• 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

食管癌手术后抢救失败的预测因素。

Predictors of Failure to Rescue After Esophagectomy.

机构信息

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

Department of Surgery, Division of Thoracic Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.

出版信息

Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Mar;105(3):871-878. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.10.022. Epub 2018 Feb 2.

DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.10.022
PMID:29397102
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Failure to rescue (FTR), defined as death after a major complication, is a metric increasingly being used to assess quality of care. Risk factors associated with FTR after esophagectomy have not been previously studied.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients who underwent esophagectomy with gastric conduit between 2010 and 2014. Patients with at least one major postoperative complication were grouped according to inhospital mortality (FTR group) and survival to discharge (SUR group). A stepwise logistic regression model was used to identify predictors of FTR.

RESULTS

A total of 1,730 patients comprised the study group, with 102 (5.9%) in the FTR group and 1,628 (94.1%) in the SUR group. The FTR patients were older (69.0 versus 64.0 years, p < 0.0001) compared with the SUR patients. There were no differences in sex, body mass index, preoperative weight loss, smoking status, operation type, or surgeon specialty between the two groups. Age greater than 75 years (adjusted odds ratio 2.68, p < 0.0001), black race (adjusted odds ratio 2.75, p = 0.001), American Society of Anesthesiologists class 4 or 5 (adjusted odds ratio 1.82, p = 0.02), and the occurrence of pneumonia, respiratory failure, acute renal failure, sepsis, or acute myocardial infarction were predictive of FTR based on multivariable logistic regression.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly 6% of patients who have a major complication after esophagectomy do not survive to discharge. Age greater than 75 years, black race, American Society of Anesthesiologists class 4 or 5, and complications related to major infection or organ failure predict FTR. Further research is necessary to investigate how these factors affect survival after complications in order to improve rescue efforts.

摘要

背景

术后失败救治(Failure to Rescue,FTR)是一种越来越多地用于评估医疗质量的指标,其定义为发生重大并发症后导致的死亡。然而,此前尚未研究食管切除术后发生 FTR 的相关风险因素。

方法

本研究在美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划数据库中检索了 2010 年至 2014 年间接受胃管食管切除术的患者。根据住院期间死亡率(FTR 组)和存活至出院(SUR 组)将至少发生一种重大术后并发症的患者分为两组。采用逐步逻辑回归模型确定 FTR 的预测因素。

结果

共有 1730 例患者纳入本研究,其中 FTR 组 102 例(5.9%),SUR 组 1628 例(94.1%)。FTR 患者的年龄大于 SUR 患者(69.0 岁比 64.0 岁,p<0.0001)。两组间在性别、体重指数、术前体重减轻、吸烟状态、手术类型或外科医生专业方面无差异。年龄大于 75 岁(调整后优势比 2.68,p<0.0001)、黑种人(调整后优势比 2.75,p=0.001)、美国麻醉医师协会 4 级或 5 级(调整后优势比 1.82,p=0.02)以及发生肺炎、呼吸衰竭、急性肾功能衰竭、脓毒症或急性心肌梗死与多变量逻辑回归分析的 FTR 相关。

结论

近 6%的食管切除术后发生重大并发症的患者未存活至出院。年龄大于 75 岁、黑种人、美国麻醉医师协会 4 级或 5 级以及与重大感染或器官衰竭相关的并发症可预测 FTR。需要进一步研究这些因素如何影响并发症后的生存情况,以改善抢救工作。

相似文献

1
Predictors of Failure to Rescue After Esophagectomy.食管癌手术后抢救失败的预测因素。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Mar;105(3):871-878. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2017.10.022. Epub 2018 Feb 2.
2
Understanding Failure to Rescue After Esophagectomy in the United States.理解美国食管癌手术后的抢救失败。
Ann Thorac Surg. 2020 Mar;109(3):865-871. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2019.09.044. Epub 2019 Nov 9.
3
Failure to rescue following cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.细胞减灭术及热灌注腹腔化疗后的救援失败。
J Surg Res. 2017 Jun 15;214:209-215. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.02.048. Epub 2017 Mar 3.
4
Failure-to-rescue in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal or gastric cancer.接受食管癌或胃癌手术患者的抢救失败情况。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017 Oct;43(10):1962-1969. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2017.07.005. Epub 2017 Jul 29.
5
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.
6
Incidence and risk factors for respiratory complications in patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignancy: a NSQIP analysis.恶性肿瘤食管癌切除术后患者呼吸并发症的发生率及危险因素:一项美国国立外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)分析
Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014 Winter;26(4):287-94. doi: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2014.12.002. Epub 2014 Dec 13.
7
Assessment of failure to rescue after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program procedure-targeted data set.使用国家外科质量改进计划程序靶向数据集评估腹主动脉瘤修复术后的抢救失败情况。
J Vasc Surg. 2018 Nov;68(5):1335-1344.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.01.059. Epub 2018 May 18.
8
Failure to Rescue in Geriatric Ground-Level Falls: The Role of Frailty on Not-So-Minor Injuries.老年地面跌倒的救援失败:脆弱性对非轻微损伤的作用。
J Surg Res. 2024 Oct;302:891-896. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2024.07.095. Epub 2024 Sep 11.
9
Association of Medical Comorbidities, Surgical Outcomes, and Failure to Rescue: An Analysis of the Rhode Island Hospital NSQIP Database.医学合并症、手术结果与抢救失败的关联:罗德岛医院国家外科质量改进计划数据库分析
J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Dec;221(6):1050-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.09.003. Epub 2015 Sep 21.
10
The relative effect of hospital and surgeon volume on failure to rescue among patients undergoing liver resection for cancer.医院规模和外科医生手术量对肝癌肝切除患者抢救失败的相对影响。
Surgery. 2016 Apr;159(4):1004-12. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.10.025. Epub 2015 Dec 2.

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
Risk factors associated with failure to rescue after minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.微创Ivor Lewis食管切除术后抢救失败的相关危险因素。
Surg Endosc. 2025 Jul 14. doi: 10.1007/s00464-025-11949-1.
3
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.
4
A Novel Frailty Index Can Predict the Short-Term Outcomes of Esophagectomy in Older Patients with Esophageal Cancer.一种新的虚弱指数可预测老年食管癌患者接受食管癌切除术的短期预后。
Curr Oncol. 2024 Aug 16;31(8):4685-4694. doi: 10.3390/curroncol31080349.
5
Long-Term Impact of Severe Postoperative Complications after Esophagectomy for Cancer: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.食管癌切除术后严重术后并发症的长期影响:个体患者数据荟萃分析
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Apr 11;16(8):1468. doi: 10.3390/cancers16081468.
6
Comparison of failure to rescue in younger versus elderly patients following lung cancer resection.肺癌切除术后年轻与老年患者抢救失败情况的比较。
JTCVS Open. 2023 Aug 11;16:855-872. doi: 10.1016/j.xjon.2023.08.002. eCollection 2023 Dec.
7
Failure to rescue following anatomical lung resection. Analysis of a prospective nationwide database.解剖性肺切除术后的抢救失败。一项全国性前瞻性数据库分析。
Front Surg. 2023 Feb 21;10:1077046. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1077046. eCollection 2023.
8
A narrative review of socioeconomic disparities in the treatment of esophageal cancer.食管癌治疗中社会经济差异的叙述性综述。
J Thorac Dis. 2021 Jun;13(6):3801-3808. doi: 10.21037/jtd-20-3095.
9
Socioeconomic factors in timing of esophagectomy and association with outcomes.社会经济因素与食管癌手术时机及其预后的关系。
J Surg Oncol. 2021 Dec;124(7):1014-1021. doi: 10.1002/jso.26606. Epub 2021 Jul 12.
10
Esophageal Cancer in Elderly Patients, Current Treatment Options and Outcomes; A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis.老年患者的食管癌:当前治疗选择与结果;系统评价与汇总分析
Cancers (Basel). 2021 Apr 27;13(9):2104. doi: 10.3390/cancers13092104.