Performance of a consensus-based algorithm for diagnosing anastomotic leak after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.


Journal

Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus
ISSN: 1442-2050
Titre abrégé: Dis Esophagus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8809160

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
30 Sep 2023
Historique:
received: 15 09 2022
revised: 17 02 2023
medline: 4 10 2023
pubmed: 30 3 2023
entrez: 29 3 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common and severe complication after esophagectomy. This study aimed to assess the performance of a consensus-based algorithm for diagnosing AL after minimally invasive esophagectomy. This study used data of the ICAN trial, a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing cervical and intrathoracic anastomosis, in which a predefined diagnostic algorithm was used to guide diagnosing AL. The algorithm identified patients suspected of AL based on clinical signs, blood C-reactive protein (cut-off value 200 mg/L), and/or drain amylase (cut-off value 200 IU/L). Suspicion of AL prompted evaluation with contrast swallow computed tomography and/or endoscopy to confirm AL. Primary outcome measure was algorithm performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), respectively. AL was defined according to the definition of the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group. 245 patients were included, and 125 (51%) patients were suspected of AL. The algorithm had a sensitivity of 62% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 46-75), a specificity of 97% (95% CI: 89-100), and a PPV and NPV of 94% (95% CI: 79-99) and 77% (95% CI: 66-86), respectively, on initial assessment. Repeated assessment in 19 patients with persisting suspicion of AL despite negative or inconclusive initial assessment had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 77-100). The algorithm showed poor performance because the low sensitivity indicates the inability of the algorithm to confirm AL on initial assessment. Repeated assessment using the algorithm was needed to confirm remaining leaks.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36988007
pii: 7091611
doi: 10.1093/dote/doad016
pmc: PMC10543373
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Subventions

Organisme : ZonMw
Pays : Netherlands

Informations de copyright

© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Références

Dis Esophagus. 2020 Jan 16;33(1):
pubmed: 31076741
Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Dec;106(6):1702-1708
pubmed: 29883644
J Gastrointest Surg. 2020 Sep;24(9):1948-1954
pubmed: 31410819
J Surg Oncol. 2009 Dec 15;100(8):699-702
pubmed: 19731246
Dis Esophagus. 2021 Feb 10;34(2):
pubmed: 33565590
Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Nov;28(12):7259-7276
pubmed: 34036429
BMJ. 2013 May 16;346:f2778
pubmed: 23682043
Dis Esophagus. 2021 Jan 11;34(1):
pubmed: 32476017
Eur Radiol. 2017 Oct;27(10):4426-4434
pubmed: 28357496
Ann Thorac Surg. 2023 Mar;115(3):719-724
pubmed: 35618049
BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 14;6(11):e012799
pubmed: 28137831
Ann Surg. 2015 Aug;262(2):286-94
pubmed: 25607756
Surg Oncol. 2020 Mar;32:30-34
pubmed: 31715559
Ann Thorac Surg. 2013 Jan;95(1):292-8
pubmed: 23200235
PLoS One. 2018 Dec 17;13(12):e0209272
pubmed: 30557392
Dis Esophagus. 2019 Jul 1;32(7):
pubmed: 30855088
Dig Surg. 2018;35(5):419-426
pubmed: 29131024
J Clin Oncol. 2012 May 10;30(14):1615-9
pubmed: 22473157
J Gastrointest Oncol. 2016 Apr;7(2):181-8
pubmed: 27034784
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018 Dec;1434(1):254-273
pubmed: 29984413
Diagnostics (Basel). 2018 May 09;8(2):
pubmed: 29747402
Trials. 2016 Oct 18;17(1):505
pubmed: 27756419
Surg Endosc. 2014 Jul;28(7):2078-85
pubmed: 24519029
J Clin Med. 2019 Nov 17;8(11):
pubmed: 31744186
J Thorac Dis. 2020 Dec;12(12):7182-7192
pubmed: 33447407
J Thorac Dis. 2019 Apr;11(Suppl 5):S805-S811
pubmed: 31080662
Br J Surg. 2019 Jan;106(1):111-119
pubmed: 30370938
Diseases. 2022 Dec 14;10(4):
pubmed: 36547212
Ann Surg. 2022 Feb 1;275(2):e382-e391
pubmed: 33630459
J Thorac Imaging. 2013 Mar;28(2):121-8
pubmed: 23059739
JAMA Surg. 2021 Jul 1;156(7):601-610
pubmed: 33978698

Auteurs

Jobbe Lemmens (J)

Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Bastiaan Klarenbeek (B)

Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Moniek Verstegen (M)

Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Frans van Workum (F)

Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Canisius Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Gerjon Hannink (G)

Department of Operating Rooms, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Sander Ubels (S)

Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Camiel Rosman (C)

Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH