Attenzione: i dati modificati non sono ancora stati salvati. Per confermare inserimenti o cancellazioni di voci è necessario confermare con il tasto SALVA/INSERISCI in fondo alla pagina
CRIS Current Research Information System
Objective: This study aimed to characterize rates and management of anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) after esophagectomy in an international cohort. Background: Outcomes in patients with anastomotic complications of esophagectomy are currently uncertain. Optimum strategies to manage AL/CN are unknown, and have not been assessed in an international cohort. Methods: This prospective multicenter cohort study included patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between April 2018 and December 2018 (with 90 days of follow-up). The primary outcomes were AL and CN, as defined by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group. The secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and successful AL/CN management, defined as patients being alive at 90 day postoperatively, and requiring no further AL/CN treatment. Results: This study included 2247 esophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. The AL rate was 14.2% (n = 319) and CN rate was 2.7% (n = 60). The overall 90-day mortality rate for patients with AL was 11.3%, and increased significantly with severity of AL (Type 1: 3.2% vs. Type 2: 13.2% vs. Type 3: 24.7%, P < 0.001); a similar trend was observed for CN. Of the 329 patients with AL/CN, primary management was successful in 69.6% of cases. Subsequent rounds of management lead to an increase in the rate of successful treatment, with cumulative success rates of 85.4% and 88.1% after secondary and tertiary management, respectively. Conclusion: Patient outcomes worsen significantly with increasing AL and CN severity. Reintervention after failed primary anastomotic complication management can be successful, hence surgeons should not be deterred from trying alternative management strategies.
R P T Evans, S.K.K. (2022). Rates of Anastomotic Complications and Their Management Following Esophagectomy: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA). ANNALS OF SURGERY, 275(2), 382-391 [10.1097/SLA.0000000000004649].
Rates of Anastomotic Complications and Their Management Following Esophagectomy: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA)
R P T Evans;S K Kamarajah;J R Bundred;K Siaw-Acheampong;D Nepogodiev;J Hodson;J A Gossage;R S Vohra;R van Hillegersberg;P Singh;E A Griffiths;J Hodson;S K Kamarajah;E A Griffiths;D Alderson;J Bundred;R P T Evans;J Gossage;E A Griffiths;B Jefferies;S K Kamarajah;S McKay;I Mohamed;D Nepogodiev;K Siaw-Acheampong;P Singh;R van Hillegersberg;R Vohra;K Wanigasooriya;T Whitehouse;A Gjata;J I Moreno;S F Schoppmann;F R Takeda;B Kidane;R Guevara Castro;T Harustiak;A Bekele;A Kechagias;I Gockel;A Da Roit;A Bagajevas;J S Azagra;H A Mahendran;L Mejía-Fernández;B P L Wijnhoven;J El Kafsi;R H Sayyed;M Sousa;A S Sampaio;I Negoi;R Blanco-Colino;B Wallner;P M Schneider;P K Hsu;A Isik;A Kennedy;S Gananadha;V Wills;M Devadas;C Duong;M Talbot;M W Hii;R Jacobs;N A Andreollo;B Johnston;G Darling;A Isaza-Restrepo;G Rosero;F Arias-Amézquita;D Raptis;J Gaedcke;D Reim;J Izbicki;S Dikinis;D W Kjaer;M H Larsen;M P Achiam;J Saarnio;D Theodorou;T Liakakos;D P Korkolis;W B Robb;C Collins;T Murphy;J Reynolds;V Tonini;M Migliore;L Bonavina;M Valmasoni;R Bardini;J Weindelmayer;M Terashima;R E White;E Alghunaim;M Elhadi;A M Leon-Takahashi;H Medina-Franco;P C Lau;K E Okonta;J Heisterkamp;C Rosman;R van Hillegersberg;G Beban;R Babor;A Gordon;J I Rossaak;K M I Pal;A U Qureshi;S A Naqi;A A Syed;J Barbosa;C S Vicente;J Leite;J Freire;R Casaca;R C T Costa;R R Scurtu;S S Mogoanta;C Bolca;S Constantinoiu;D Sekhniaidze;M Bjelović;J B Y So;G Gačevski;C Loureiro;M Pera;A Bianchi;M Moreno Gijón;J Martín Fernández;M S Trugeda Carrera;M Vallve-Bernal;M A Cítores Pascual;S Elmahi;B Wallner;I Halldestam;J Hedberg;M Stefan;M Schafer;S Gutknecht;M Tez;A Guner;M B Tirnaksiz;E Colak;B Sevinç;A Hindmarsh;I Khan;D Khoo;R Byrom;J Gokhale;P Wilkerson;P Jain;D Chan;K Robertson;S Iftikhar;R J E Skipworth;M Forshaw;S Higgs;J Gossage;R Ni;Y K S Viswanath;P Turner;S Dexter;A Boddy;W H Allum;S Oglesby;E Cheong;D Beardsmore;R Vohra;N Maynard;R Berrisford;S Mercer;S Puig;R Melhado;C Kelty;T Underwood;K Dawas;W Lewis;A Al-Bahrani;G Bryce;M Thomas;A T Arndt;F Palazzo;R A Meguid;Z Cooper;W B Bowne;J Fergusson;E Beenen;C Mosse;J Salim;S Cheah;T Wright;M P Cerdeira;P McQuillan;M Richardson;H Liem;J Spillane;M Yacob;F Albadawi;T Thorpe;A Dingle;C Cabalag;K Loi;O Fisher;S Ward;M Read;M Johnson;R Bassari;H Bui;I Cecconello;R A A Sallum;J R M da Rocha;L R Lopes;V Tercioti Jr;J D S Coelho;J A P Ferrer;G Buduhan;L Tan;S Srinathan;P Shea;J Yeung;F Allison;P Carroll;F Vargas-Barato;F Gonzalez;J Ortega;L Nino-Torres;T C Beltrán-García;L Castilla;M Pineda;A Bastidas;J Gómez-Mayorga;N Cortés;C Cetares;S Caceres;S Duarte;A Pazdro;M Snajdauf;H Faltova;M Sevcikova;P B Mortensen;N Katballe;T Ingemann;B Morten;I Kruhlikava;A P Ainswort;N M Stilling;J Eckardt;J Holm;M Thorsteinsson;M Siemsen;B Brandt;B Nega;E Teferra;A Tizazu;J H Kauppila;V Koivukangas;S Meriläinen;R Gruetzmann;C Krautz;G Weber;H Golcher;G Emons;A Azizian;M Ebeling;S Niebisch;N Kreuser;G Albanese;J Hesse;L Volovnik;U Boecher;M Reeh;S Triantafyllou;D Schizas;A Michalinos;E Mpaili;M Mpoura;A Charalabopoulos;D K Manatakis;D Balalis;J Bolger;C Baban;A Mastrosimone;O McAnena;A Quinn;C B Ó Súilleabháin;M M Hennessy;I Ivanovski;H Khizer;N Ravi;N Donlon;M Cervellera;S Vaccari;S Bianchini;L Sartarelli;E Asti;D Bernardi;S Merigliano;L Provenzano;M Scarpa;L Saadeh;B Salmaso;G De Manzoni;S Giacopuzzi;R La Mendola;C A De Pasqual;Y Tsubosa;M Niihara;T Irino;R Makuuchi;K Ishii;M Mwachiro;A Fekadu;A Odera;E Mwachiro;D AlShehab;H A Ahmed;A O Shebani;A Elhadi;F A Elnagar;H F Elnagar;S T Makkai-Popa;L F Wong;T Yunrong;S Thanninalai;H C Aik;P W Soon;T J Huei;H N L Basave;R Cortés-González;S M Lagarde;J J B van Lanschot;C Cords;W A Jansen;I Martijnse;R Matthijsen;S Bouwense;B Klarenbeek;M Verstegen;F van Workum;J P Ruurda;P C van der Sluis;M de Maat;N Evenett;P Johnston;R Patel;A MacCormick;M Young;B Smith;C Ekwunife;A H Memon;K Shaikh;A Wajid;N Khalil;M Haris;Z U Mirza;S B A Qudus;M Z Sarwar;A Shehzadi;A Raza;M H Jhanzaib;J Farmanali;Z Zakir;O Shakeel;I Nasir;S Khattak;M Baig;M A Noor;H H Ahmed;A Naeem;A C Pinho;R da Silva;A Bernardes;J C Campos;H Matos;T Braga;C Monteiro;P Ramos;F Cabral;M P Gomes;P C Martins;A M Correia;J F Videira 1st;C Ciuce;R Drasovean;R Apostu;C Ciuce;S Paitici;A E Racu;C V Obleaga;M Beuran;B Stoica;C Ciubotaru;V Negoita;I Cordos;R D Birla;D Predescu;P A Hoara;R Tomsa;V Shneider;M Agasiev;I Ganjara;D Gunjić;M Veselinović;T Babič;T S Chin;A Shabbir;G Kim;A Crnjac;H Samo;I Díez Del Val;S Leturio;I Díez Del Val;S Leturio;J M Ramón;M Dal Cero;S Rifá;M Rico;A Pagan Pomar;J A Martinez Corcoles;J L Rodicio Miravalles;S A Pais;S A Turienzo;L S Alvarez;P V Campos;A G Rendo;S S García;E P G Santos;E T Martínez;M J Fernández Díaz;C Magadán Álvarez;V Concepción Martín;C Díaz López;A Rosat Rodrigo;L E Pérez Sánchez;M Bailón Cuadrado;C Tinoco Carrasco;E Choolani Bhojwani;D P Sánchez;M E Ahmed;T Dzhendov;F Lindberg;M Rutegård;M Sundbom;C Mickael;N Colucci;A Schnider;S Mantziari;S Er;E Kurnaz;S Turkyilmaz;A Turkyilmaz;R Yildirim;B E Baki;N Akkapulu;O Karahan;N Damburaci;R Hardwick;P Safranek;V Sujendran;J Bennett;Z Afzal;M Shrotri;B Chan;K Exarchou;T Gilbert;S Mukherjee;T Amalesh;R Kennedy;S McCain;A Harris;G Dobson;N Davies;I Wilson;D Mayo;D Bennett;R Young;P Manby;N Blencowe;M Schiller;B Byrne;A Reece-Smith;D Mitton;V Wong;A Elshaer;M Cowen;V Menon;L C Tan;E McLaughlin;R Koshy;C Sharp;H Brewer;N Das;M Cox;W Al Khyatt;D Worku;R Iqbal;L Walls;R J McGregor;G Fullarton;A Macdonald;C MacKay;C Craig;S Dwerryhouse;S Hornby;S Jaunoo;M Wadley;C Baker;M Saad;M Kelly;A Davies;F Di Maggio;S McKay;P Mistry;R Singhal;O Tucker;S Kapoulas;S Powell-Brett;P Davis;G Bromley;L Watson;R Verma;J Ward;V Shetty;C Ball;K Pursnani;A Sarela;H Sue Ling;S Mehta;J Hayden;N To;T Palser;D Hunter;K Supramaniam;Z Butt;A Ahmed;S Kumar;A Chaudry;O Moussa;M Wilson;P Patil;I Noaman;J Willem;G Bouras;R Evans;M Singh;H Warrilow;A Ahmad;N Tewari;F Yanni;J Couch;E Theophilidou;J J Reilly;P Singh;G van Boxel Gijs;K Akbari;D Zanotti;B Sgromo;G Sanders;T Wheatley;A Ariyarathenam;A Reece-Smith;L Humphreys;C Choh;N Carter;B Knight;P Pucher;A Athanasiou;I Mohamed;B Tan;M Abdulrahman;J Vickers;K Akhtar;R Chaparala;R Brown;M M A Alasmar;R Ackroyd;K Patel;A Tamhankar;A Wyman;R Walker;B Grace;N Abbassi;N Slim;L Ioannidi;G Blackshaw;T Havard;X Escofet;A Powell;A Owera;F Rashid;P Jambulingam;J Padickakudi;H Ben-Younes;K Mccormack;T H Wiggins;I A Makey;M K Karush;C W Seder;M J Liptay;G Chmielewski;W B Bowne;E L Rosato;A C Berger;R Zheng;E Okolo;S Sabour;A Singh;C D Scott;M J Weyant;J D Mitchell;S Rausei;S A Hirji;A Salim;V Roxo;C Chung;A Brown;L Hansen;B Okafor;R Chemaly
2022
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to characterize rates and management of anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) after esophagectomy in an international cohort. Background: Outcomes in patients with anastomotic complications of esophagectomy are currently uncertain. Optimum strategies to manage AL/CN are unknown, and have not been assessed in an international cohort. Methods: This prospective multicenter cohort study included patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between April 2018 and December 2018 (with 90 days of follow-up). The primary outcomes were AL and CN, as defined by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group. The secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and successful AL/CN management, defined as patients being alive at 90 day postoperatively, and requiring no further AL/CN treatment. Results: This study included 2247 esophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. The AL rate was 14.2% (n = 319) and CN rate was 2.7% (n = 60). The overall 90-day mortality rate for patients with AL was 11.3%, and increased significantly with severity of AL (Type 1: 3.2% vs. Type 2: 13.2% vs. Type 3: 24.7%, P < 0.001); a similar trend was observed for CN. Of the 329 patients with AL/CN, primary management was successful in 69.6% of cases. Subsequent rounds of management lead to an increase in the rate of successful treatment, with cumulative success rates of 85.4% and 88.1% after secondary and tertiary management, respectively. Conclusion: Patient outcomes worsen significantly with increasing AL and CN severity. Reintervention after failed primary anastomotic complication management can be successful, hence surgeons should not be deterred from trying alternative management strategies.
R P T Evans, S.K.K. (2022). Rates of Anastomotic Complications and Their Management Following Esophagectomy: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA). ANNALS OF SURGERY, 275(2), 382-391 [10.1097/SLA.0000000000004649].
R P T Evans, S K Kamarajah, J R Bundred, K Siaw-Acheampong, D Nepogodiev, J Hodson, J A Gossage, R S Vohra, R van Hillegersberg, P Singh, E A Griffith...espandi
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/903888
Attenzione
Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo
Citazioni
18
36
24
social impact
Conferma cancellazione
Sei sicuro che questo prodotto debba essere cancellato?
simulazione ASN
Il report seguente simula gli indicatori relativi alla propria produzione scientifica in relazione alle soglie ASN 2023-2025 del proprio SC/SSD. Si ricorda che il superamento dei valori soglia (almeno 2 su 3) è requisito necessario ma non sufficiente al conseguimento dell'abilitazione. La simulazione si basa sui dati IRIS e sugli indicatori bibliometrici alla data indicata e non tiene conto di eventuali periodi di congedo obbligatorio, che in sede di domanda ASN danno diritto a incrementi percentuali dei valori. La simulazione può differire dall'esito di un’eventuale domanda ASN sia per errori di catalogazione e/o dati mancanti in IRIS, sia per la variabilità dei dati bibliometrici nel tempo. Si consideri che Anvur calcola i valori degli indicatori all'ultima data utile per la presentazione delle domande.
La presente simulazione è stata realizzata sulla base delle specifiche raccolte sul tavolo ER del Focus Group IRIS coordinato dall’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e delle regole riportate nel DM 589/2018 e allegata Tabella A. Cineca, l’Università di Modena e Reggio Emilia e il Focus Group IRIS non si assumono alcuna responsabilità in merito all’uso che il diretto interessato o terzi faranno della simulazione. Si specifica inoltre che la simulazione contiene calcoli effettuati con dati e algoritmi di pubblico dominio e deve quindi essere considerata come un mero ausilio al calcolo svolgibile manualmente o con strumenti equivalenti.