The Effect of Center Esophagectomy Volume on Outcomes in Clinical Stage I to III Esophageal Cancer

Objective: To determine the threshold annualized esophagectomy volume that is associated with improved survival, oncologic resection, and postoperative outcomes. Background: Esophagectomy at high-volume centers is associated with improved outcomes; however, the definition of high-volume remains debated. Methods: The 2004 to 2016 National Cancer Database was queried for patients with clinical stage I to III esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy. Center esophagectomy volume was modeled as a continuous variable using restricted cubic splines. Maximally selected ranks were used to identify an inflection point of center volume and survival. Survival was compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine secondary outcomes. Results: Overall, 13,493 patients met study criteria. Median center esophagectomy volume was 8.2 (interquartile range: 3.2–17.2) cases per year. On restricted cubic splines, inflection points were identified at 9 and 30 cases per year. A multivariable Cox model was constructed modeling annualized center surgical volume as a continuous variable using 3 linear splines and inflection points at 9 and 30 cases per year. On multivariable analysis, increasing center volume up to 9 cases per year was associated with a substantial survival benefit (hazard ratio: 0.97, 95% confidence interval, 0.95–0.98, P≤0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, factors associated with undergoing surgery at a high-volume center (>9 cases per year) included private insurance, care at an academic center, completion of high school education, and greater travel distance. Conclusions: This National Cancer Database study utilizing multivariable analysis and restricted cubic splines suggests the threshold definition of a high-volume esophagectomy center as one that performs at least 10 operations a year.

[1]  Natalie S. Lui,et al.  Influence of facility volume on long-term survival of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. , 2021, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[2]  T. D’amico,et al.  Utilization Trends and Volume-outcomes Relationship of Endoscopic Resection for Early Stage Esophageal Cancer , 2021, Annals of surgery.

[3]  D. Harpole,et al.  Tumor Size, Histology, and Survival After Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy and Sublobar Resection in Node-negative Non-small Cell Lung Cancer , 2021, Annals of surgery.

[4]  D. Harpole,et al.  The Relationship Between Lymph Node Ratio and Survival Benefit With Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Node-positive Esophageal Adenocarcinoma , 2020, Annals of surgery.

[5]  Ricardo L. Rojas,et al.  Understanding Failure-to-Rescue after Esophagectomy in the United States. , 2019, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[6]  J. Boyle,et al.  Hospital Volume Association With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Mortality: Analysis of the International Consortium of Vascular Registries. , 2019, Circulation.

[7]  D. Harpole,et al.  Effect of time to surgery on outcomes in stage I esophageal adenocarcinoma. , 2019, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[8]  T. Gooley,et al.  Cubic splines to model relationships between continuous variables and outcomes: a guide for clinicians , 2019, Bone Marrow Transplantation.

[9]  H. Yasunaga,et al.  Comparing Perioperative Mortality and Morbidity of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer , 2019, Annals of surgery.

[10]  R. Fields,et al.  Re-defining a high volume center for pancreaticoduodenectomy. , 2019, HPB : the official journal of the International Hepato Pancreato Biliary Association.

[11]  A. Chang,et al.  Diagnosis, assessment, and management of surgical complications following esophagectomy , 2018, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[12]  R. Alban,et al.  Predictors of Failure to Rescue After Esophagectomy. , 2018, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[13]  P. Austin,et al.  Relation between surgeon volume and risk of complications after total hip arthroplasty: propensity score matched cohort study , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  W. Berry,et al.  Esophagectomy Outcomes at Low-Volume Hospitals: The Association Between Systems Characteristics and Mortality , 2011, Annals of surgery.

[15]  Kara E MacLeod,et al.  Variation in esophagectomy outcomes in hospitals meeting Leapfrog volume outcome standards. , 2011, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[16]  P. Bach,et al.  A Decade of Mortality Reductions in Major Oncologic Surgery: The Impact of Centralization and Quality Improvement , 2010, Medical care.

[17]  N. Meropol,et al.  Trends in Centralization of Cancer Surgery , 2010, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[18]  Elizabeth E Ward,et al.  The National Cancer Data Base: Past, Present, and Future , 2009, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[19]  C. Ko,et al.  Using the NCDB for cancer care improvement: An introduction to available quality assessment tools , 2009, Journal of surgical oncology.

[20]  L. Stassen,et al.  Centralization of Esophageal Cancer Surgery: Does It Improve Clinical Outcome? , 2009, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[21]  C. Ko,et al.  The National Cancer Data Base: A Powerful Initiative to Improve Cancer Care in the United States , 2008, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[22]  J. Hunter,et al.  Case volume as a predictor of inpatient mortality after esophagectomy. , 2007, Archives of surgery.

[23]  J. Birkmeyer,et al.  Specialty training and mortality after esophageal cancer resection. , 2005, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[24]  Justin B Dimick,et al.  Potential benefits of the new Leapfrog standards: effect of process and outcomes measures. , 2004, Surgery.

[25]  I. Ihse,et al.  The Volume-Outcome Relationship in Cancer Surgery: A Hard Sell , 2003, Annals of surgery.

[26]  J. Birkmeyer,et al.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[27]  D. Harpole,et al.  The Effect of Tumor Size and Histologic Findings on Outcomes After Segmentectomy vs Lobectomy for Clinically Node-Negative Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer , 2020 .

[28]  Ashraf Mansour Habib Mansour,et al.  The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm , 2018, Journal of vascular surgery.

[29]  R. Croxford.  Restricted Cubic Spline Regression : A Brief Introduction , 2016 .

[30]  D. R. Jones.  The effect of volume on esophageal cancer resections: What constitutes acceptable resection volumes for centers of excellence? , 2010 .

[31]  E. Blackstone,et al.  Esophagectomy volume threshold as a criterion for centers of excellence: causation or cause, strategy or strategem? , 2009, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.