Short-Term Outcomes Following Open Versus Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Cancer in England
Authors:
- Alex BottleABAlex Bottle
- Paul AylinPAPaul Aylin
- Omar FaizOFOmar Faiz
- George B. HannaGHGeorge B. Hanna
- 1 February 2012
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Annals of Surgery
- Vol. 255 (2) , 197-203
Abstract
To compare short-term outcomes of open and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for cancer. Numerous studies have demonstrated the safety and possible advantages of MIE in selected cohorts of patients. The increasing use of MIE is not coupled with conclusive evidence of its benefits over "open" esophagectomy, especially in the absence of randomized trials. Hospital Episode Statistics data were analyzed from April 2005 to March 2010. This is a routinely collected database of all English National Health Service Trusts. Office of Population Censuses and Surveys Classification of Surgical Operations and Procedures, 4th revision (OPCS-4), procedure codes were used to identify index resections and International Statistical Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10), diagnostic codes were used to ascertain comorbidity status and complications. Thirty-day in-hospital mortality, medical complications, and surgical reinterventions were analyzed. Unadjusted and risk-adjusted regression analyses were undertaken. Seven thousand five hundred and two esophagectomies were undertaken; of these, 1155 (15.4%) were MIE. In 2009-2010, 24.7% of resections were MIE. There was no difference in 30-day mortality (4.3% vs 4.0%; P = 0.605) and overall medical morbidity (38.0% vs 39.2%; P = 0.457) rates between open and MIE groups, respectively. A higher reintervention rate was associated with the MIE group than with the open group (21% vs 17.6%, P = 0.006; odds ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.38; P = 0.040). Minimally invasive esophagectomy is increasingly performed in the United Kingdom. Although the study confirmed the safety of MIE in a population-based national data, there are no significant benefits demonstrated in mortality and overall morbidity. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is associated with higher reintervention rate. Further evidence is needed to establish the long-term survival of MIE.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- Open Versus Minimally Invasive EsophagectomyAnnals of Surgery, 2010
- Nonelective Excisional Colorectal Surgery in English National Health Service Trusts: A Study of Outcomes from Hospital Episode Statistics Data between 1996 and 2007Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 2010
- Is minimally invasive surgery beneficial in the management of esophageal cancer? A meta-analysisSurgical Endoscopy, 2010
- Perioperative outcomes after transition from conventional to minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in a specialized centerSurgical Endoscopy, 2009
- Systematic review of minimally invasive resection for gastro-oesophageal cancerBritish Journal of Surgery, 2007
- Minimally invasive techniques for oesophageal cancer surgeryBest Practice & Research Clinical Gastroenterology, 2006
- The effects of surgical volumes and training centre status on outcomes following total joint replacement: analysis of the Hospital Episode Statistics for EnglandJournal of Public Health, 2006
- Deprivation: explaining differences in mortality between Scotland and England and Wales.BMJ, 1989
- Total three-stage oesophagectomy for cancer of the oesophagusBritish Journal of Surgery, 1976
- The surgical treatment of carcinoma of the oesophagus with special reference to a new operation for growths of the middle thirdBritish Journal of Surgery, 1946