Comparable Esophagectomy Outcomes by Surgeon Specialty: A NSQIP Analysis

Background A few observational studies have found that outcomes after esophagectomies by thoracic surgeons are better than those by general surgeons. Methods Non-emergent esophagectomy cases were identified in the 2016-2017 American College of Surgeons NSQIP database. Associations between patient characteristics and outcomes by thoracic versus general surgeons were evaluated with univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results Of 1,606 cases, 886 (55.2%) were performed by thoracic surgeons. Those patients differed from patients treated by general surgeons in race (other/unknown 19.3% vs 7.8%; P<.001) but not in other baseline characteristics (age, sex, BMI, and comorbidities). Thoracic surgeons performed an open approach more frequently (48.9% vs 30.8%, P<.001) and had operative times that were 30 minutes shorter (P<.001). General surgeons had lower rates of reoperation (11.8% vs 17.2%; P=.003) and were more likely to treat postoperative leak with interventional means (6.3% vs 3.4%, P=.01). Thoracic surgeons were more likely to treat postoperative leak with reoperation (5.9% vs 3.6%, P=.01). There were no other differences in univariate comparison of outcomes between the two groups, including leak, readmission, and death. General surgery specialty was associated with lower risk of reoperation. Our multivariable model also found no relationship between general surgeon and risk of any complication (odds ratio 1.10; 95% CI .86 to 1.42). Discussion In our large, national database study, we found that outcomes of esophagectomies by general surgeons were comparable with those by thoracic surgeons. General surgeons managed postoperative leaks differently than thoracic surgeons.

Impact of cardiometabolic multimorbidity and ethnicity on cardiovascular/renal complications in patients with COVID-19

ObjectiveUsing a large national database of people hospitalised with COVID-19, we investigated the contribution of cardio-metabolic conditions, multi-morbidity and ethnicity on the risk of in-hospital cardiovascular complications and death.MethodsA multicentre, prospective cohort study in 302 UK healthcare facilities of adults hospitalised with COVID-19 between 6 February 2020 and 16 March 2021. Logistic models were used to explore associations between baseline patient ethnicity, cardiometabolic conditions and multimorbidity (0, 1, 2, >2 conditions), and in-hospital cardiovascular complications (heart failure, arrhythmia, cardiac ischaemia, cardiac arrest, coagulation complications, stroke), renal injury and death.ResultsOf 65 624 patients hospitalised with COVID-19, 44 598 (68.0%) reported at least one cardiometabolic condition on admission. Cardiovascular/renal complications or death occurred in 24 609 (38.0%) patients. Baseline cardiometabolic conditions were independently associated with increased odds of in-hospital complications and this risk increased in the presence of cardiometabolic multimorbidity. For example, compared with having no cardiometabolic conditions, 1, 2 or ≥3 conditions was associated with 1.46 (95% CI 1.39 to 1.54), 2.04 (95% CI 1.93 to 2.15) and 3.10 (95% CI 2.92 to 3.29) times higher odds of any cardiovascular/renal complication, respectively. A similar pattern was observed for all-cause death. Compared with the white group, the South Asian (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.29) and black (OR 1.53 to 95% CI 1.37 to 1.72) ethnic groups had higher risk of any cardiovascular/renal complication.ConclusionsIn hospitalised patients with COVID-19, cardiovascular complications or death impacts just under half of all patients, with the highest risk in those of South Asian or Black ethnicity and in patients with cardiometabolic multimorbidity.