nach oben

Digestive Diseases and Sciences

Erschienen in:

01.12.2015 | Review

Quality Management and Key Performance Indicators in Oncologic Esophageal Surgery

verfasst von: Ines Gockel, Constantin Johannes Ahlbrand, Michael Arras, Elke Maria Schreiber, Hauke Lang

Erschienen in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences | Ausgabe 12/2015

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Ranking systems and comparisons of quality and performance indicators will be of increasing relevance for complex “high-risk” procedures such as esophageal cancer surgery. The identification of evidence-based standards relevant for key performance indicators in esophageal surgery is essential for establishing monitoring systems and furthermore a requirement to enhance treatment quality. In the course of this review, we analyze the key performance indicators case volume, radicality of resection, and postoperative morbidity and mortality, leading to continuous quality improvement. Ranking systems established on this basis will gain increased relevance in highly complex procedures within the national and international comparison and furthermore improve the treatment of patients with esophageal carcinoma.

R0: microscopic tumor-free resection margin, R1: microscopic positive resection margin, R2: macroscopic positive resection margin.

Brown LM, Devesa SS, Chow WH. Incidence of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus among white Americans by sex, stage, and age. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1184–1187. doi:10.1093/jnci/djn211.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

van Hagen P, Hulshof MC, van Lanschot JJ, et al. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:2074–2084. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1112088.CrossRefPubMed

von Zglinicki T. Oxidative stress shortens telomeres. Trends Biochem Sci. 2002;27:339–344.CrossRef

Goldstone J. The role of quality assurance versus continuous quality improvement. J Vasc Surg. 1998;28:378–380.CrossRefPubMed

Hammermeister KE, Johnson R, Marshall G, Grover FL. Continuous assessment and improvement in quality of care. A model from the Department of Veterans Affairs Cardiac Surgery. Ann Surg. 1994;219:281–290.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Sihvo EI, Salminen JT, Rantanen TK, et al. Oxidative stress has a role in malignant transformation in Barrett’s oesophagus. Int J Cancer. 2002;102:551–555. doi:10.1002/ijc.10755.CrossRefPubMed

Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1128–1137. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa012337.CrossRefPubMed

Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, Goodney PP, Wennberg DE, Lucas FL. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2117–2127. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa035205.CrossRefPubMed

Finks JF, Osborne NH, Birkmeyer JD. Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2128–2137. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa1010705.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

10.

Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Thrumurthy S, Low DE. Volume-outcome relationship in surgery for esophageal malignancy: systematic review and meta-analysis 2000–2011. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:1055–1063. doi:10.1007/s11605-011-1731-3.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Wouters MW, Gooiker GA, van Sandick JW, Tollenaar RA. The volume-outcome relation in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer. 2012;118:1754–1763. doi:10.1002/cncr.26383.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Wouters MW, Wijnhoven BP, Karim-Kos HE, et al. High-volume versus low-volume for esophageal resections for cancer: the essential role of case-mix adjustments based on clinical data. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:80–87. doi:10.1245/s10434-007-9673-4.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

13.

Coupland VH, Lagergren J, Luchtenborg M, et al. Hospital volume, proportion resected and mortality from oesophageal and gastric cancer: a population-based study in England, 2004–2008. Gut. 2013;62:961–966. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2012-303008.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Wouters MW, Karim-Kos HE, le Cessie S, et al. Centralization of esophageal cancer surgery: does it improve clinical outcome? Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:1789–1798. doi:10.1245/s10434-009-0458-9.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

15.

Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Hospital volume and failure to rescue with high-risk surgery. Med Care. 2011;49:1076–1081. doi:10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182329b97.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Dikken JL, van Sandick JW, Allum WH, et al. Differences in outcomes of oesophageal and gastric cancer surgery across Europe. Br J Surg. 2013;100:83–94. doi:10.1002/bjs.8966.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Metzger R, Bollschweiler E, Vallbohmer D, Maish M, DeMeester TR, Holscher AH. High volume centers for esophagectomy: what is the number needed to achieve low postoperative mortality? Dis Esophagus. 2004;17:310–314. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2050.2004.00431.x.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Dikken JL, Wouters MW, Lemmens VE, et al. Influence of hospital type on outcomes after oesophageal and gastric cancer surgery. Br J Surg. 2012;99:954–963. doi:10.1002/bjs.8787.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Dimick JB, Cowan JA Jr, Colletti LM, Upchurch GR Jr. Hospital teaching status and outcomes of complex surgical procedures in the United States. Arch Surg. 2004;139:137–141. doi:10.1001/archsurg.139.2.137.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Milstein A, Galvin RS, Delbanco SF, Salber P, Buck CR Jr. Improving the safety of health care: the leapfrog initiative. Eff Clin Pract. 2000;3:313–316.PubMed

21.

Pandeya N, Williams G, Green AC, Webb PM, Whiteman DC. Alcohol consumption and the risks of adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus. Gastroenterology. 2009;136:1215e1-2–1224e1-2. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2008.12.052.CrossRef

22.

Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Potential benefits of the new Leapfrog standards: effect of process and outcomes measures. Surgery. 2004;135:569–575. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2004.03.004.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Jenkins GJ, Cronin J, Alhamdani A, et al. The bile acid deoxycholic acid has a non-linear dose response for DNA damage and possibly NF-kappaB activation in oesophageal cells, with a mechanism of action involving ROS. Mutagenesis. 2008;23:399–405. doi:10.1093/mutage/gen029.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Courrech Staal EF, Wouters MW, Boot H, Tollenaar RA, Sandick JW. Quality-of-care indicators for oesophageal cancer surgery: a review. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010;36:1035–1043. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2010.08.131.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Urbach DR, Austin PC. Conventional models overestimate the statistical significance of volume-outcome associations, compared with multilevel models. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58:391–400. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.12.001.CrossRefPubMed

26.

LaPar DJ, Kron IL, Jones DR, Stukenborg GJ, Kozower BD. Hospital procedure volume should not be used as a measure of surgical quality. Ann Surg. 2012;256:606–615. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31826b4be6.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Osborne NH, Ghaferi AA, Nicholas LH, Dimick JB, Mph M. Evaluating popular media and internet-based hospital quality ratings for cancer surgery. Arch Surg. 2011;146:600–604. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2011.119.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Wouters MW, Krijnen P, Le Cessie S, et al. Volume- or outcome-based referral to improve quality of care for esophageal cancer surgery in The Netherlands. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99:481–487. doi:10.1002/jso.21191.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Dexter SP, Sue-Ling H, McMahon MJ, Quirke P, Mapstone N, Martin IG. Circumferential resection margin involvement: an independent predictor of survival following surgery for oesophageal cancer. Gut. 2001;48:667–670.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

30.

Griffiths EA, Brummell Z, Gorthi G, Pritchard SA, Welch IM. The prognostic value of circumferential resection margin involvement in oesophageal malignancy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:413–419. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2005.11.024.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Khan OA, Fitzgerald JJ, Soomro I, Beggs FD, Morgan WE, Duffy JP. Prognostic significance of circumferential resection margin involvement following oesophagectomy for cancer. Br J Cancer. 2003;88:1549–1552. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6600931.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

32.

Law S, Arcilla C, Chu KM, Wong J. The significance of histologically infiltrated resection margin after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Am J Surg. 1998;176:286–290.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Sagar PM, Johnston D, McMahon MJ, Dixon MF, Quirke P. Significance of circumferential resection margin involvement after oesophagectomy for cancer. Br J Surg. 1993;80:1386–1388.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Scheepers JJ, van der Peet DL, Veenhof AA, Cuesta MA. Influence of circumferential resection margin on prognosis in distal esophageal and gastroesophageal cancer approached through the transhiatal route. Dis Esophagus. 2009;22:42–48. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2050.2008.00898.x.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Sujendran V, Wheeler J, Baron R, Warren BF, Maynard N. Effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on circumferential margin positivity and its impact on prognosis in patients with resectable oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg. 2008;95:191–194. doi:10.1002/bjs.5983.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Wijnhoven BP, Tran KT, Esterman A, Watson DI, Tilanus HW. An evaluation of prognostic factors and tumor staging of resected carcinoma of the esophagus. Ann Surg. 2007;245:717–725. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000251703.35919.02.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

37.

Altorki NK, Zhou XK, Stiles B, et al. Total number of resected lymph nodes predicts survival in esophageal cancer. Ann Surg. 2008;248:221–226. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31817bbe59.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Gockel I, Sgourakis G, Lyros O, Hansen T, Lang H. Dissection of lymph node metastases in esophageal cancer. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2011;11:571–578. doi:10.1586/era.10.157.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Peyre CG, Hagen JA, DeMeester SR, et al. The number of lymph nodes removed predicts survival in esophageal cancer: an international study on the impact of extent of surgical resection. Ann Surg. 2008;248:549–556. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e318188c474.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Schwarz RE, Smith DD. Clinical impact of lymphadenectomy extent in resectable esophageal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2007;11:1384–1393; discussion 93–94. doi:10.1007/s11605-007-0264-2.

41.

Courrech Staal EF, Aleman BM, Boot H, van Velthuysen ML, van Tinteren H, van Sandick JW. Systematic review of the benefits and risks of neoadjuvant chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1482–1496. doi:10.1002/bjs.7175.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Siewert JR, Stein HJ. Lymph-node dissection in squamous cell esophageal cancer—who benefits? Langenbecks Arch Surg. 1999;384:141–148.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Siewert JR, Stein HJ, Bottcher K. Lymphadenectomy in tumors of the upper gastrointestinal tract. Chirurg. 1996;67:877–888.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Bollschweiler E, Besch S, Drebber U, et al. Influence of neoadjuvant chemoradiation on the number and size of analyzed lymph nodes in esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:3187–3194. doi:10.1245/s10434-010-1196-8.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Nishihira T, Hirayama K, Mori S. A prospective randomized trial of extended cervical and superior mediastinal lymphadenectomy for carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus. Am J Surg. 1998;175:47–51.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Lagarde SM, Vrouenraets BC, Stassen LP, van Lanschot JJ. Evidence-based surgical treatment of esophageal cancer: overview of high-quality studies. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;89:1319–1326. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009.09.062.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg. 2012;256:95–103. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182590603.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

48.

Dantoc M, Cox MR, Eslick GD. Evidence to support the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. Arch Surg. 2012;147:768–776. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2012.1326.CrossRefPubMed

49.

Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379:1887–1892. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(12)60516-9.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Bolger C, Walsh TN, Tanner WA, Keeling P, Hennessy TP. Chylothorax after oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 1991;78:587–588.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Dimick JB, Pronovost PJ, Cowan JA, Lipsett PA. Complications and costs after high-risk surgery: where should we focus quality improvement initiatives? J Am Coll Surg. 2003;196:671–678. doi:10.1016/s1072-7515(03)00122-4.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Ferri LE, Law S, Wong KH, Kwok KF, Wong J. The influence of technical complications on postoperative outcome and survival after esophagectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13:557–564. doi:10.1245/aso.2006.04.040.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Hirai T, Yamashita Y, Mukaida H, Kuwahara M, Inoue H, Toge T. Poor prognosis in esophageal cancer patients with postoperative complications. Surg Today. 1998;28:576–579.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Kinugasa S, Tachibana M, Yoshimura H, et al. Postoperative pulmonary complications are associated with worse short- and long-term outcomes after extended esophagectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2004;88:71–77. doi:10.1002/jso.20137.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Lagarde SM, de Boer JD, ten Kate FJ, Busch OR, Obertop H, van Lanschot JJ. Postoperative complications after esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus are related to timing of death due to recurrence. Ann Surg. 2008;247:71–76. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31815b695e.CrossRefPubMed

56.

Lagarde SM, Omloo JM, de Jong K, Busch OR, Obertop H, van Lanschot JJ. Incidence and management of chyle leakage after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;80:449–454. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2005.02.076.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Rizk NP, Bach PB, Schrag D, et al. The impact of complications on outcomes after resection for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;198:42–50. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2003.08.007.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Whooley BP, Law S, Murthy SC, Alexandrou A, Wong J. Analysis of reduced death and complication rates after esophageal resection. Ann Surg. 2001;233:338–344.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

59.

Sgourakis G, Gockel I, Radtke A, et al. Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy: meta-analysis of outcomes. Dig Dis Sci. 2010;55:3031–3040. doi:10.1007/s10620-010-1153-1.CrossRefPubMed

60.

Blencowe NS, Strong S, McNair AG, et al. Reporting of short-term clinical outcomes after esophagectomy: a systematic review. Ann Surg. 2012;255:658–666. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182480a6a.CrossRefPubMed

61.

Lee TJ, Martin RC 2nd. Surgical quality of care in esophageal malignancies. Future Oncol. 2013;9:575–584. doi:10.2217/fon.13.18.CrossRefPubMed

62.

Veeramootoo D, Parameswaran R, Krishnadas R, et al. Classification and early recognition of gastric conduit failure after minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc. 2009;23:2110–2116. doi:10.1007/s00464-008-0233-1.CrossRefPubMed

63.

Dimick JB, Welch HG, Birkmeyer JD. Surgical mortality as an indicator of hospital quality: the problem with small sample size. JAMA. 2004;292:847–851. doi:10.1001/jama.292.7.847.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Freiman JA, Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr, Kuebler RR. The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial. Survey of 71 “negative” trials. N Engl J Med. 1978;299:690–694. doi:10.1056/nejm197809282991304.CrossRefPubMed

65.

van Gijn W, Wouters MW, Peeters KC, van de Velde CJ. Nationwide outcome registrations to improve quality of care in rectal surgery. An initiative of the European Society of Surgical Oncology. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99:491–496. doi:10.1002/jso.21203.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Trayhurn P, Wood IS. Adipokines: inflammation and the pleiotropic role of white adipose tissue. Br J Nutr. 2004;92:347–355.CrossRefPubMed

67.

Collins GS, Jibawi A, McCulloch P. Control chart methods for monitoring surgical performance: a case study from gastro-oesophageal surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37:473–480. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2010.10.008.CrossRefPubMed

68.

Harry M, Schroeder R. Six Sigma. Prozesse optimieren, Null-Fehler-Qualität schaffen, Rendite radikal steigern. Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag; 2000.

69.

Low DE. Evolution in surgical management of esophageal cancer. Dig Dis. 2013;31:21–29. doi:10.1159/000343650.CrossRefPubMed

70.

Iannettoni MD, Lynch WR, Parekh KR, McLaughlin KA. Kaizen method for esophagectomy patients: improved quality control, outcomes, and decreased costs. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;91:1011–1017; discussion 7–8. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.01.001.

71.

Schwarzbach M, Ronellenfitsch U. Klinikpfade in der Chirurgie: Ein Instrument für den Routinebetrieb? Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2008;105:2512.

72.

Low DE, Kunz S, Schembre D, et al. Esophagectomy—it’s not just about mortality anymore: standardized perioperative clinical pathways improve outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer. J Gastrointest Surg. 2007;11:1395–1402; discussion 402. doi:10.1007/s11605-007-0265-1.

73.

Munitiz V, Martinez-de-Haro LF, Ortiz A, Ruiz-de-Angulo D, Pastor P, Parrilla P. Effectiveness of a written clinical pathway for enhanced recovery after transthoracic (Ivor Lewis) oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 2010;97:714–718. doi:10.1002/bjs.6942.CrossRefPubMed

74.

Preston SR, Markar SR, Baker CR, Soon Y, Singh S, Low DE. Impact of a multidisciplinary standardized clinical pathway on perioperative outcomes in patients with oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg. 2013;100:105–112. doi:10.1002/bjs.8974.CrossRefPubMed

75.

Zehr KJ, Dawson PB, Yang SC, Heitmiller RF. Standardized clinical care pathways for major thoracic cases reduce hospital costs. Ann Thorac Surg. 1998;66:914–919.CrossRefPubMed

76.

Li C, Ferri LE, Mulder DS, et al. An enhanced recovery pathway decreases duration of stay after esophagectomy. Surgery. 2012;152:606–614; discussion 14–16. doi:10.1016/j.surg.2012.07.021.

Titel: Quality Management and Key Performance Indicators in Oncologic Esophageal Surgery
verfasst von: Ines Gockel
Constantin Johannes Ahlbrand
Michael Arras
Elke Maria Schreiber
Hauke Lang
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2015
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences / Ausgabe 12/2015
Print ISSN: 0163-2116
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2568
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-015-3790-x

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

19.04.2024 | Vorhofflimmern | Nachrichten

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Quality Management and Key Performance Indicators in Oncologic Esophageal Surgery

Abstract

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Antihypertensiva schützen auch alte Menschen noch vor Demenz

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Denken Sie bei starker Blutung auch an die Hemmkörper-Hämophilie

Update Innere Medizin

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 12/2015

Ulcerative Colitis Symptomatology and Depression: The Exacerbator Role of Maladaptive Psychological Processes

The Incidence, Predictors and Outcomes of Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Patients with Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD)

Trimethylamine-N-oxide: A Novel Biomarker for the Identification of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Autoimmune Markers Do Not Impact Clinical Presentation or Natural History of Steatohepatitis-Related Liver Disease

Trastuzumab Inhibits Growth of HER2-Negative Gastric Cancer Cells Through Gastrin-Initialized CCKBR Signaling

Protective Effect of Peroxiredoxin 6 in Ischemia/Reperfusion-Induced Damage of Small Intestine

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Neu im Fachgebiet Innere Medizin

Parodontalbehandlung verbessert Prognose bei Katheterablation

Antihypertensiva schützen auch alte Menschen noch vor Demenz

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

Denken Sie bei starker Blutung auch an die Hemmkörper-Hämophilie

Update Innere Medizin