4.5 Article

Prognostic impact of postoperative pulmonary complications following salvage esophagectomy after definitive chemoradiotherapy

Journal

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 117, Issue 6, Pages 1251-1259

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jso.24941

Keywords

esophageal cancer; lung complications; prognosis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BackgroundPostoperative complications after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer have a negative effect on patients' survival. Although postoperative complications are more frequently observed after salvage esophagectomy than after planned esophagectomy, the effects of postoperative complications on long-term oncologic outcomes after salvage esophagectomy remain unclear. MethodsThis retrospective study of 70 esophageal cancer patients after definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) compared long-term outcomes between those with and without complications. The association between morbidity and overall survival (OS) was evaluated by a Cox regression analysis. To identify the risk factors for pulmonary complications, logistic regression analysis was carried out. ResultsPostoperative complications occurred in 42 (60.0%) patients. Pulmonary complications and anastomotic leakage occurred in 23 (32.9%) and 9 (12.9%) patients, respectively. Overall complications and anastomotic leakage did not affect long-term outcomes. Survival was significantly worse for patients with pulmonary complications. Radiation dose (<60Gy), response to dCRT (complete), ypStage (0-II), residual disease (R0), and pulmonary complications (negative) were independent factors related to a favorable OS. BMI (<20kg/m(2)), ASA-PS (2-3), and radiation dose (>60Gy) were significant factors affecting the occurrence of pulmonary complications. ConclusionsDevelopment of postoperative pulmonary complications was independently associated with poor prognosis in patients who underwent salvage esophagectomy after dCRT.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available