of initial hospitalization (P = 0.03). No difference in 5-year survival was identified (33.5% vs. 36%, P = 0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

TH esophagectomy was associated with lower costs and shorter length of stay in an elderly Medicare population, with similar clinical outcomes to TT. The TH approach to esophagectomy for distal esophageal adenocarcinoma may, therefore, provide greater value (quality/cost).

Minimally invasive esophagectomy provides significant survival advantage compared with open or hybrid esophagectomy for patients with cancers of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly being used to treat patients with cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. We previously reported that oncologic efficacy may be improved with MIE compared with open or hybrid esophagectomy (OHE). We compared survival of patients undergoing MIE and OHE.

STUDY DESIGN

Our contemporary series of patients who underwent MIE (2008 to 2013) was compared with a cohort undergoing OHE (3-hole [n = 39], Ivor Lewis [n = 16], hybrid [n = 13], 2000 to 2013). Summary statistics were calculated by operation type; Kaplan-Meier methods were used to compare survival. Cox regression was used to assess the impact of operation type (MIE vs OHE) on mortality, adjusting for age, sex, total lymph nodes, lymph node ratio (LNR), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), and stage.

RESULTS

The MIE (n = 104) and OHE (n = 68) groups were similar with respect to age and sex. The MIE group tended to have higher BMI, earlier stage disease, and was less likely to receive CRT. The MIE group experienced lower operative mortality (3.9% vs 8.8%, p = 0.35) and significantly fewer major complications. Five-year survival between groups was significantly different (MIE, 64%, OHE, 35%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients undergoing OHE had a significantly worse survival compared with MIE independent of age, LNR, CRT, and pathologic stage (hazard ratio 2.00, p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports MIE for EC as a superior procedure with respect to overall survival, perioperative mortality, and severity of postoperative complications. Several biases may have affected these results: earlier stage in the MIE group and disparity in timing of the procedures. These results will need to be confirmed in future prospective studies with longer follow-up.