Article

Impact of Surgeon Demographics and Technique on Outcomes After Esophageal Resections: A Nationwide Study

Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Missouri-Columbia School of Medicine, Columbia, Missouri. Electronic address: .
The Annals of thoracic surgery (Impact Factor: 3.65). 12/2012; 95(3). DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.10.038
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Thoracic, cardiac, and general surgeons perform esophageal resections in the United States. This article examines the impact of surgeon subspecialty on outcomes after esophagectomy. METHODS: Esophagectomies performed between 1998 and 2008 were identified in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Surgeons were classified as thoracic, cardiac, or general surgeons if greater than 65% of their operative case mix was representative of their specialty. Surgeons with less than 65% of a specialty-specific case mix served as controls. Regression equations calculated the independent effect of surgeon specialty, surgeon volume, and operative approach (transhiatal versus transthoracic) on outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 40,589 patients who underwent esophagectomies, surgeon identifiers were available for 23,529 patients. Based on case mix, thoracic, cardiac, and general surgeons performed 3,027 (12.9%), 688 (2.9%), and 4,086 (17.4%) esophagectomies, respectively. Operative technique did not independently affect risk-adjusted outcomes-mortality, morbidity, and failure to rescue (defined as death after a complication). Surgeon volume independently lowered mortality and failure to rescue by 4% (p ≤ 0.002 for both), but not complications (p = 0.6). High-volume hospitals (>12 procedures/year) independently lowered mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.96), and failure to rescue (AOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.44-0.94). Esophageal resections performed by general surgeons were associated with higher mortality (AOR, 1.87; 95% CI 1.02-3.45) and failure to rescue (AOR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.06-3.61) but not complications (AOR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.64-1.49). CONCLUSIONS: General surgeons perform the major proportion of esophagectomies in the United States. Surgeon subspecialty is not associated with the risk of complications developing but instead is associated with mortality and failure to rescue from complications. Surgeon subspecialty case mix is an important determinant of outcomes for patients undergoing esophagectomy.

0 Followers
 · 
78 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anastomotic leak is an important cause of morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy. Few studies have targeted risk factors for the development of leak after esophagectomy. The purpose of this study is to use The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database to identify variables associated with leak after esophagectomy. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database was queried for patients treated with esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between 2001 and 2011. Univariate and multivariate analysis of variables associated with an increased risk anastomotic leak was performed. There were 7,595 esophagectomies, with 804 (10.6%) leaks. Thirty-day mortality and length of stay were higher for patients with anastomotic leak. Mortality in patients requiring surgical management was 11.6% (38 of 327) compared with 4.4% (20 of 458) in medically managed leaks (p < 0.001). The leak rate was higher in patients with cervical anastomosis compared with those with intrathoracic anastomoses, 12.3% versus 9.3%, respectively (p = 0.006). There was no difference in leak-associated mortality between the two approaches. Factors associated with leak on univariate analysis include obesity, heart failure, coronary disease, vascular disease, hypertension, steroids, diabetes, renal insufficiency, tobacco use, procedure duration greater than 5 hours, and type of procedure (p < 0.05). Multivariable regression analysis associated heart failure, hypertension, renal insufficiency, and type of procedure as risk factors for the development of leak (p < 0.05). Anastomotic leak after esophagectomy is an important cause of postoperative mortality and increased length of stay. We have identified important risk factors for the development of esophageal anastomotic leak after esophagectomy. Further studies aimed at risk reduction are warranted.
    The Annals of thoracic surgery 09/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.07.119 · 3.65 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To define the impact of hospital teaching status on length of stay and mortality for patients undergoing complex hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) surgery in the USA. Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we identified 285,442 patient records that involved a liver resection, pancreatoduodenectomy, other pancreatic resection, or hepaticojejunostomy between years 2000 and 2010. Year-wise distribution of procedures at teaching and non-teaching hospitals was described. The impact of teaching status on in-hospital mortality for operations performed at hospitals in the top tertile of procedure volume was determined using multivariate logistic regression analysis. A majority of patients were under 65 years of age (59.6 %), white (74.0 %), admitted on an elective basis (77.3 %), and had a low comorbidity burden (70.5 %). Ninety percent were operated upon at hospitals in the top tertile of yearly procedure volume. Among patients undergoing an operation at a hospital in the top tertile of procedure volume (>25/year), non-teaching status was associated with an increased risk of in-hospital death (OR 1.47 [1.3, 1.7]). Other factors associated with increased risk of mortality were older patient age (OR 2.52 [2.3, 2.8]), male gender (OR 1.73 [1.6, 1.9]), higher comorbidity burden (OR 1.49 [1.3, 1.7]), non-elective admission (OR 3.32 [2.9, 4.0]), and having a complication during in-hospital stay (OR 2.53 [2.2, 3.0]), while individuals with private insurance had a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.45 [0.4, 0.5]). After controlling for other covariates, undergoing complex HPB surgery at a non-teaching hospital remained independently associated with 32 % increased odds of death as (OR 1.32, 95 % CI 1.11-1.58; P < 0.001). Even among high-volume hospitals, patients undergoing complex HPB have better outcomes at teaching vs. non-teaching hospitals. While procedural volume is an established factor associated with surgical outcomes among patients undergoing complex HPB procedures, other hospital-level factors such as teaching status have an important impact on peri-operative outcomes.
    Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery 09/2013; 17(12). DOI:10.1007/s11605-013-2349-4 · 2.39 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the increased acceptance of failure-to-rescue (FTR) as an important patient safety indicator (defined as the percentage of deaths among surgical patients with treatable complications), there has not been any large epidemiological study reporting FTR in an Australian setting nor any evaluation on its suitability as a performance indicator. We conducted a population-based study on elective surgical patients from 82 public acute hospitals in New South Wales, Australia between 2002 and 2009, exploring the trends and variations in rates of hospital complications, FTR and 30-day mortality. We used Poisson regression models to derive relative risk ratios (RRs) after adjusting for a range of patient and hospital characteristics. The average rates of complications, FTR and 30-day mortality were 13.8 per 1000 admissions, 14.1% and 6.1 per 1000 admission, respectively. The rates of complications and 30-day mortality were stable throughout the study period however there was a significant decrease in FTR rate after 2006, coinciding with the establishment of national and state-level peak patient safety agencies. There were marked variations in the three rates within the top 20% of hospitals (best) and bottom 20% of hospitals (worst) for each of the four peer-hospital groups. The group comprising the largest volume hospitals (principal referral/teaching hospitals) had a significantly higher rate of FTR in comparison to the other three groups of smaller-sized peer hospital groups (RR = 0.78, 0.57, and 0.61, respectively). Adjusted rates of complications, FTR and 30-day mortality varied widely for individual surgical procedures between the best and worst quintile hospitals within the principal referral hospital group. The decrease in FTR rate over the study period appears to be associated with a wide range of patient safety programs. The marked variations in the three rates between- and within- peer hospital groups highlight the potential for further quality improvement intervention opportunities.
    PLoS ONE 05/2014; 9(5):e96164. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0096164 · 3.53 Impact Factor