Dataset Information

Hospital readmission is associated with poor survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

ABSTRACT: Hospital readmissions are costly and associated with inferior patient outcomes. There is limited knowledge related to readmissions after esophagectomy for malignancy. Our aim was to determine the impact on survival of readmission after esophagectomy.This cohort study utilizes Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data (2002 to 2009). Survival, length of stay, 30-day readmissions, and discharge disposition were determined. Multivariate logistic regression models were created to examine risk factors associated with readmission.In all, 1,744 patients with esophageal cancer underwent esophagectomy: 80% of patients (1,390) were male, and mean age was 73 years; 71.8% of tumors (1,251) were adenocarcinomas, and 72.5% (1,265) were distal esophageal tumors; 38% of patients (667) received induction therapy. Operative approach was transthoracic in 52.6% of patients (918) and transhiatal in 37.4% (653), and required complex reconstruction (intestinal interposition) in 9.9% (173). Stage distribution was as follows: stage I, 35.3% (616); stage II, 32.5% (566); stage III, 27.9% (487); and stage IV, 2.3% (40). Median length of stay was 13 days, hospital mortality was 9.3% (158 patients), and 30-day readmission rate was 18.6% (212 of 1,139 home discharges); 25.4% of patients (443) were discharged to institutional care facilities. Overall survival was significantly worse for patients who were readmitted (p < 0.0001, log rank test). Risk factors for readmission were comorbidity score of 3+, urgent admission, and urban residence.Hospital readmissions after esophagectomy for cancer occur frequently and are associated with worse survival. Improved identification of patients at risk for readmission after esophagectomy can inform patient selection, discharge planning, and outpatient monitoring. Optimization of such practices may lead to improved outcomes at reduced cost.

SUBMITTER: Fernandez FG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4282960 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hospital readmission is associated with poor survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Fernandez Felix G FG Khullar Onkar O Force Seth D SD Jiang Renjian R Pickens Allan A Howard David D Ward Kevin K Gillespie Theresa T

The Annals of thoracic surgery 20141111 1

<h4>Background</h4>Hospital readmissions are costly and associated with inferior patient outcomes. There is limited knowledge related to readmissions after esophagectomy for malignancy. Our aim was to determine the impact on survival of readmission after esophagectomy.<h4>Methods</h4>This cohort study utilizes Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data (2002 to 2009). Survival, length of stay, 30-day readmissions, and discharge disposition were determined. Multivariate logistic re ...[more]

PMID: 25442987

Similar Datasets

Project description:The purpose of this study was to examine the role of induction chemoradiation in the treatment of potentially resectable locally advanced (T2-3N0 and T1-3N+) esophageal cancer utilizing a large national database. The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried for all patients undergoing esophagectomy for clinical T2-3N0 and T1-3N+ esophageal cancer of the mid- or lower esophagus. Patients were stratified by the use of induction chemoradiation therapy versus surgery-first. Trends were assessed with the Cochran-Armitage test. Predictors of receiving induction therapy were evaluated with multivariable logistic regression. A propensity-matched analysis was conducted to compare outcomes between groups, and the Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate long-term survival. Within the NCDB, 7921 patients were identified, of which 6103 (77.0%) were treated with chemoradiation prior to esophagectomy, while the remaining 1818 (23.0%) were managed with surgery-first. Use of induction therapy increased over time, with an absolute increase of 11.8% from 2003-2011 (P < 0.001). As revealed by the propensity model, induction therapy was associated with higher rates of negative margins and shorter hospital length of stay, but no differences in unplanned readmission and 30-day mortality rates. In unadjusted survival analysis, induction therapy was associated with better long-term survival compared to a strategy of surgery-first, with 5-year survival rates of 37.2% versus 28.6%, P < 0.001. Following propensity score matching analysis, the use of induction therapy maintained a significant survival advantage over surgery-first (5-year survival: 37.9% vs. 28.7%, P < 0.001). Treatment with induction chemoradiation therapy prior to surgical resection is associated with significant improvement in long-term survival, even after adjusting for confounders with a propensity model. Induction therapy should be considered in all medically appropriate patients with resectable cT2-3N0 and cT1-3N+ esophageal cancer, prior to esophagectomy.

Project description:IntroductionEsophagectomy is a key component in the curative treatment of esophageal cancer. Little is understood about the impact of smoking status on perioperative morbidity and mortality and the long-term outcome of patients following esophagectomy.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate morbidity and mortality according to smoking status in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing two-stage transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) for esophageal cancers (adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma) between January 1997 and December 2016 at the Northern Oesophagogastric Unit were included from a prospectively maintained database. The main explanatory variable was smoking status, defined as current smoker, ex-smoker, and non-smoker. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), while secondary outcomes included perioperative complications (overall, anastomotic leaks, and pulmonary complications) and survival (cancer-specific survival [CSS], recurrence-free survival [RFS]).ResultsDuring the study period, 1168 patients underwent esophagectomy for cancer. Of these, 24% (n = 282) were current smokers and only 30% (n = 356) had never smoked. The median OS of current smokers was significantly shorter than ex-smokers and non-smokers (median 36 vs. 42 vs. 48 months; p = 0.015). However, on adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in long-term OS between smoking status in the entire cohort. The overall complication rates were significantly higher with current smokers compared with ex-smokers or non-smokers (73% vs. 66% vs. 62%; p = 0.018), and there were no significant differences in anastomotic leaks and pulmonary complications between the groups. On subgroup analysis by receipt of neoadjuvant therapy and tumor histology, smoking status did not impact long-term survival in adjusted multivariable analyses.ConclusionAlthough smoking is associated with higher rates of short-term perioperative morbidity, it does not affect long-term OS, CSS, and RFS following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Therefore, implementation of perioperative pathways to optimize patients may help reduce the risk of complications.

Project description:To update our experiences with minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 445 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy between January 2009 and July 2015 at the Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and used 103 patients who underwent open McKeown esophagectomy in the same period as controls. Among 375 patients who underwent total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy, 180 in the early period were chosen for the study of learning curve of total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy. These 180 minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomies performed by five surgeons were divided into three groups according to time sequence as group 1 (n = 60), group 2 (n = 60) and group 3 (n = 60).Patients who underwent total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy had significantly less intraoperative blood loss than patients who underwent hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy or open McKeown esophagectomy (100 mL vs 300 mL vs 200 mL, P = 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in operation time, number of harvested lymph nodes, or postoperative morbidity including incidence of pulmonary complication and anastomotic leak between total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy, hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy and open McKeown esophagectomy groups. There were no significant differences in 5-year survival between these three groups (60.5% vs 47.9% vs 35.6%, P = 0.735). Patients in group 1 had significantly longer duration of operation than those in groups 2 and 3. There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, or postoperative morbidity including incidence of pulmonary complication and anastomotic leak between groups 1, 2 and 3.Total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy was associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss and comparable short term and long term survival compared with hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy or open Mckeown esophagectomy. At least 12 cases are needed to master total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a high volume center.

Project description:Background:Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) reduces postoperative respiratory complications and enables meticulous mediastinal lymphadenectomy. However, whether adding a robotic abdominal procedure to a robotic thoracic procedure can result in better outcomes is unclear. We examined outcomes after total-RAMIE (T-RAMIE) and compared them with the outcomes after hybrid-RAMIE (H-RAMIE). Methods:Total of 227 patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were included. T-RAMIE was defined as esophagectomy performed robotically in both the thoracic and abdominal cavities. Laparotomy was used instead of the robotic procedure in H-RAMIE. T-RAMIE was performed in 144 patients (63.4%), and propensity score matching produced 49 matched pairs from each group. Early and long-term clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared. Results:T-RAMIE was mostly performed for upper or mid-thoracic squamous cell carcinoma (n=119, 82.6%) and cervical anastomosis, and three-field lymphadenectomy was performed in 113 (78.5%) and 54 (37.5%) patients, respectively. One laparotomy conversion was necessary because of severe obesity. The propensity-matched analysis demonstrated that T-RAMIE showed a comparable 90-day mortality rate with H-RAMIE (0% vs. 6.1%, P=0.083). The incidence rates of total (63.3% vs. 63.3%; P=1.000), abdominal (8.2% vs. 14.3%; P=0.366), and respiratory complications (10.2% vs. 10.2%; P=1.000) were not different between two groups. The number of harvested abdominal lymph nodes was similar (12.4±9.0 vs. 12.3±8.9; P=0.992). Median follow-up duration for T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE was 16.3 and 23.5 months, respectively. Two-year overall survival rate (86.2% in T-RAMIE vs. 77.6% in H-RAMIE; P=0.150) and recurrence-free survival (76.6% in T-RAMIE vs. 62.2% in H-RAMIE; P=0.280) were comparable between the two groups. Conclusions:In this matched analysis, T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE showed comparable early outcomes and long-term survival. The low tendencies of early mortality and conversion rate of T-RAMIE suggest that it might be a safe alternative to open stomach mobilization and abdominal lymphadenectomy.

Dataset Information

Hospital readmission is associated with poor survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Publications

Hospital readmission is associated with poor survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets