Markar S R, Wahlin K, Lagergren P, Lagergren J
Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, 171 76 Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Surgery & Cancer, Imperial College London, UK.
Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, 171 76 Stockholm, Sweden.
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Aug;42(8):1191-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.05.028. Epub 2016 Jun 1.
We hypothesized that such prognosis is independently improved by surgery conducted within university hospitals.
Patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between 1987 and 2010 with follow-up until 2014 were identified from population-based nationwide Swedish cohort study. The association between university hospital status in and mortality was analyzed using a multivariable Cox-proportional hazards model, providing hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The HRs were adjusted for surgeon volume as well as age, comorbidity, tumor stage, histological subtype, neoadjuvant therapy and calendar period.
Among 1820 included patients, 989 (54.3%) had surgery at one of the six university hospitals. Of the 83 and 569 patients operated on by the higher surgeon volume (17-46 cases) and middle surgeon volume groups (7-16 cases), 60 (72.3%) and 430 cases (75.6%) respectively were performed within university hospitals. University hospitals status indicated a non-significant reduction in all-cause 90-day mortality (HR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.61-1.10), but all-cause 5-year (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.83-1.05) and disease-specific 5-year mortality (HR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.88-1.14) were similar to non-university hospitals. Higher surgeon volume (17-46 cases), showed non-significant reductions in all-cause 90-day (HR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.21-1.14), all-cause 5-year (HR = 0.80, 95% CI 0.61-1.06) and disease-specific 5-year mortality (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.60-1.09).
This study found no improvements in long-term mortality from esophagectomy performed within university hospitals after adjustment for surgeon volume and other confounders.
我们假设在大学医院进行手术能独立改善此类预后。
从基于人群的瑞典全国队列研究中确定1987年至2010年间接受食管癌食管切除术且随访至2014年的患者。使用多变量Cox比例风险模型分析大学医院状态与死亡率之间的关联,得出风险比(HRs)及95%置信区间(CIs)。HRs针对外科医生手术量以及年龄、合并症、肿瘤分期、组织学亚型、新辅助治疗和日历时间进行了调整。
在纳入的1820例患者中,989例(54.3%)在六所大学医院之一接受了手术。在由高手术量外科医生(17 - 46例)和中等手术量外科医生组(7 - 16例)手术的83例和569例患者中,分别有60例(72.3%)和430例(75.6%)在大学医院进行。大学医院状态表明全因90天死亡率有不显著降低(HR = 0.82,95% CI 0.61 - 1.10),但全因5年死亡率(HR = 0.94,95% CI 0.83 - 1.05)和疾病特异性5年死亡率(HR = 1.00,95% CI 0.88 - 1.14)与非大学医院相似。高手术量(17 - 46例)显示全因90天死亡率(HR = 0.49,95% CI 0.21 - 1.14)、全因5年死亡率(HR = 0.80,95% CI 0.61 - 1.06)和疾病特异性5年死亡率有不显著降低(HR = 0.81,95% CI 0.60 - 1.09)。
本研究发现,在调整外科医生手术量和其他混杂因素后,大学医院进行的食管切除术的长期死亡率没有改善。