Mortality and failure‐to‐rescue after esophagectomy in the procedure‐targeted National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe association between procedural volume and esophagectomy outcomes has been established, but the relationship between higher levels of care and esophagectomy outcomes has not been explored. This study aims to investigate whether hospital participation in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) esophagectomy‐targeted registry is associated with superior outcomes.MethodsThe 2016–2020 ACS NSQIP standard and esophagectomy‐targeted registries were queried. Esophagectomy outcomes were analyzed overall and stratified by esophagectomy type (Ivor Lewis vs. transhiatal vs. 3‐field McKeown).ResultsA total of 2181 and 5449 esophagectomy cases were identified in the standard and targeted databases (68% Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). The median age was 65 years and 80% were male. Preoperative characteristics were largely comparable. On univariate analysis, targeted hospitals were associated with lower mortality (2% vs. 4%, p < 0.01) and failure‐to‐rescue rates (11% vs. 17%, p < 0.01), higher likelihood of an optimal outcome (62% vs. 58%, p = 0.01), and shorter hospital stay (median 9 vs. 10 days, p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, Ivor Lewis esophagectomy at targeted centers was associated with reduced odds of mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.57 and 95% confidence intervals 0.35–0.90] and failure‐to‐rescue [OR 0.54 (0.33–0.90)] with no difference in serious morbidity or optimal outcome. There was no statistically significant difference in odds of mortality or failure to rescue in targeted versus standard centers when performing transhiatal or McKeown esophagectomy.ConclusionsEsophagectomy performed at hospitals participating in the targeted ACS NSQIP is associated with roughly half the risk of mortality compared to the standard registry. The factors underlying this relationship may be valuable in quality improvement.