• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

手术结果-手术量关系与经胸食管切除术:将“救援失败”降至最低

Outcome-volume relationships and transhiatal esophagectomy: minimizing "failure to rescue".

作者信息

Arlow Renee L, Moore Dirk F, Chen Chunxia, Langenfeld John, August David A

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany Street, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903-2601 USA.

Department of Biostatistics, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany Street, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903-2601 USA.

出版信息

Ann Surg Innov Res. 2014 Dec 19;8(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s13022-014-0009-3. eCollection 2014.

DOI:10.1186/s13022-014-0009-3
PMID:25550708
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4279687/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study is to describe the system and technical factors that enabled our moderate size transhiatal esophagectomy program to achieve low mortality rates.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted on 200 consecutive patients who underwent transhiatal esophagectomy at Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital. Primary outcomes included operative times, estimated blood loss, frequency and nature of complications, and lengths of stay in the hospital and the intensive care unit.

RESULTS

In general, surgical outcomes tended to improve over the course of this study. We identified decreased operative time, intra-operative blood loss, frequency of complications, and lengths of intensive care unit and hospital stay as the program matured. Through coordinated actions of the surgical and anesthesia teams, all intraoperative injuries were responded to in an effective, emergent fashion and all but one patient was saved. This resulted in an inhospital and 30-day mortality rate of only 0.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that a dual attending approach, focus on avoiding "failure to rescue", increased volume, and a surgeon driven commitment to quality improvement may lead to low mortality rates after transhiatal esophagectomy.

摘要

背景

本研究的目的是描述使我们中等规模的经胸食管切除术项目实现低死亡率的系统和技术因素。

方法

对在罗伯特·伍德·约翰逊大学医院接受经胸食管切除术的200例连续患者进行回顾性病历审查。主要结果包括手术时间、估计失血量、并发症的频率和性质,以及住院时间和重症监护病房的住院时间。

结果

总体而言,在本研究过程中手术结果趋于改善。随着项目的成熟,我们发现手术时间、术中失血量、并发症频率以及重症监护病房和住院时间均有所减少。通过手术和麻醉团队的协同行动,所有术中损伤均得到有效、紧急的处理,除一名患者外所有患者均获救。这导致住院死亡率和30天死亡率仅为0.5%。

结论

我们的研究表明,双重主治医生方法、注重避免“未能挽救”、增加手术量以及外科医生对质量改进的坚定承诺可能导致经胸食管切除术后的低死亡率。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5898/4279687/2747bee7a2b0/13022_2014_9_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5898/4279687/fcfb8ca50f2b/13022_2014_9_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5898/4279687/2747bee7a2b0/13022_2014_9_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5898/4279687/fcfb8ca50f2b/13022_2014_9_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5898/4279687/2747bee7a2b0/13022_2014_9_Fig2_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Outcome-volume relationships and transhiatal esophagectomy: minimizing "failure to rescue".手术结果-手术量关系与经胸食管切除术:将“救援失败”降至最低
Ann Surg Innov Res. 2014 Dec 19;8(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s13022-014-0009-3. eCollection 2014.
2
An audit of surgical outcomes of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.食管鳞状细胞癌手术结果的审计
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007 Mar;31(3):536-44. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.12.002. Epub 2007 Jan 11.
3
Short-term outcomes after esophagectomy at 164 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program hospitals: effect of operative approach and hospital-level variation.美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划的164家医院食管癌切除术后的短期结局:手术方式及医院层面差异的影响
Arch Surg. 2012 Nov;147(11):1009-16. doi: 10.1001/2013.jamasurg.96.
4
Robot-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy: a 3-year single-center experience.机器人辅助经食管裂孔食管切除术:3 年单中心经验。
Dis Esophagus. 2013 Feb-Mar;26(2):159-66. doi: 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2012.01325.x. Epub 2012 Mar 6.
5
Operative and survival outcomes in a series of 100 consecutive cases of robot-assisted transhiatal esophagectomies.连续100例机器人辅助经裂孔食管切除术的手术及生存结果
Dis Esophagus. 2017 Oct 1;30(10):1-7. doi: 10.1093/dote/dox045.
6
Simplifying minimally invasive transhiatal esophagectomy with the inversion approach: Lessons learned from the first 20 cases.采用翻转法简化微创经裂孔食管切除术:来自前20例病例的经验教训。
Arch Surg. 2006 Sep;141(9):857-65; discussion 865-6. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.141.9.857.
7
Transhiatal esophagectomy: a safe alternative for selected patients.经胸食管切除术:特定患者的安全替代方案。
Ann Thorac Surg. 1992 Oct;54(4):686-9; discussion 689-90. doi: 10.1016/0003-4975(92)91012-x.
8
Impact of surgeon demographics and technique on outcomes after esophageal resections: a nationwide study.外科医生特征和技术对食管切除术后结果的影响:一项全国性研究。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2013 Mar;95(3):1064-9. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.10.038. Epub 2012 Dec 20.
9
Comparison of minimally invasive esophagectomy with transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy.微创食管切除术与经胸及经裂孔食管切除术的比较。
Arch Surg. 2000 Aug;135(8):920-5. doi: 10.1001/archsurg.135.8.920.
10
Transhiatal versus transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.经裂孔与经胸食管癌切除术治疗食管癌的比较。
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1993 Aug;106(2):205-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Glycocalyx-Shedding and Inflammatory Reactions Occur Yet Do Not Predict Complications Resulting from an Esophagectomy in an Accelerated Recovery After Surgery Program.在加速康复外科计划中,食管切除术后会发生糖萼脱落和炎症反应,但这些并不能预测并发症的发生。
J Clin Med. 2025 Aug 26;14(17):6048. doi: 10.3390/jcm14176048.
2
Esophagectomy Trends and Postoperative Outcomes at Private Equity-Acquired Health Centers.私募股权收购的健康中心的食管癌切除术趋势及术后结果
JAMA Surg. 2025 Mar 1;160(3):296-302. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5920.
3
Impact of surgeon specialty on clinical outcomes following esophagectomy for cancer.

本文引用的文献

1
Short-term outcomes after esophagectomy at 164 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program hospitals: effect of operative approach and hospital-level variation.美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划的164家医院食管癌切除术后的短期结局:手术方式及医院层面差异的影响
Arch Surg. 2012 Nov;147(11):1009-16. doi: 10.1001/2013.jamasurg.96.
2
Volume-outcome relationship in surgery for esophageal malignancy: systematic review and meta-analysis 2000-2011.手术治疗食管恶性肿瘤的量效关系:2000-2011 年系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 May;16(5):1055-63. doi: 10.1007/s11605-011-1731-3. Epub 2011 Nov 17.
3
外科医生专业对食管癌切除术治疗癌症的临床结果的影响。
Surg Endosc. 2023 Nov;37(11):8309-8315. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10391-5. Epub 2023 Sep 7.
4
Upper Gastrointestinal Tract Cancer after Liver Transplantation: A Demographic Report.肝移植术后上消化道癌:一份人口统计学报告。
Int J Organ Transplant Med. 2020;11(2):71-80.
5
Morbidity analysis in minimally invasive esophagectomy for oesophageal cancer versus conventional over the last 10 years, a single institution experience.过去10年单机构经验:微创食管癌切除术与传统食管癌切除术的发病率分析
J Minim Access Surg. 2017 Jul-Sep;13(3):192-199. doi: 10.4103/0972-9941.199606.
6
Age and preexisting conditions as risk factors for severe adverse events and failure to rescue after injury.年龄和既往疾病作为严重不良事件及伤后抢救失败的风险因素。
J Surg Res. 2016 Oct;205(2):368-377. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.06.082. Epub 2016 Jul 5.
7
Changes in oncological outcomes: comparison of the conventional and minimally invasive esophagectomy, a single institution experience.肿瘤学结局的变化:传统与微创食管切除术的比较,单机构经验
Updates Surg. 2016 Dec;68(4):343-349. doi: 10.1007/s13304-016-0390-z. Epub 2016 Sep 15.
8
Does "Two is Better Than One" Apply to Surgeons? Comparing Single-Surgeon Versus Co-surgeon Bilateral Mastectomies.“两人比一人强”适用于外科医生吗?单主刀与双主刀双侧乳房切除术的比较。
Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Apr;23(4):1111-6. doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4956-7. Epub 2015 Oct 29.
Variation in esophagectomy outcomes in hospitals meeting Leapfrog volume outcome standards.
符合莱普戈夫(Leapfrog)容量结局标准的医院中食管切除术结局的变化。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2011 Apr;91(4):1003-9; discussion 1009-10. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2010.11.006.
4
Transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma: experience from a single tertiary care institution.胸段与经胸食管切除术治疗食管癌:单中心经验。
World J Surg. 2011 Jun;35(6):1296-302. doi: 10.1007/s00268-011-1020-z.
5
Minimally invasive oesophagectomy: current status and future direction.微创食管切除术:现状与未来方向。
Surg Endosc. 2011 Jul;25(7):2071-83. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1511-2. Epub 2011 Feb 7.
6
Systematic review of the impact of volume of oesophagectomy on patient outcome.食管切除术手术量对患者预后影响的系统评价。
ANZ J Surg. 2010 May;80(5):317-23. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2010.05276.x.
7
Variation in hospital mortality associated with inpatient surgery.与住院手术相关的医院死亡率差异。
N Engl J Med. 2009 Oct 1;361(14):1368-75. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa0903048.
8
National trends in esophageal surgery--are outcomes as good as we believe?全国食管外科手术趋势——手术效果是否如我们所认为的那样好?
J Gastrointest Surg. 2009 Nov;13(11):1900-10; discussion 1910-2. doi: 10.1007/s11605-009-1008-2. Epub 2009 Sep 16.
9
Transhiatal oesophagectomy: techniques, tips and outcomes.经胸食管切除术:技术、技巧与结果
Surgeon. 2008 Dec;6(6):335-40. doi: 10.1016/s1479-666x(08)80004-2.
10
Outcomes after transhiatal and transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer.经裂孔与经胸食管癌切除术的术后结果。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2008 Feb;85(2):424-9. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.10.007.