Reply to Letter: “For Patients With Early Esophageal Cancer Endoscopic Mucosa Resection Is Not the End of the Story!”

Simple preoperative risk scale accurately predicts perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy

Surgery remains one of the major treatment options available to patients with esophageal cancer, with high mortality in certain cohorts. The aim of this study was to develop a simple preoperative risk scale based on patient factors, hospital factors, and tumor pathology to predict the risk of perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was used to create the risk scale. Patients who underwent open or laparoscopic transhiatal and transthoracic esophageal resection were identified using International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition codes. Patients <18 years and those with peritoneal disease were excluded. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to define a predictive model of perioperative mortality and to create a simple risk scale. From 1998 to 2011, a total of 23 751 patients underwent esophagectomy. The observed overall perioperative mortality rate for this cohort was 7.7%. Minimally invasive techniques, and operations performed in higher volume centers were protective, whereas increasing age, comorbidities and diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma were independent predictors of mortality. Based on this population, a risk scale from 0-16 was created. The calibration revealed a good agreement between the observed and risk scale-predicted probabilities. A set of sensitivity/specificity analyses was then performed to define normal (score 0-7) and high risk (score 8-16) patients for clinical practice. Mortality in patients with a score of 0-7 ranged from 1.3-7.6%, compared with 10.5-34.5% in patients with a score of 8-16. This simple preoperative risk scale may accurately predict the risk of perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy and can be used as a clinical tool for preoperative counseling.

Mortality after esophagectomy is heavily impacted by center volume: retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample

BACKGROUND

The effects of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality after esophageal resection are disputed in the literature. We sought to analyze treatment effects in patient subpopulations that undergo esophagectomy for cancer based on hospital volume.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 1998 to 2011. Patients who underwent open or laparoscopic transhiatal and transthoracic esophageal resection were identified using ICD-9 codes. Patients <18 years and those with peritoneal disease were excluded. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used with mortality as the independent variable to evaluate the effect of low (<6), intermediate (6-19), and high (≥20) hospital volume of esophagectomies. These analyses were repeated in different subsets of patients to determine whether hospital volume affected mortality depending on the subpopulation evaluated. Subgroups were created depending on age, race, gender, operative approach, comorbidities, and tumor pathology.

RESULTS

A total of 23,751 patients were included. The overall perioperative mortality rate was 7.7 % (low volume: 11.4 %; intermediate volume: 8.39 %, high volume: 4.01 %), and multivariate analysis revealed that high hospital volume had a protective effect (OR 0.54, 95 % CI 0.45-0.65). On subgroup analyses for low- and intermediate-volume hospitals, mortality was uniformly elevated for the subpopulations when comparing to high-volume hospitals (p < 0.05). There was no difference in mortality between low- and medium-volume hospitals and between subgroups.

CONCLUSION

No lower mortality risk subgroup could be identified in this nationwide collective. This analysis emphasizes that perioperative mortality after esophagectomy for cancer is lower in high-volume hospitals.

Intraoperative Endoscopic Botox Injection During Total Esophagectomy Prevents the Need for Pyloromyotomy or Dilatation

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy may lead to impairment in gastric emptying unless pyloric drainage is performed. Pyloric drainage may be technically challenging during minimally invasive esophagectomy and can add morbidity. We sought to determine the effectiveness of intraoperative endoscopic injection of botulinum toxin into the pylorus during robotic-assisted esophagectomy as an alternative to surgical pyloric drainage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction who underwent robotic-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy (RATE) without any surgical pyloric drainage. Patients with and without intraoperative endoscopic injection of 200 units of botulinum toxin in 10 cc of saline (BOTOX group) were compared to those that did not receive any pyloric drainage (noBOTOX group). Main outcome measure was the incidence of postoperative pyloric stenosis; secondary outcomes included operative and oncologic parameters, length of stay (LOS), morbidity, and mortality.

RESULTS

From November 2006 to August 2014, 41 patients (6 females) with a mean age of 65 years underwent RATE without surgical drainage of the pylorus. There were 14 patients in the BOTOX group and 27 patients in the noBOTOX group. Mean operative time was not different between the comparison groups. There was one conversion to open surgery in the BOTOX group. No pyloric dysfunction occurred in the BOTOX group postoperatively, and eight stenoses in the noBOTOX group (30%) required endoscopic therapy (P < .05). There were no differences in incidence of anastomotic strictures or anastomotic leaks. One patient in group noBOTOX required pyloroplasty 3 months after esophagectomy. There was one death in the noBOTOX group postoperatively (30-day mortality 2.4%). Mean LOS was 9.6 days, and BOTOX patients were discharged earlier (7.4 versus 10.7, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative endoscopic injection of botulinum toxin into the pylorus during RATE is feasible, safe, and effective and can prevent the need for pyloromyotomy.