Hospital esophagectomy volume and postoperative length of stay: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Incidence and treatment of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy in German acute care hospitals: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a major concern following esophagectomy due to the associated morbidity and mortality. The impact of hospital volume on postoperative outcomes after esophagectomy has previously been reported. The aim of this study was to analyze the current trends in postoperative anastomotic leakage and associated failure-to-rescue after esophagectomy in relation to hospital volume in German acute care hospitals using real-world data from the German Diagnosis-Related Groups (G-DRG) database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective secondary data analysis of the G-DRG database was performed for all in-hospital cases of patients undergoing esophagectomy from 2013 to 2021. AL and in-house mortality rates were assessed in relation to hospital case volume and endoscopic treatment modalities.

RESULTS

The study included 32 335 cases. The mean reported AL rate was 17.1% with a mean failure-to-rescue rate of 18.9%. AL rates did not differ between hospitals with an annual case-volume ≤ 25 procedures/year vs. >25 procedures/year (16.8% vs. 17.6%, OR 1.06, P = 0.07). However, in high-volume centers (> 25 procedures/year), in-hospital mortality for cases with AL (failure-to-rescue) was lower compared to medium-volume (10-25 cases/year) and low-volume (1-9 cases/year) centers (14.2% vs. 21.5% vs. 25.1%). The use of endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) increased over time, reaching 58.1% of AL cases in 2021 compared to 14.2% in 2013, while the use of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) decreased from 37.0% in 2013 to 9.3% in 2021.

CONCLUSIONS

AL rates after esophagectomy remain high. In-house mortality is significantly lower in high-volume hospitals highlighting the importance to consider improvements in centralization of procedures. Further efforts are needed to reduce AL rates and improve outcomes after esophagectomy.

Failure to Rescue After Resection of Perhilar Cholangiocarcinoma in an International Multicenter Cohort

BACKGROUND

Failure to rescue (FTR) is defined as the inability to prevent death after the development of a complication. FTR is a parameter in evaluating multidisciplinary postoperative complication management. The aim of this study was to evaluate FTR rates after major liver resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) and analyze factors associated with FTR.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Patients who underwent major liver resection for pCCA at 27 centers were included. FTR was defined as the presence of a Dindo grade III or higher complication followed by death within 90 days after surgery. Liver failure ISGLS grade B/C were scored. Multivariable logistic analysis was performed to identify predictors of FTR and reported using odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

In the 2186 included patients, major morbidity rate was 49%, 90-day mortality rate 13%, and FTR occurred in 24% of patients with a grade III or higher complication. Across centers, major complication rate varied from 19 to 87%, 90-day mortality rate from 5 to 33%, and FTR ranged from 11 to 50% across hospitals. Age [1.04 (1.02-1.05) years], ASA 3 or 4 [1.40 (1.01-1.95)], jaundice at presentation [1.79 (1.16-2.76)], right-sided resection [1.45 (1.06-1.98)], and annual hospital volume < 6 [1.44 (1.07-1.94)] were positively associated with FTR. When liver failure is included, the odds ratio for FTR is 9.58 (6.76-13.68).

CONCLUSION

FTR occurred in 24% of patients after resection for pCCA. Liver failure was associated with a nine-fold increase of FTR and hospital volume below six was also associated with an increased risk of FTR.

Mortality and failure-to-rescue after esophagectomy in the procedure-targeted National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry

BACKGROUND

The association between procedural volume and esophagectomy outcomes has been established, but the relationship between higher levels of care and esophagectomy outcomes has not been explored. This study aims to investigate whether hospital participation in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) esophagectomy-targeted registry is associated with superior outcomes.

METHODS

The 2016-2020 ACS NSQIP standard and esophagectomy-targeted registries were queried. Esophagectomy outcomes were analyzed overall and stratified by esophagectomy type (Ivor Lewis vs. transhiatal vs. 3-field McKeown).

RESULTS

A total of 2181 and 5449 esophagectomy cases were identified in the standard and targeted databases (68% Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). The median age was 65 years and 80% were male. Preoperative characteristics were largely comparable. On univariate analysis, targeted hospitals were associated with lower mortality (2% vs. 4%, p < 0.01) and failure-to-rescue rates (11% vs. 17%, p < 0.01), higher likelihood of an optimal outcome (62% vs. 58%, p = 0.01), and shorter hospital stay (median 9 vs. 10 days, p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, Ivor Lewis esophagectomy at targeted centers was associated with reduced odds of mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.57 and 95% confidence intervals 0.35-0.90] and failure-to-rescue [OR 0.54 (0.33-0.90)] with no difference in serious morbidity or optimal outcome. There was no statistically significant difference in odds of mortality or failure to rescue in targeted versus standard centers when performing transhiatal or McKeown esophagectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophagectomy performed at hospitals participating in the targeted ACS NSQIP is associated with roughly half the risk of mortality compared to the standard registry. The factors underlying this relationship may be valuable in quality improvement.

Dynamic volume-outcome association for esophagectomies: Do current volume thresholds still apply?

BACKGROUND

It is unknown if the current minimum case volume recommendation of 20 cases per year per hospital is applicable to contemporary practice.

METHODS

Patients undergoing esophageal resection between 2005 and 2015 were identified in the National Cancer Database. High, medium, and low-volume hospital strata were defined by quartiles. Adjusted odds ratios and adjusted 30-day mortality between low-, medium-, and high-volume hospitals were calculated using logistic regression analyses and trended over time.

RESULTS

Only 1.1% of hospitals had ≥20 annual cases. The unadjusted 30-day mortality for esophagectomy was 3.8% overall. Unadjusted and adjusted 30-day mortality trended down for all three strata between 2005 and 2015, with disproportionate decreases for low-volume and medium-volume versus high-volume hospitals. By 2015, adjusted 30-day mortality was similar in medium- and high-volume hospitals (odds ratio 1.35, 95% confidence interval 0.96-1.91). For hospitals with 20 or more annual cases the adjusted 30-day mortality was 2.7% overall. To achieve this same 30-day mortality the minimum volume threshold had lowered to 7 annual cases by 2015.

CONCLUSION

Only 1.1% of hospitals meet current volume recommendations for esophagectomy. Differential improvements in postoperative mortality at low- and medium- versus high-volume hospitals have led to 7 cases in 2015 achieving the same adjusted 30-day mortality as 20 cases in the overall cohort. Lowering volume thresholds for esophagectomy in contemporary practice would potentially increase the proportion of hospitals able to meet volume standards and increase access to quality care without sacrificing quality.

Proposal of a Network System to Solve the Problem of Small Volume in Liver Transplantation; Catholic Medical Center Network

INTRODUCTION

Liver transplantation (LT) is a complex and demanding procedure associated with significant perioperative challenges and risks. Concerns have arisen regarding LT outcomes in low-volume centers. We implemented an integrated training and surgical team network to address these concerns within the Catholic Medical Center (CMC) network. This study presents a comprehensive review of our 9-year LT experience within the CMC medical network.

METHOD

A retrospective study of LT procedures conducted between January 2013 and August 2021 in 6 CMC-affiliated hospitals was performed. One center was categorized as a high-volume center, conducting over 60 cases annually, and the remaining 5 were considered small-volume centers. The primary endpoints assessed were 1-year and 5-year survival rates.

RESULTS

A total of 793 LTs were performed during the study period. The high-volume center performed 411 living donor LT (LDLT) cases and 127 deceased donor LT (DDLT) cases. Also, 146 LDLT cases and 109 DDLT cases were performed in 5 small-volume centers. One-year and 5-year patient survival for LDLT recipients was 88.3% and 78.8% in the high-volume center and 85.6% and 80.6% in the low-volume center. Five-year survival was not significantly different in small-volume centers (P = .903). For DDLT recipients, 1-year and 5-year patient survival was 80.3% and 70.6% in the high-volume center and 76.1% and 67.6% in the low-volume center. In DDLT cases, 5-year survival was not significantly different in small-volume centers (P = .445).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, comparable outcomes for liver transplantation can be obtained in a small-volume center with a high level of integrated training systems and networks.

Reducing Conduit Ischemia and Anastomotic Leaks in Transhiatal Esophagectomy: Six Principles

BACKGROUND

Transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) is an accepted approach for distal esophageal (DE) and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers. Its reported weaknesses are limited loco-regional resection and high anastomotic leak rates. We have used laparoscopic assistance to perform a THE (LapTHE) as our preferred method of resection for GEJ and DE cancers for over 20 years. Our unique approach and experience may provide technical insights and perhaps superior outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed all patients who underwent LapTHE for DE and GEJ malignancy over 10 years (2011-2020). We included 6 principles in our approach: (1) minimize dissection trauma using laparoscopy; (2) routine Kocher maneuver; (3) division of lesser sac adhesions exposing the entire gastroepiploic arcade; (4) gaining excess conduit mobility, allowing resection of proximal stomach, and performing the anastomosis with a well perfused stomach; (5) stapled side-to-side anastomosis; and (6) routine feeding jejunostomy and early oral diet.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-seven patients were included in the analysis. The median number of lymph nodes procured was 19 (range 5-49). Negative margins were achieved in all cases (95% confidence interval [CI] 98-100%). Median hospital stay was 7 days. Overall major complication rate was 24% (17-32%), 90-day mortality was 2.0% (0.4-5.8%), and reoperation was 5.4% (2.4-10%). Three patients (2.0%, 0.4-5.8%) developed anastomotic leaks. Median follow-up was 901 days (range 52-5240). Nine patients (6.1%, 2.8-11%) developed anastomotic strictures.

CONCLUSIONS

Routine use of LapTHE for DE and GEJ cancers and inclusion of these six operative principles allow for a low rate of anastomotic complications relative to national benchmarks.

Novel Mediastinoscope-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery is an expanding field of surgery that has replaced many open surgical techniques. Surgery remains a cornerstone in the treatment of esophageal cancer, yet it is still associated with significant morbidity and technical difficulties. Mediastinoscope-assisted esophagectomy is a promising technique that aims to decrease the surgical burden and enhance recovery.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases were searched for publications on mediastinoscope-assisted esophagectomies for esophageal cancer. The primary endpoint was a postoperative anastomotic leak, while secondary endpoints were assessment of harvested lymph nodes (LNs), blood loss, chyle leak, hospital length of stay (LOS), operative (OR) time, pneumonia, wound infection, mortality, and microscopic positive margin (R1). The pooled event rate (PER) and pooled mean were calculated for binary and continuous outcomes respectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-six out of the 2274 searched studies were included. The pooled event rate (PER) for anastomotic leak was 0.145 (0.1144; 0.1828). The PERs for chyle leak, recurrent laryngeal nerve injury/hoarseness, postoperative pneumonia, wound infection, early mortality, postoperative morbidity, and microscopically positive (R1) resection margins were 0.027, 0.185, 0.09, 0.083, 0.020, 0.378, and 0.037 respectively. The pooled means for blood loss, hospital stay, operative time, number of total harvested LNs, and number of harvested thoracic LNs were 159.209, 15.187, 311.116, 23.379, and 15.458 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Mediastinoscopic esophagectomy is a promising minimally invasive technique, avoiding thoracotomy, patient repositioning, and lung manipulation; thus allowing for shorter surgery, decreased blood loss, and decreased postoperative morbidity. It can also be reliable in terms of oncological safety and LN dissection.

Multi-institutional Care in Clinical Stage II and III Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Management of clinical stage II or III esophageal cancer requires multidisciplinary care. Multi-institutional care has been associated with worse survival in other malignant diseases. This study aimed to determine the impact of multi-institutional care on survival in patients with stage II or III esophageal cancer.

METHODS

The 2004 to 2016 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage II or III esophageal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiation therapy followed by surgical resection. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: multi-institutional or single-institution care. Survival between groups was compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with multi-institutional care.

RESULTS

Overall, 11 399 patients met study criteria: 6569 (57.6%) received multi-institutional care and 4,830 (42.4%) received care at a single institution. In a multivariable analysis, factors associated with multi-institutional care were later year of diagnosis, greater distance from treating facility, residence in an urban or rural setting (vs metro), and residence in states without Medicaid expansion. Care at a single institution was associated with Black race, lack of insurance, and treatment at higher-volume or academic centers. Despite these differences, patients who received multi-institutional care had survival comparable to that in patients who received care at a single institution (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92-1.03; P = .30).

CONCLUSIONS

In this National Cancer Database analysis, multi-institutional care was not associated with inferior overall survival. As complex cancer care becomes more regionalized, patients may consider receiving part of their cancer care closer to home, whereas traveling to surgical centers of excellence should be encouraged.

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.

Short-Term Outcomes of Epidural Analgesia in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: Nationwide Inpatient Data Study in Japan

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that epidural analgesia (EDA) is associated with a decreased risk of pneumonia and anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy, and several guidelines strongly recommend EDA use after esophagectomy. However, the benefit of EDA use in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the short-term outcomes between patients with and without EDA undergoing MIE for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent oncologic MIE (April 2014-March 2019) were extracted from a Japanese nationwide inpatient database. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), propensity score matching, and instrumental variable analyses were performed to investigate the associations between EDA use and short-term outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

Among 12,688 eligible patients, EDA was used in 9954 (78.5%) patients. In-hospital mortality, respiratory complications, and anastomotic leakage occurred in 230 (1.8%), 2139 (16.9%), and 1557 (12.3%) patients, respectively. In stabilized IPTW, EDA use was significantly associated with decreased in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.46 [95% confidence interval 0.34-0.61]), respiratory complications (OR 0.74 [0.66-0.84]), and anastomotic leakage (OR 0.77 [0.67-0.88]). EDA use was also associated with decreased prolonged mechanical ventilation, unplanned intubation, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use, acetaminophen use, postoperative length of stay, and total hospitalization costs and increased vasopressor use. One-to-three propensity score matching and instrumental variable analyses demonstrated equivalent results.

CONCLUSIONS

EDA use in oncologic MIE was associated with low in-hospital mortality as well as decreased respiratory complications, and anastomotic leakage, suggesting the potential advantage of EDA use in MIE.

McKeown esophagectomy: robot-assisted versus conventional minimally invasive technique-systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This meta-analysis assesses the surgical outcomes between robot-assisted minimally-invasive McKeown esophagectomy and conventional one.

METHOD

This meta-analysis searched the Web of Science, PUBMED, and EMBASE from the database's inception to January 2022. Altogether, 1073 records were identified in the literature search. Studies that evaluated the outcomes between robot-assisted minimally-invasive McKeown esophagectomy and conventional one among postoperative patients with oesophageal neoplasms were included. The assessed outcomes involved complications and clinical outcomes. In addition, heterogeneity was analyzed, and evidence quality was evaluated.

RESULT

Evidence indicated that RAMIE (minimally-invasive esophagectomy assisted with robot) decreased incidences of lung complications and hospital stay as well as increased harvested lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

There was currently little evidence from randomized studies depicting that robot surgery manifested a clear overall advantage, but there was growing evidence regarding the clinical benefits of robot-assisted minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy over conventional one.

Is there a relationship between two different anesthetic methods and postoperative length of stay during radical resection of malignant esophageal tumors in China?: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Data providing a relationship between the anesthetic method and postoperative length of stay (PLOS) is limited. We aimed to investigate whether general anesthesia alone or combined with epidural anesthesia might affect perioperative risk factors and PLOS for patients undergoing radical resection of malignant esophageal tumors.

METHODS

The study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 680 patients who underwent a radical esophageal malignant tumor resection in a Chinese hospital from January 01, 2010, to December 31, 2020. The primary outcome measure was PLOS, and the secondary outcome was perioperative risk-related parameters that affect PLOS. The independent variable was the type of anesthesia: general anesthesia (GA) or combined epidural-general anesthesia (E-GA). The dependent variable was PLOS. We conducted univariate and multivariate logistic regression and propensity score matching to compare the relationships of GA and E-GA with PLOS and identify the perioperative risk factors for PLOS. In this cohort study, the confounders included sociodemographic data, preoperative chemotherapy, coexisting diseases, laboratory parameters, intraoperative variables, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

In all patients, the average PLOS was 19.85 ± 12.60 days. There was no significant difference in PLOS between the GA group and the E-GA group either before or after propensity score matching (20.01 days ± 14.90 days vs. 19.79 days ± 11.57 days, P = 0.094, 18.09 ± 9.71 days vs. 19.39 ± 10.75 days, P = 0.145). The significant risk factors for increased PLOS were lung infection (β = 3.35, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.54-5.52), anastomotic leakage (β = 25.73, 95% CI: 22.11-29.34), and surgical site infection (β = 9.39, 95% CI: 4.10-14.68) by multivariate regression analysis. Subgroup analysis revealed a stronger association between PLOS and vasoactive drug use, blood transfusions, and open esophagectomy. The results remained essentially the same (stable and reliable) after subgroup analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there is no significant association between the type of anesthesia(GA or E-GA) and PLOS for patients undergoing radical esophageal malignant tumor resection, an association between PLOS and lung infection, anastomotic leakage, and surgical site infection was determined by multivariate regression analysis. A larger sample future study design may verify our results.

Association of Operative Volume and Odds of Surgical Complication for Patients Undergoing Repair of Pectus Excavatum at Children's Hospitals

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether procedure-specific provider volume is associated with outcomes for patients undergoing repair of pectus excavatum at tertiary care children's hospitals.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a cohort study of patients undergoing repair of pectus excavatum between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2019, at children's hospitals using the Pediatric Health Information System database. The main exposures were the pectus excavatum repair volume quartile of the patient's hospital and the pectus excavatum repair volume category of their surgeon. Our primary outcome was surgical complication, identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes from Pediatric Health Information System. Secondary outcomes included high-cost admission and extended length of stay.

RESULTS

In total, 7183 patients with an average age of 15.2 years (SD 2.0), 83% male, 74% non-Hispanic White, 68% no comorbidities, 72% private insurance, and 82% from metro areas were analyzed. Compared with the lowest-volume (≤10 cases/year) quartile of hospitals, patients undergoing repair of pectus excavatum at hospitals in the second (>10-18 cases/year), third (>18-26 cases/year), and fourth (>26 cases/year) volume quartiles had decreased odds of complication of OR 0.52 (CI 0.34-0.82), 0.51 (CI 0.33-0.78), and 0.41 (CI 0.27-0.62), respectively. Patients with pectus excavatum who underwent repair by surgeons in the second (>1-5 cases/year), third (>5-10 cases/year), and fourth (>10 cases/year) volume categories had decreased odds of complication of OR 0.91 (CI 0.68-1.20), OR 0.73 (CI 0.51-1.04), and OR 0.55 (CI 0.39-0.76), respectively, compared with the lowest-volume (≤1 case/year) category of surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Procedure-specific case volume is an important factor when considering providers for elective surgery, even among specialized centers providing comprehensive patient care.

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.

Technique of robotic esophagectomy

Robotic surgery continues to grow in thoracic surgery, and currently plays an evolving role in esophagectomy. Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has continued to expand, with many institutions adapting the technique. As the overall experience continues to grow, new data is emerging in its support. We present our approach to this operation.

Modeling the impact of delaying surgery for early esophageal cancer in the era of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Surgical society guidelines have recommended changing the treatment strategy for early esophageal cancer during the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. Delaying resection can allow for interim disease progression, but the impact of this delay on mortality is unknown. The COVID-19 infection rate at which immediate operative risk exceeds benefit is unknown. We sought to model immediate versus delayed surgical resection in a T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A decision analysis model was developed, and sensitivity analyses performed. The base case was a 65-year-old male smoker presenting with cT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma scheduled for esophagectomy during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compared immediate surgical resection to delayed resection after 3 months. The likelihood of key outcomes was derived from the literature where available. The outcome was 5-year overall survival.

RESULTS

Proceeding with immediate esophagectomy for the base case scenario resulted in slightly improved 5-year overall survival when compared to delaying surgery by 3 months (5-year overall survival 0.74 for immediate and 0.73 for delayed resection). In sensitivity analyses, a delayed approach became preferred when the probability of perioperative COVID-19 infection increased above 7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate resection of early esophageal cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic did not decrease 5-year survival when compared to resection after 3 months for the base case scenario. However, as the risk of perioperative COVID-19 infection increases above 7%, a delayed approach has improved 5-year survival. This balance should be frequently re-examined by surgeons as infection risk changes in each hospital and community throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Association between hospital liver transplantation volume and mortality after liver re-transplantation

BACKGROUND

The relationship between institutional liver transplantation (LT) case volume and clinical outcomes after liver re-transplantation is yet to be determined.

METHODS

Patients who underwent liver re-transplantation between 2007 and 2016 were selected from the Korean National Healthcare Insurance Service database. Liver transplant centers were categorized to either high-volume centers (≥ 64 LTs/year) or low-volume centers (< 64 LTs/year) according to the annual LT case volume. In-hospital and long-term mortality after liver re-transplantation were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 258 liver re-transplantations were performed during the study period: 175 liver re-transplantations were performed in 3 high-volume centers and 83 were performed in 21 low-volume centers. In-hospital mortality after liver re-transplantation in high and low-volume centers were 25% and 36% (P = 0.069), respectively. Adjusted in-hospital mortality was not different between low and high-volume centers. Adjusted 1-year mortality was significantly higher in low-volume centers (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.05-4.37, P = 0.037) compared to high-volume centers. Long-term survival for up to 9 years was also superior in high-volume centers (P = 0.005). Other risk factors of in-hospital mortality and 1-year mortality included female sex and higher Elixhauser comorbidity index.

CONCLUSION

Centers with higher case volume (≥ 64 LTs/year) showed lower in-hospital and overall mortality after liver re-transplantation compared to low-volume centers.

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.

Trends in Surgical Volume in the Military Health System-A Potential Threat to Mission Readiness

INTRODUCTION

The Military Health System (MHS) is tasked with a dual mission both to provide medical services for covered patients and to ensure that its active duty medical personnel maintain readiness for deployment. Knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA) is a metric evaluating the transferrable skills incorporated into a given surgery or medical procedure that are most relevant for surgeons deployed to a theatre of war. Procedures carrying a high KSA value are those utilizing skills with high relevance for maintaining deployment readiness. Given ongoing concerns regarding surgical volumes at MTFs and the potential adverse impact on military surgeon mission readiness were high-value surgeries to be lost to the civilian sector, we evaluated trends in the setting of high-value surgeries for beneficiaries within the MHS.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed inpatient admissions data from MTFs and TRICARE claims data from civilian hospitals, 2005-2019, to identify TRICARE-covered patients covered under "purchased care" (referred to civilian facilities) or receiving "direct care" (undergoing treatment at MTFs) and undergoing seven high-value/high-KSA surgeries: colectomy, pancreatectomy, hepatectomy, open carotid endarterectomy, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, esophagectomy, and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Overall and procedure-specific counts were captured, MTFs were categorized into quartiles by volume, and independence between trends was tested with a Cochran-Armitage test, hypothesizing that the proportion of cases referred for purchased care was increasing.

RESULTS

We captured 292,411 cases, including 7,653 pancreatectomies, 4,177 hepatectomies, 3,815 esophagectomies, 112,684 colectomies, 92,161 CABGs, 26,893 AAA repairs, and 45,028 carotid endarterectomies. The majority of cases included were referred for purchased care (90.3%), with the proportion of cases referred increasing over the study period (P < .01). By procedure, all cases except AAA repairs were increasingly referred for treatment over the study period (all P < .01, except esophagectomy P = .04). On examining volume, we found that even the highest-volume-quartile MTFs performed a median of less than one esophagectomy, hepatectomy, or pancreatectomy per month. The only included procedure performed once a month or more at the majority of MTFs was CABG.

CONCLUSION

On examining volume and referral trends for high-value surgeries within the MHS, we found low surgical volumes at the vast majority of included MTFs and an increasing proportion of cases referred to civilian hospitals over the last 15 years. Our findings illustrate missed opportunities for maintaining the mission readiness of military surgical personnel. Prioritizing the recapture of lost surgical volume may improve the surgical teams' mission readiness.

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

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

Concurrent diagnosis of anxiety increases postoperative length of stay among patients receiving esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Psychiatric comorbidities disproportionately affect patients with cancer. While identified risk factors for prolonged length of stay (LOS) after esophagectomy are primarily medical comorbidities, the impact of psychiatric comorbidities on perioperative outcomes is unclear. We hypothesized that psychiatric comorbidities would prolong LOS in patients with esophageal cancer.

METHODS

The 2016 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was used to identify patients with esophageal cancer receiving esophagectomy. Concurrent psychiatric illness was categorized using Clinical Classifications Software Refined for ICD-10, creating 34 psychiatric diagnosis groups (PDGs). Only PDGs with >1% prevalence in the cohort were included in the analysis. The outcome of interest was hospital LOS. Bivariable testing was performed to determine the association of PDGs and demographic factors on LOS using rank sum test. Multivariable regression analysis was performed using backward selection from bivariable testing (α ≤ 0.05).

RESULTS

We identified 1,730 patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in the 2016 NIS. The median LOS was 8 days (IQR 5-12). In bivariable testing, a concurrent diagnosis of anxiety was the only PDG associated with LOS (9 days (IQR 6-14) with anxiety diagnosis versus 8 days (IQR 5-12) with no anxiety diagnosis, p = 0.022). Multivariable modeling showed an independent association between anxiety diagnosis and increased LOS (OR 4.82 (1.25-25.23), p = 0.022). Anxiety was not associated with increased hospital cost or in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrates an independent effect of anxiety prolonging postoperative LOS after esophagectomy in the United States. These findings may influence perioperative care, patient expectations, and resource allocation.

Hospital volume-outcome relationship in severe traumatic brain injury: stratified analysis by level of trauma center

OBJECTIVE

The nature of the volume-outcome relationship in cases with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains unclear, with considerable interhospital variation in patient outcomes. The objective of this study was to understand the state of the volume-outcome relationship at different levels of trauma centers in the United States.

METHODS

The authors queried the National Trauma Data Bank for the years 2007-2014 for patients with severe TBI. Case volumes for each level of trauma center organized into quintiles (Q1-Q5) served as the primary predictor. Analyzed outcomes included in-hospital mortality, total hospital length of stay (LOS), and intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Multivariable regression models were performed for in-hospital mortality, overall complications, and total hospital and ICU LOSs to adjust for possible confounders. The analysis was stratified by level designation of the trauma center. Statistical significance was established at p < 0.001 to avoid a type I error due to a large sample size.

RESULTS

A total of 122,445 patients were included. Adjusted analysis did not demonstrate a significant relationship between increasing hospital volume of severe TBI cases and in-hospital mortality, complications, and nonhome hospital discharge disposition among level I-IV trauma centers. However, among level II trauma centers, hospital LOS was longer for the highest volume quintile (adjusted mean difference [MD] for Q5: 2.83 days, 95% CI 1.40-4.26 days, p < 0.001, reference = Q1). For level III and IV trauma centers, both hospital LOS and ICU LOS were longer for the highest volume quintile (adjusted MD for Q5: LOS 4.6 days, 95% CI 2.3-7.0 days, p < 0.001; ICU LOS 3.2 days, 95% CI 1.6-4.8 days, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher volumes of severe TBI cases at a lower level of trauma center may be associated with a longer LOS. These results may assist policymakers with target interventions for resource allocation and point to the need for careful prehospital decision-making in patients with severe TBI.

Does Timing of Robotic Esophagectomy Adoption Impact Short-Term Postoperative Outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Robotic esophagectomies are increasingly common and are reported to have superior outcomes compared with an open approach; however, it is unclear if all institutions can achieve such outcomes. We hypothesize that early adopters of robotic technique would have improved short-term outcomes.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (2010-2016) was used to identify robotic esophagectomies. Early adopters were defined as programs which performed robotic esophagectomies in 2010-2011, late adopters in 2012-2013. Outcomes of esophagectomies performed between 2014 and 2016 were compared and included length of stay, number of lymph nodes evaluated, readmission, conversion rate, and 90-day mortality. Multivariable regressions, accounting for robotic esophagectomy volume, were used to control for confounding factors.

RESULTS

There were 37 early adopters and 35 late adopters. Between 2014 and 2016, 683 robotic esophagectomies were performed: 446 (65.3%) by early adopters and 237 (34.7%) by late adopters. Early adopters were more likely to be academic programs (96.2 versus 72.8%, P < 0.01). Other clinical and demographic variables were similar. Late adopters were found to have decreased a number of lymph nodes evaluated (coefficient -2.407, P = 0.004) compared with early adopters. There were no significant differences in length of stay, readmissions, rate of positive margins, conversion from robotic to open, or 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

When accounting for robotic esophagectomy volume, late adoption of robotic esophagectomy was associated with a reduced lymph node harvest, but other postoperative outcomes were similar. These data suggest that programs can safely start new robotic esophagectomy programs, but must ensure an adequate case load.

Quality Versus Costs Related to Gastrointestinal Surgery: Disentangling the Value Proposition

BACKGROUND

There has been a dramatic increase in worldwide health care spending over the last several decades. Operative procedures and perioperative care in the USA represent some of the most expensive episodes per patient. In view of both the rising cost of health care in general and the rising cost of surgical care specifically, policymakers and stakeholders have sought to identify ways to increase the value-improving quality of care while controlling (or diminishing) costs. In this context, we reviewed data relative to achieving the "value proposition" in the delivery of gastrointestinal surgical care.

METHODS

The National Library of Medicine online repository (PubMed) was text searched for human studies including "cost," "quality," "outcomes," "health care," "surgery," and "value." Results from this literature framed by the Donabedian conceptual model (identifying structures, processes, and outcomes), and the resulting impact of efforts to improve quality on costs.

RESULTS

The relationship between quality and costs was nuanced. Better quality care, though associated with better outcomes, was not always reported as concomitant with low costs. Moreover, some centers reported higher costs of surgical care commensurate with higher quality. Conversely, higher costs in health care delivery were not always linked to improved outcomes. While higher quality surgical care can lead to lower costs, higher costs of care were not necessarily associated with better outcomes. Strategies to improve quality, reduce cost, or achieve both simultaneously included regionalization of complex operations to high-volume centers of excellence, overall reduction in complications, introducing evidence-based improvements in perioperative care pathways including as enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), and elimination of inefficient or low-value care.

CONCLUSIONS

The relationship between quality and cost following gastrointestinal surgical procedure is complex. Data from the current study should serve to highlight the various means available to improve the value proposition related to surgery, as well as encourage surgeons to become more engaged in the national conversation around the Triple Aim of better health care quality, lower costs, and improved health care outcomes.

Predictors of Anastomotic Leak After Esophagectomy for Cancer: Not All Leaks Increase Mortality

BACKGROUND

The impact of preoperative chemotherapy/radiation on esophageal anastomotic leaks (ALs) and the correlation between AL severity and mortality risk have not been fully elucidated. We hypothesized that lower severity ALs have a similar risk of mortality compared to those without ALs, and preoperative chemotherapy/radiation increases AL risk.

METHODS

The 2016-2017 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program's procedure-targeted esophagectomy database was queried for patients undergoing any esophagectomy for cancer. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for risk of ALs.

RESULTS

From 2042 patients, 280 (13.7%) had ALs. AL patients requiring intervention had increased mortality risk including those requiring reoperation, interventional procedure, and medical therapy (P < .05). AL patients requiring no intervention had similar mortality risk compared to patients without ALs (P > .05). Preoperative chemotherapy/radiation was not predictive of ALs (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative chemotherapy/radiation does not contribute to risk for ALs after esophagectomy. There is a stepwise increased risk of 30-day mortality for ALs requiring increased invasiveness of treatment.

Factors associated with the costs of hospitalization after esophagectomy: a retrospective observational study at a three-tertiary cancer hospital in China

Background

Esophageal cancer represents a major health threat in China. Esophagectomy is the standard treatment for respectable esophageal cancer. This study aimed to investigate the costs of hospitalization in esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy, and to analyze the factors influencing these costs.

Methods

A retrospective observational study which enrolled 196 patients who underwent esophagectomy from September, 2018, to April, 2019, in the Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University were conducted

Results

The median inpatient cost was ￥72,772 (range, ￥49,796–128,771). Materials accounted for 39.7% of the direct medical costs, which was the highest proportion for any of the cost components. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE, OR: 0.031; 95% CI: 0.005–0.209), cardiopathy comorbidity (OR: 0.344; 95% CI: 0.136–0.872), and anastomotic leak (OR: 0.012; 95% CI: 0.001–0.131) were risk factors for higher cost, while early oral feeding (OR: 3.979; 95% CI: 1.430–11.067) was a protective factor.

Conclusions

Understanding the factors associated with high hospitalization costs will help to reduce healthcare expenditure. By controlling complications and promoting early oral feeding, the economic burden on esophagectomy patients can be relieved. Further research based on a longitudinal design is needed to investigate the full costs of hospitalization associated with esophageal cancer.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Differences in Treatment of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis at Burn Centers and Nonburn Centers

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), and Stevens-Johnson/TEN overlap syndrome (SJS/TEN) are severe exfoliative skin disorders resulting primarily from allergic drug reactions and sometimes from viral causes. Because of the significant epidermal loss in many of these patients, many of them end up receiving treatment at a burn center for expertise in the care of large wounds. Previous work on the treatment of this disease focused only on the differences in care of the same patients treated at nonburn centers and then transferred to burn centers. We wanted to explore whether patients had any differences in care or outcomes when they received definitive treatment at burn centers and nonburn centers. We queried the National Inpatient Sample database from 2016 for patients with SJS, SJS/TEN, and TEN diagnoses. We considered burn centers as those with greater than 10 burn transfers to their center and fewer than 5 burn transfers out of their center in a year. Multivariable logistic regression assessed factors associated with treatment at a burn center and mortality. Using the National Inpatient Sample, a total of 1164 patients were identified. These were divided into two groups, nonburn centers vs burn centers, and those groups were compared for demographic characteristics as well as variables in their hospital course and outcome. Patients treated at nonburn centers were more likely to have SJS and patients treated at burn centers were more likely to have both SJS/TEN and TEN. Demographics were similar between treatment locations, though African-Americans were more likely to be treated at a burn center. Burn centers had higher rates of patients with extreme severity and mortality risks and a longer length of stay. However, burn centers had similar actual mortality compared to nonburn centers. Patients treated at burn centers had higher charges and were more likely to be transferred to long-term care after their hospital stay. The majority of patients with exfoliative skin disorders are still treated at nonburn centers. Patients with SJS/TEN and TEN were more likely to be treated at a burn center. Patients treated at burn centers appear to have more severe disease but similar mortality to those treated at nonburn centers. Further study is needed to determine whether patients with these disorders do indeed benefit from transfer to a burn center.

Outcomes of robotic esophagectomies for esophageal cancer by hospital volume: an analysis of the national cancer database

BACKGROUND

Robotic minimally invasive esophagectomies (RMIE) have been associated with superior outcomes; however, it is unclear if these are specific to robotic technique or are present only at high-volume institutions. We hypothesize that low-volume RMIE centers would have inferior outcomes.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) identified patients receiving RMIE from 2010 to 2016. Based on the total number of RMIE performed by each hospital system, the lowest quartile performed ≤ 9 RMIE over the study period. Ninety-day mortality, number of lymph nodes evaluated, margins status, unplanned readmissions, length of stay (LOS), and overall survival were compared. Regression models were used to account for confounding.

RESULTS

1565 robotic esophagectomies were performed by 212 institutions. 173 hospitals performed ≤ 9 RMIE (totaling 478 operations over the study period, 30.5% of RMIE) and 39 hospitals performed > 9 RMIE (1087 operations, 69.5%). Hospitals performing > 9 RMIE were more likely to be academic centers (90.4% vs 66.2%, p < 0.001), have patients with advanced tumor stage (65.3% vs 59.8%, p = 0.049), andadministered preoperative radiation (72.8% vs 66.3%, p = 0.010). There were no differences based on demographics, nodal stage, or usage of preoperative chemotherapy. On multivariable regressions, hospitals performing ≤ 9 RMIE were associated with a greater likelihood of experiencing a 90-day mortality, a reduced number of lymph nodes evaluated, and a longer LOS; however, there was no association with rates of positive margins or unplanned readmissions. Median overall survival was decreased at institutions performing ≤ 9 RMIE (37.3 vs 51.5 months, p < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression demonstrated an association with poor survival comparing hospitals performing ≤ 9 to > 9 RMIE (HR 1.327, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

Many robotic esophagectomies occur at institutions which performed relatively few RMIE and were associated with inferior short- and long-term outcomes. These data argue for regionalization of robotic esophagectomies or enhanced training in lower volume hospitals.

Treatment of early stage (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma: Personalizing the best therapy choice

Esophagectomy is considered the primary form of management for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC); however, the surgery is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. For patients with early-stage EAC, endoscopic resection (ER) presents a potential curative treatment option that is less invasive and carries fewer risks procedure related risks, but it is associated with higher rates of cancer recurrence following the procedure. For some patients, age and comorbidities may prevent them from having esophagectomy as a treatment option, while other patients may be operative candidates but do not wish to undergo esophagectomy for a variety of reasons related to their values and preferences. Furthermore, while anxiety of cancer recurrence following ER may significantly diminish a patient’s quality of life (QOL), so might the morbidity surrounding esophagectomy. In addition to considering health status, patient preferences, and impacts on QOL, physicians and patients must also consider what treatments would be both beneficial and available to the patient, considering esophagectomy methods-minimally invasive vs open-or the use of chemoradiotherapy in addition to ER. Our article reviews and summarizes available treatment options for patients with early EAC and their potential effects on the health and wellbeing of patients based on the current data. We conclude with a request for more research of available options for early EAC patients, the conditions that determine when each option should be employed, and their effects not only on patient health but also QOL.

Effect of Institutional Case Volume on In-hospital Mortality After Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Analysis of 7073 Cases Between 2007 and 2016 in Korea

BACKGROUND

The relationship between institutional case volume and clinical outcomes after living donor liver transplantation is not clarified.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide retrospective cohort study using the database of Korean National Healthcare Insurance Service. Between January 2007 and December 2016, 7073 adult living donor liver transplantations were performed at 50 centers in Korea. Centers were categorized according to the average annual number of liver transplantations: >50, 10 to 50, and <10.

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality rates in the high-, medium-, and low-volume centers were 2.8%, 4.1%, and 6.7%, respectively. After adjustment, in-hospital mortality was significantly higher in low-volume centers (adjusted odds ratio, 2.287; 95% confidence interval, 1.471-3.557; P < 0.001) and medium-volume centers (adjusted odds ratio, 1.676; 95% confidence interval, 1.089-2.578; P = 0.019) compared with high-volume centers. Long-term survival for up to 9 years was better, and intensive care unit and hospital length of stay were shorter in high-volume centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Centers with higher case volume (>50 liver transplantations/year) had better outcomes after living donor liver transplantation, including in-hospital mortality and long-term mortality compared with centers with lower case volume (≤50 liver transplantations/year).

The Impact of Hospital Size on National Trends and Outcomes Following Open Esophagectomy

Background and Objectives: Previous studies have demonstrated superior patient outcomes for thoracic oncology patients treated at high-volume surgery centers compared to low-volume centers. However, the specific role of overall hospital size in open esophagectomy morbidity and mortality remains unclear. Materials and Methods: Patients aged >18 years who underwent open esophagectomy for primary malignant neoplasia of the esophagus between 2002 and 2014 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Minimally invasive procedures were excluded. Discharges were stratified by hospital size (large, medium, and small) and analyzed using trend and multivariable regression analyses. Results: Over a 13-year period, a total of 69,840 open esophagectomy procedures were performed nationally. While the proportion of total esophagectomies performed did not vary by hospital size, in-hospital mortality trends decreased for all hospitals (large (7.2% to 3.7%), medium (12.8% vs. 4.9%), and small (12.8% vs. 4.9%)), although this was only significant for large hospitals (P < 0.01). After controlling for patient demographics, comorbidities, admission, and hospital-level factors, hospital length of stay (LOS), total inflation-adjusted costs, in-hospital mortality, and complications (cardiac, respiratory, vascular, and bleeding) did not vary by hospital size (all P > 0.05). Conclusions: After risk adjustment, patient morbidity and in-hospital mortality appear to be comparable across all institutions, including small hospitals. While there appears to be an increased push for referring patients to large hospitals, our findings suggest that there may be other factors (such as surgeon type, hospital volume, or board status) that are more likely to impact the results; these need to be further explored in the current era of episode-based care.

Do the 2018 Leapfrog Group Minimal Hospital and Surgeon Volume Thresholds for Esophagectomy Favor Specific Patient Demographics?

OBJECTIVE

We examine how esophagectomy volume thresholds reflect outcomes relative to patient characteristics.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Esophagectomy outcomes are associated with surgeon and hospital operative volumes, leading the Leapfrog Group to recommend minimum annual volume thresholds of 7 and 20 respectively.

METHODS

Patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer were identified from the 2007-2013 New York and Florida Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Databases. Logit models adjusted for patient characteristics evaluated in-hospital mortality, complications, and prolonged length of stay (PLOS). Median surgeon and hospital volumes were compared between young-healthy (age 18-57, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index [ECI] <2) and older-sick patients (age ≥71, ECI >4).

RESULTS

Of 4330 esophagectomy patients, 3515 (81%) were male, median age was 64 (interquartile range 58-71), and mortality was 4.0%. Patients treated by both low-volume surgeons and hospitals had the greatest mortality risk (5.0%), except in the case of older-sick patients mortality was highest at high-volume hospitals with high-volume surgeons (12%). For mortality <1%, annual hospital and surgeon volumes needed were 23 and 8, respectively; mortality rose to 4.2% when volumes dropped to the Leapfrog thresholds of 20 and 7, respectively. Complication rose from 53% to 63% when hospital and surgeon volumes decreased from 28 and 10 to 19 and 7, respectively. PLOS rose from 19% to 27% when annual hospital and surgeon volumes decreased from 27 and 8 to 20 and 7, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Current Leapfrog Group esophagectomy volume guidelines may not predict optimal outcomes for all patients, especially at extremes of age and comorbidities.

Predictive factors of difficulty of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left decubitus position

BACKGROUND

We have sometimes experienced technical difficulty performing thoracoscopic esophagectomy because of the position of the descending aorta or width of the mediastinal space. In this study, we retrospectively investigated predictive preoperative factors that influence the procedure of thoracoscopic esophagectomy with a focus on the position of the descending aorta and width of the mediastinal space.

METHODS

Ninety-five patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer by two specialists were included in this study. Thirty patients in whom both the operation time and blood loss in the thoracic region exceeded the median were categorized to the difficult group. The remaining 65 patients were categorized into the common group. During the evaluation of the position of the descending aorta, we measured the aorta-vertebra angle at the level of the left inferior pulmonary vein. During the evaluation of the width of the mediastinal space, we measured the sternum-vertebra distance at the level of the tracheal bifurcation.

RESULTS

A forward stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed the following independent predictive factors of the technical difficulty of thoracoscopic esophagectomy: aorta-vertebra angle (≥ 30°), sternum-vertebra distance (< 100 mm), and clinical T stage (T3).

CONCLUSIONS

The position of the descending aorta, width of the mediastinal space, and clinical T stage are predictive factors of the technical difficulty of thoracoscopic esophagectomy. These factors might become supporting indices for the indication for thoracoscopic esophagectomy among trainees or the surgeons who introduce this procedure.

Hospital volume versus outcome following oesophagectomy for cancer in Australia and New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Volume-outcome relationships for mortality following oesophagectomy have been demonstrated in Europe and the USA, but not in Australia or New Zealand. We determined whether higher volume hospitals achieve better outcomes following oesophagectomy in Australia and New Zealand.

METHODS

Administrative data for hospitals contributing data to the Health Roundtable were analysed. Hospitals performing oesophagectomy for cancer from July 2008 to June 2015 were grouped according to mean annual caseload: low (1-5), medium (6-11) and high (12+) volume. Univariate and multivariable analyses determined the impact of volume on 30-day and in-hospital mortalities, length of hospital stay and mechanical ventilation following surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 2252 patients underwent oesophagectomy in 65 hospitals. Sixty-eight percent (n = 44) were low-, 26% (n = 17) were medium- and 6% (n = 4) were high-volume hospitals. Seven hundred and sixty-two (34%) procedures were performed in low-, 1042 (46%) in medium- and 448 (20%) in high-volume hospitals. Overall in-hospital mortality was 3.1% and 30-day mortality was 2.1%. In-hospital mortality was lowest in high-volume hospitals; 1.6% versus 2.6% and 4.1% for low- and medium-volume hospitals (P = 0.02). Surgery in high-volume hospitals was shorter (32 min, P = 0.001), and patients were less likely to require post-operative ventilation (16.7% versus 25.3% and 28.0%, P < 0.001), although patients requiring ventilation in high-volume hospitals were ventilated for longer.

CONCLUSIONS

A volume-outcome relationship was demonstrated, with overall better performance in higher volume hospitals. Colocation of oesophagectomies to hospitals that can demonstrate appropriate caseload should be considered.

Technique of robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE)

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has gained popularity over the last two decades as an oncologically sound alternative to open esophagectomy. Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been developed at few highly-specialized centers, and overall experience with this technique remains limited. Herein, we describe our overall approach to this operation and specific technical issues.