Division of Thoracic and Esophageal Surgery, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center and Case Western Reserve School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH.
Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC.
Ann Surg. 2018 May;267(5):886-891. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002231.
Blood transfusion has been associated with poor outcomes in many disciplines, yet transfusion practices and related outcomes in esophagectomy are unknown. We analyzed the Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Database to determine patient factors associated with transfusion after esophagectomy, risk-adjusted variation in transfusion practice among institutions, and the association of transfusion practice with mortality.
We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer from October 2008 to December 31, 2014. Patient comorbidities and procedure variables were used to construct a risk model for transfusion. Using this model, each institution was assigned an observed to expected (O:E) transfusion rate. We examined institutional factors associated with variation in O:E transfusion rate. Finally, O:E transfusion rate was compared to risk-adjusted mortality to determine if there was an association of transfusion practice and survival.
Seven thousand one hundred thirty-seven patients underwent esophagectomy at 182 institutions during the study period. The median unadjusted transfusion rate was 23.1%. The risk model for transfusion demonstrated patients who received transfusions were more likely to be older, female, and have low preoperative hemoglobin and other comorbidities, such as CAD, COPD, and low creatinine clearance. Patients who received a minimally invasive procedure were less likely to have received a transfusion.After adjusting for the characteristics above, 13 centers (7.1%) were classified as having lower than average O:E transfusion rate and 16 centers (8.7%) were classified as higher than average O:E transfusion rate.Institutions with lower than expected transfusion rates also had lower risk-adjusted perioperative mortality than institutions with higher than expected transfusion rates (median [IQR] = 0.90 [0.77-0.94] vs. 0.99 [0.94-1.06], P = 0.028).
Age, female sex, CAD, COPD, renal insufficiency, and open technique are associated with transfusion after esophagectomy, while tumor stage and preoperative chemoradiation are not. There is wide variation in transfusion practice. Centers with lower than expected transfusion rate also had lower than expected perioperative mortality. At an institutional level, lower transfusion rates are associated with improved outcomes.
在许多学科中,输血与不良结局相关,但在食管癌切除术方面,输血的实际情况和相关结局尚不清楚。我们分析了胸外科医师学会(STS)普通胸科数据库,以确定食管癌切除术患者输血的相关因素、不同机构间输血实践的风险调整差异以及输血实践与死亡率之间的关系。
我们对 2008 年 10 月至 2014 年 12 月 31 日期间接受食管癌切除术的癌症患者进行了回顾性分析。患者合并症和手术变量被用于构建输血风险模型。根据该模型,为每个机构分配观察到的与预期的(O:E)输血率。我们检查了与 O:E 输血率差异相关的机构因素。最后,将 O:E 输血率与风险调整死亡率进行比较,以确定输血实践与生存率之间是否存在关联。
在研究期间,182 家机构的 7137 名患者接受了食管癌切除术。未调整的输血率中位数为 23.1%。输血风险模型显示,接受输血的患者更可能年龄较大、女性、术前血红蛋白较低,且合并症较多,如 CAD、COPD 和低肌酐清除率。接受微创手术的患者不太可能接受输血。在调整上述特征后,有 13 家中心(7.1%)的 O:E 输血率低于平均水平,有 16 家中心(8.7%)的 O:E 输血率高于平均水平。输血率低于预期的机构的围手术期死亡率也低于输血率高于预期的机构(中位数[IQR] = 0.90 [0.77-0.94] 比 0.99 [0.94-1.06],P = 0.028)。
年龄、女性、CAD、COPD、肾功能不全和开放技术与食管癌术后输血相关,而肿瘤分期和术前放化疗则不然。输血实践存在广泛差异。输血率低于预期的中心的围手术期死亡率也低于预期。在机构层面,较低的输血率与较好的结果相关。