Transhiatal vs. Transthoracic Esophagectomy: A NSQIP Analysis of Postoperative Outcomes and Risk Factors for Morbidity
Both transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) and transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) are accepted procedures for esophageal resection. We aimed to compare postoperative outcomes between these procedures and identify risk factors for morbidity.
A retrospective analysis was performed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Adult patients who underwent THE or TTE between 2005 and 2014 were included. Postoperative morbidity, length of stay, and 30-day mortality were compared. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for complications, and likelihood ratio tests were used to assess whether the effect of each risk factor was different across THE and TTE.
A total of 4053 patients were included, 2362 (58.3%) underwent TTE and 1691 (41.7%) underwent THE. TTE was associated with higher incidences of postoperative pneumonia and bleeding requiring transfusion. THE had higher incidences of superficial wound infection, deep wound infection, urinary tract infection, and sepsis. There were no significant differences in occurrence of anastomotic leak (THE 7.6% vs. TTE 9.4%, p = 0.35) or 30-day mortality (THE 2.3% vs. TTE 2.5%, p = 0.63). Female gender, black race, hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, partially or fully dependent functional status, and an ASA score ≥ 3 were independently associated with postoperative complications. The impact of the risk factors on morbidity was similar across both procedures.
THE and TTE have similar incidence of anastomotic leak and 30-day mortality. The impact of gender, race, and patients’ comorbidities on postoperative complications is similar across both types of esophagectomy.
Publisher URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11605-017-3572-1
Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.
Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.