Cultural advice

The Australian National University acknowledges, celebrates and pays our respects to the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people of the Canberra region and to all First Nations Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and work, and whose cultures are among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are advised that ANU Library collections may include images, names, voices, and other representations of deceased persons.

Material in the collection may contain terms, language or views that reflect the period in which the item was created and may be considered inappropriate today.

Predictors of anastomotic leak and conduit necrosis after oesophagectomy: Results from the oesophago-gastric anastomosis audit (OGAA)

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Authors

Griffiths, Ewen A.
Halle-Smith, J. M.
Kamarajah, S. K.
Evans, R. P. T.
Nepogodiev, D.
Hodson, J.
Bundred, J. R.
Gockel, I.
Gossage, J.
Isik, A.

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Access Statement

Research Projects

Organizational Units

Journal Issue

Abstract

Background: Both anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) after oesophagectomy are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the identification of preoperative, modifiable risk factors is desirable. The aim of this study was to generate a risk scoring model for AL and CN after oesophagectomy.  Methods: Patients undergoing curative resection for oesophageal cancer were identified from the international Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) from April 2018–December 2018. Definitions for AL and CN were those set out by the Oesophageal Complications Consensus Group. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for both AL and CN. A risk score was then produced for both AL and CN using the derivation set, then internally validated using the validation set.  Results: This study included 2247 oesophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. The AL rate was 14.2% and CN rate was 2.7%. Preoperative factors that were independent predictors of AL were cardiovascular comorbidity and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The risk scoring model showed insufficient predictive ability in internal validation (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.618). Preoperative factors that were independent predictors of CN were: body mass index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, previous myocardial infarction and smoking history. These were converted into a risk-scoring model and internally validated using the validation set with an AUROC of 0.775.  Conclusion: Despite a large dataset, AL proves difficult to predict using preoperative factors. The risk-scoring model for CN provides an internally validated tool to estimate a patient's risk preoperatively.

Description

Citation

Source

European Journal of Surgical Oncology

Book Title

Entity type

Publication

Access Statement

License Rights

Restricted until

abcd