Suppr超能文献

胸外科区域化可改善食管癌切除术的短期疗效。

Regionalization of thoracic surgery improves short-term cancer esophagectomy outcomes.

作者信息

Ely Sora, Alabaster Amy, Ashiku Simon K, Patel Ashish, Velotta Jeffrey B

机构信息

UCSF East Bay Surgery, Oakland, CA, USA.

Oakland Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente, Oakland, CA, USA.

出版信息

J Thorac Dis. 2019 May;11(5):1867-1878. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.05.30.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Some studies have found that outcomes from cancer esophagectomy are better at higher-volume centers than at lower-volume centers. Reports on outcomes following systematic centralization have largely demonstrated subsequent improvements, but these originate in nationalized healthcare systems that are not very comparable to the heterogeneous private-payer systems that predominate in the United States. We examined how regionalization of thoracic surgery to Centers of Excellence (CoE) within our American integrated healthcare system changed overall care for our patients, and whether it changed outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of 461 consecutive patients undergoing cancer esophagectomy between 2009-2016, spanning the 2014 shift to regionalization. High-volume was defined as ≥5 esophagectomies per year. We compared characteristics of the surgeon, hospital, and operation pre- and post-regionalization using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis test for age. We evaluated their associations with patient outcomes with hierarchical linear and logistic mixed models, which adjusted for clustering within surgeon and facility levels and relevant covariates.

RESULTS

While there was no difference in their baseline demographics, patients undergoing esophagectomy post-regionalization were much more likely to have their surgery performed at a designated Center of Excellence (78.8% of cases versus 34.2%, P<0.001), at a high-volume hospital (92.1% from 75.7%, P<0.001), by a high-volume surgeon (78.8% from 58.8%, P<0.001), by a board-certified thoracic surgeon (82.5% from 64.0%, P<0.001), and by minimally-invasive, versus open, approach (60.8% from 22.1%, P<0.001). Post-regionalization patients were in higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classes (P=0.03) and trended toward higher-stage disease (P=0.14), indicative of the inclusion of higher-complexity patients. Despite that, regionalization was associated with improved short-term outcomes, most notably: average minimally-invasive esophagectomy (MIE) operative time decreased by 2 hours (-135.9 minutes, 95% CI: -172.2, -99.7 minutes); length of stay (LOS) decreased by 2.3 days (95% CI: -3.4, -1.2 days); and 30-day complication rate decreased significantly, from 50.7% to 30.2% (OR 0.45, 95% CI: 0.25, 0.79). Regionalization was the only variable significantly and independently associated with all three outcomes in our adjusted multivariable models. Mortality, both at 30 and 90 days, decreased modestly but was low pre-regionalization, and the difference did not reach significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Regionalization of thoracic surgery in our hospital system resulted in esophagectomies being performed by more experienced surgeons at higher-volume centers, with a concomitant improvement in short-term outcomes. Patients undergoing esophagectomy, particularly MIE, post-regionalization benefited significantly from decreased LOS and perioperative complication rate. Our results suggest that, in a large integrated healthcare system, regionalization significantly improves overall outcomes for patients undergoing cancer esophagectomy.

摘要

背景

一些研究发现,在高容量中心进行的食管癌切除术的结果优于低容量中心。关于系统性集中化后的结果报告在很大程度上显示了随后的改善,但这些报告源于国有化医疗系统,与美国占主导地位的异质私人支付者系统不太具有可比性。我们研究了在美国综合医疗系统内将胸外科手术区域化至卓越中心(CoE)如何改变了我们患者的整体护理,以及它是否改变了结果。

方法

我们对2009年至2016年间连续接受食管癌切除术的461例患者进行了回顾性图表审查(涵盖了2014年向区域化的转变)。高容量定义为每年≥5例食管癌切除术。我们使用卡方检验或费舍尔精确检验对分类变量进行比较,使用克鲁斯卡尔 - 沃利斯检验对年龄进行比较,以分析区域化前后外科医生、医院和手术的特征。我们使用分层线性和逻辑混合模型评估它们与患者结果的关联,该模型调整了外科医生和机构层面的聚类以及相关协变量。

结果

虽然他们的基线人口统计学特征没有差异,但区域化后接受食管癌切除术的患者更有可能在指定的卓越中心进行手术(78.8%的病例,而之前为34.2%,P<0.001),在高容量医院进行手术(从75.7%增至92.1%,P<0.001),由高容量外科医生进行手术(从58.8%增至78.8%,P<0.001),由获得委员会认证的胸外科医生进行手术(从64.0%增至82.5%,P<0.001),以及采用微创而非开放手术方式(从22.1%增至60.8%)。区域化后患者的美国麻醉医师协会分级更高(P = 0.03),且疾病分期有升高趋势(P = 0.14),这表明纳入了更高复杂性的患者。尽管如此,区域化与短期结果的改善相关,最显著的是:平均微创食管切除术(MIE)手术时间减少了2小时(-135.9分钟,95%置信区间:-172.2,-99.7分钟);住院时间(LOS)减少了2.3天(95%置信区间:-3.4,-1.2天);30天并发症发生率显著降低,从50.7%降至30.2%(比值比0.45,95%置信区间:0.25,0.79)。在我们调整后的多变量模型中,区域化是与所有三个结果均显著且独立相关的唯一变量。30天和90天的死亡率虽略有下降,但区域化前死亡率就较低,差异未达到显著水平。

结论

我们医院系统的胸外科区域化导致食管癌切除术由经验更丰富的外科医生在高容量中心进行,并伴随短期结果的改善。区域化后接受食管癌切除术的患者,尤其是MIE患者,住院时间和围手术期并发症发生率降低,显著受益。我们的结果表明,在大型综合医疗系统中,区域化显著改善了接受食管癌切除术患者的总体结果。

相似文献

1
Regionalization of thoracic surgery improves short-term cancer esophagectomy outcomes.
J Thorac Dis. 2019 May;11(5):1867-1878. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.05.30.
2
Effect of Thoracic Surgery Regionalization on 1- and 3-Year Survival after Cancer Esophagectomy.
Ann Surg. 2023 Feb 1;277(2):e305-e312. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005076. Epub 2023 Jan 10.
4
Effect of thoracic surgery regionalization on long-term survival after lung cancer resection.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2022 Mar;163(3):769-777. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2021.03.050. Epub 2021 Mar 20.
5
Variation in Diagnosis, Treatment, and Outcome of Esophageal Cancer in a Regionalized Care System in Ontario, Canada.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Sep 1;4(9):e2126090. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.26090.
6
Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Comparison of Early Surgical Outcomes From The Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2016 Apr;101(4):1281-8; discussion 1288-9. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.09.095. Epub 2015 Dec 17.
7
Variation in outcomes across surgeons meeting the Leapfrog volume standard for complex oncologic surgery.
Cancer. 2021 Nov 1;127(21):4059-4071. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33766. Epub 2021 Jul 22.
8
Outcomes of robotic esophagectomies for esophageal cancer by hospital volume: an analysis of the national cancer database.
Surg Endosc. 2021 Jul;35(7):3802-3810. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07875-z. Epub 2020 Aug 12.
9
Robotic minimally invasive esophagectomy provides superior surgical resection.
Surg Endosc. 2021 Nov;35(11):6329-6334. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-08120-3. Epub 2020 Nov 10.
10
Impact of surgeon specialty on clinical outcomes following esophagectomy for cancer.
Surg Endosc. 2023 Nov;37(11):8309-8315. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10391-5. Epub 2023 Sep 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Travel to High-Volume Centers and Survival After Esophagectomy for Cancer.
JAMA Surg. 2025 Jan 1;160(1):19-27. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.5009.
2
Recognizing the Role for Conversion Therapy in Metastatic Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer (ESCC): A Call for Future Study.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2025 Jan;32(1):24-26. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-16335-0. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
3
The impact of minimally-invasive esophagectomy operative duration on post-operative outcomes.
Front Surg. 2024 Feb 19;11:1348942. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2024.1348942. eCollection 2024.
5
Assessment of a collaborative treatment model for trimodal management of esophageal cancer.
J Thorac Dis. 2023 Sep 28;15(9):4668-4680. doi: 10.21037/jtd-23-346. Epub 2023 Aug 25.
8
Improving outcomes in malignant pleural mesothelioma in an integrated health care system.
J Thorac Dis. 2022 Sep;14(9):3352-3363. doi: 10.21037/jtd-22-427.
9
Outcomes of Minimally Invasive and Robot-Assisted Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.
Cancers (Basel). 2022 Jul 28;14(15):3667. doi: 10.3390/cancers14153667.
10
Evaluation of oesophageal and gastric resection outcomes in a small-volume unit.
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2021 Jun 11;67:102499. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2021.102499. eCollection 2021 Jul.

本文引用的文献

1
Operative time in esophagectomy: Does it affect outcomes?
Surgery. 2018 Oct;164(4):866-871. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2018.06.020. Epub 2018 Aug 16.
3
Changes in treatment and outcome of oesophageal cancer in Denmark between 2004 and 2013.
Br J Surg. 2017 Sep;104(10):1338-1345. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10586. Epub 2017 Jul 18.
4
Characterizing the role of a high-volume cancer resection ecosystem on low-volume, high-quality surgical care.
Surgery. 2016 Oct;160(4):839-849. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2016.07.002. Epub 2016 Aug 11.
7
Does minimally invasive oesophagectomy provide a benefit in hospital length of stay when compared with open oesophagectomy?
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2016 Mar;22(3):360-7. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivv339. Epub 2015 Dec 15.
8
Outcomes With Open and Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy After Neoadjuvant Therapy.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2016 Mar;101(3):1097-103. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.09.062. Epub 2015 Dec 1.
9
The Impact of Postoperative Complications on Survivals After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Aug;94(33):e1369. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000001369.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验