University hospital status and surgeon volume and risk of reoperation following surgery for esophageal cancer

被引:17
|
作者
Kauppila, Joonas H. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Wahlin, Karl [1 ]
Lagergren, Pernilla [4 ]
Lagergren, Jesper [1 ,5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Karolinska Inst, Dept Mol Med & Surg, Upper Gastrointestinal Surg, S-77176 Stockholm, Sweden
[2] Univ Oulu, Med Res Ctr, Canc & Translat Med Res Unit, Oulu 90014, Finland
[3] Oulu Univ Hosp, Oulu 90014, Finland
[4] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Karolinska Inst, Dept Mol Med & Surg, Surg Care Sci, S-17176 Stockholm, Sweden
[5] Kings Coll London, Div Canc Studies, London, England
[6] Guys & St Thomas NHS Fdn Trust, London, England
来源
EJSO | 2018年 / 44卷 / 05期
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
Neoplasm; Esophagus; Esophagectomy; Surgery; SURVIVAL; COMPLICATIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejso.2018.02.212
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: Centralization of surgery improves the survival following esophagectomy for cancer, but whether university hospital setting or surgeon volume influences the reoperation rates is unknown. We aimed to clarify whether hospital status or surgeon volume are associated with a risk of reoperation after esophagectomy. Methods: Patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in 1987-2010 were identified from a population-based, nationwide Swedish cohort study. University hospital status and cumulative surgeon volume were analyzed in relation to risk of reoperation or death (the latter included to avoid competing risk errors) within 30 days of surgery. Multivariable logistic regression provided odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusted for calendar period, age, sex, comorbidity, tumor histology, stage, neoadjuvant therapy, resection margin, surgeon volume, and hospital status. Results: Among 1820 participants, 989 (54%) underwent esophagectomy in university hospitals and 271 (15%) died or were reoperated within 30 days of surgery. Non-university hospital status was associated with an increased risk of reoperation or death compared to university hospitals (adjusted OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.13-2.13). Regarding surgeon volume, the ORs were increased in the lower volume categories, but not statistically significant (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.89-1.89 for surgeon volume <7 and OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.75-1.63 for surgeon volume 7-16, compared to surgeon volume >16). Conclusion: The risk of reoperation or death within 30 days of esophagectomy seems to be lower in university hospitals even after adjustment for surgeon volume and other potential confounders. These results support centralizing esophageal cancer patients to university hospitals. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd, BASO similar to The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:632 / 637
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] University hospital status and prognosis following surgery for esophageal cancer
    Markar, S. R.
    Wahlin, K.
    Lagergren, P.
    Lagergren, J.
    EJSO, 2016, 42 (08): : 1191 - 1195
  • [2] Surgeon volume and reoperation risk after midurethral sling surgery
    Berger, Alexander A.
    Tan-Kim, Jasmine
    Menefee, Shawn A.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2019, 221 (05)
  • [3] Surgeon Volume and Surgeon Age in Relation to Proficiency Gain Curves for Prognosis Following Surgery for Esophageal Cancer
    Gottlieb-Vedi, Eivind
    Mackenzie, Hugh
    van Workum, Frans
    Rosman, Camiel
    Lagergren, Pernilla
    Markar, Sheraz
    Lagergren, Jesper
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 26 (02) : 497 - 505
  • [4] Surgeon Volume and Surgeon Age in Relation to Proficiency Gain Curves for Prognosis Following Surgery for Esophageal Cancer
    Eivind Gottlieb-Vedi
    Hugh Mackenzie
    Frans van Workum
    Camiel Rosman
    Pernilla Lagergren
    Sheraz Markar
    Jesper Lagergren
    Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2019, 26 : 497 - 505
  • [5] Hospital volume, surgeon volume, and patient costs for cancer surgery
    Ho, Vivian
    Aloia, Thomas
    MEDICAL CARE, 2008, 46 (07) : 718 - 725
  • [6] Surgeon Volume is a Poor Proxy for Skill in Esophageal Cancer Surgery
    Rittegard, Martin
    Lagergren, Jesper
    Rouvelas, Ioannis
    Lagergren, Pernilla
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2009, 249 (02) : 256 - 261
  • [7] A high volume surgeon or a high volume hospital for urological cancer surgery?
    McCabe, JE
    Jibawi, A
    Willmott, S
    Javle, PM
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2005, 95 : 98 - 98
  • [8] Hospital and Surgeon Volume in Relation to Survival After Esophageal Cancer Surgery in a Population-Based Study
    Derogar, Maryam
    Sadr-Azodi, Omid
    Johar, Asif
    Lagergren, Pernilla
    Lagergren, Jesper
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2013, 31 (05) : 551 - 557
  • [9] Trends in Hospital and Surgeon Volume and Operative Mortality for Cancer Surgery
    Vivian Ho
    Martin J. Heslin
    Huifeng Yun
    Lee Howard
    Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2006, 13 : 851 - 858
  • [10] The Effect of Hospital and Surgeon Volume on Outcomes for Rectal Cancer Surgery
    Salz, Talya
    Sandler, Robert S.
    CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2008, 6 (11) : 1185 - 1193