Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: Unravelling differences in failure to rescue.
Name:
Publisher version
View Source
Access full-text PDFOpen Access
View Source
Check access options
Check access options
Author
Ubels, SanderMatthée, Eric
Verstegen, Moniek
Klarenbeek, Bastiaan
Bouwense, Stefan
van Berge Henegouwen, Mark I
Daams, Freek
Dekker, Jan Willem T
van Det, Marc J
van Esser, Stijn
Griffiths, Ewen A
Haveman, Jan Willem
Nieuwenhuijzen, Grard
Siersema, Peter D
Wijnhoven, Bas
Hannink, Gerjon
van Workum, Frans
Rosman, Camiel
Heisterkamp, Joos
Polat, Fatih
Schouten, Jeroen
Singh, Pritam
Publication date
2023-01-20
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Introduction: Failure to rescue (FTR) is an important outcome measure after esophagectomy and reflects mortality after postoperative complications. Differences in FTR have been associated with hospital resection volume. However, insight into how centers manage complications and achieve their outcomes is lacking. Anastomotic leak (AL) is a main contributor to FTR. This study aimed to assess differences in FTR after AL between centers, and to identify factors that explain these differences. Methods: TENTACLE - Esophagus is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. Differences in FTR were assessed between low-volume (<20 resections), middle-volume (20-60 resections) and high-volume centers (≥60 resections). Mediation analysis was performed using logistic regression, including possible mediators for FTR: case-mix, hospital resources, leak severity and treatment. Results: FTR after AL was 11.7%. After adjustment for confounders, FTR was lower in high-volume vs. low-volume (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.2-0.8), but not versus middle-volume centers (OR 0.67, 95%CI 0.5-1.0). After mediation analysis, differences in FTR were found to be explained by lower leak severity, lower secondary ICU readmission rate and higher availability of therapeutic modalities in high-volume centers. No statistically significant direct effect of hospital volume was found: high-volume vs. low-volume 0.86 (95%CI 0.4-1.7), high-volume vs. middle-volume OR 0.86 (95%CI 0.5-1.4). Conclusion: Lower FTR in high-volume compared with low-volume centers was explained by lower leak severity, less secondary ICU readmissions and higher availability of therapeutic modalities. To reduce FTR after AL, future studies should investigate effective strategies to reduce leak severity and prevent secondary ICU readmission.Citation
Ubels S, Matthée E, Verstegen M, Klarenbeek B, Bouwense S, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Daams F, Dekker JWT, van Det MJ, van Esser S, Griffiths EA, Haveman JW, Nieuwenhuijzen G, Siersema PD, Wijnhoven B, Hannink G, van Workum F, Rosman C; TENTACLE – Esophagus collaborative group; Writing Committee; Heisterkamp J, Polat F, Schouten J, Singh P; Study collaborators. Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: Unravelling differences in failure to rescue. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2023 May;49(5):974-982. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.01.010. Epub 2023 Jan 20Type
ArticleAdditional Links
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07487983PMID
36732207Publisher
Elsevierae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
10.1016/j.ejso.2023.01.010