Feasibility analysis of combined surgery for esophageal cancer
Zhulin Wang,Shaowu Sun,Kaiyuan Li,Chunyao Huang,Xu Liu,Guoqing Zhang,Xiangnan Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-02930-0
2023-02-10
Abstract:Background: As the preoperative examination of esophageal cancer has improved, the likelihood of finding diseases in other organs that require surgical treatment has also increased. The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility of combined surgery for esophageal cancer by analyzing the occurrence of postoperative complications in patients with esophageal cancer. Methods: The clinical characteristics of 1566 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent thoracic surgery in our hospital between January 2017 and September 2022 were analyzed retrospectively. The feasibility of combined surgery for esophageal cancer was analyzed by comparing postoperative complications in patients who underwent simple esophageal cancer surgery (SEC) with those in patients who underwent combined surgery for esophageal cancer (COEC). The tendency scores of patients in the COEC and SEC groups (1:2) were matched to balance the confounding clinical factors, and the difference in postoperative complications was further analyzed. Moreover, we performed a subgroup analysis of esophagectomy combined with lung resection (ECL). In addition, the independent risk factors for postoperative Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade III complications of esophageal cancer were analyzed by multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 1566 patients (1147 (73.2%) males and 419 (26.8%) females), with an average age of 64.2 years, were analyzed. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the SEC and COEC groups according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (P=0.713). An analysis of the complications revealed that those in the COEC group had a higher incidence of lung consolidation than those in the SEC group (P=0.007). However, when we performed propensity score matching (PSM) on the SEC and COEC groups, there was still no significant difference in complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (P=0.346); furthermore, when a detailed analysis of complications was performed, there was no significant difference between the two. In subgroup analysis, after we performed PSM in ECL patients and SEC patients, we also found no significant difference in postoperative complications between patients with ECL and patients with SEC. In addition, we found that a history of diabetes (OR=1.604, P=0.029, 95% CI=1.049-2.454), a history of coronary heart disease (OR=1.592, P=0.046, 95% CI=1.008-2.515), diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO) (OR=0.916, P=0.024, 95% CI=0.849-0.988), and ALB level (OR=0.955, P=0.007, 95% CI=0.924-0.987) were independent factors that influenced postoperative complications in esophageal cancer patients with grade III or higher complications. Conclusion: Combined surgery for esophageal cancer does not increase the incidence of postoperative complications. In addition, a history of diabetes mellitus or coronary heart disease, carbon monoxide dispersion, and preoperative ALB level are independent risk factors for grade III or higher postoperative complications of esophageal cancer.