Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Individual Risk Modelling for Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Aims and scope

Abstract

Introduction

A number of models have been applied to predict outcomes from esophagectomy. This systematic review aimed to compare their clinical credibility, methodological quality and performance.

Methods

A systematic review of the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases was performed in October 2012. Model and study quality were appraised using the framework of Minne et al.

Results

Twenty studies were included in total; these were heterogeneous, retrospective and conducted over a number of years; all models were generated via logistic regression. Overall mortality was high, and consequently not representative of current practice. Clinical credibility and methodological quality were variable, with frequent failure to perform internal validation and variable presentation of calibration and discrimination metrics. P-POSSUM demonstrated the best calibration and discrimination for predicting mortality. Other than the Southampton score (which has yet to be externally validated) and the Amsterdam score, no studies had utility in predicting complications.

Conclusion

Whilst a number of models have been developed, adapted or trialled, due to numerous limitations, larger and more contemporary studies are required to develop and validate models further. The role of alternative techniques such as decision tree analysis and artificial neural networks is not known.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F et al. Estimates of worldwide burden of cancer in 2008: GLOBOCAN 2008. Int J Cancer 2010; 127: 2893-2917.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sasieni PD, Shelton J, Ormiston-Smith N et al. What is the lifetime risk of developing cancer?: the effect of adjusting for multiple primaries. Br J Cancer 2011; 105: 460-465.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Statistics HE. Main procedures and interventions: 4 character 2011-12. In. Hospital Episode Statistics Online 2011.

  4. Rodgers M, Jobe BA, O'Rourke RW et al. Case volume as a predictor of inpatient mortality after esophagectomy. Arch Surg 2007; 142: 829-839.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Park DP, Welch CA, Harrison DA et al. Outcomes following oesophagectomy in patients with oesophageal cancer: a secondary analysis of the ICNARC Case Mix Programme Database. Crit Care 2009; 13 Suppl 2: S1.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jamieson GG, Mathew G, Ludemann R et al. Postoperative mortality following oesophagectomy and problems in reporting its rate. Br J Surg 2004; 91: 943-947.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Low DE. Outcomes assessment of the surgical management of esophageal cancer in younger and older patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2012; 94: 1652-1658.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McCulloch P, Ward J, Tekkis PP et al. Mortality and morbidity in gastro-oesophageal cancer surgery: initial results of ASCOT multicentre prospective cohort study. BMJ 2003; 327: 1192-1197.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Siregar S, Groenwold RH, de Heer F et al. Performance of the original EuroSCORE. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2012; 41: 746-754.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M. POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit. Br J Surg 1991; 78: 355-360.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, Zimmerman JE. APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 1985; 13: 818-829.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Prytherch DR, Whiteley MS, Higgins B et al. POSSUM and Portsmouth POSSUM for predicting mortality. Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity. Br J Surg 1998; 85: 1217-1220.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Tekkis PP, McCulloch P, Poloniecki JD et al. Risk-adjusted prediction of operative mortality in oesophagogastric surgery with O-POSSUM. Br J Surg 2004; 91: 288-295.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Senagore AJ, Warmuth AJ, Delaney CP et al. POSSUM, p-POSSUM, and Cr-POSSUM: implementation issues in a United States health care system for prediction of outcome for colon cancer resection. Dis Colon Rectum 2004; 47: 1435-1441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Prytherch DR, Sutton GL, Boyle JR. Portsmouth POSSUM models for abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. Br J Surg 2001; 88: 958-963.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Minne L, Abu-Hanna A, de Jonge E. Evaluation of SOFA-based models for predicting mortality in the ICU: A systematic review. Crit Care 2008; 12: R161.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Minne L, Ludikhuize J, de Jonge E et al. Prognostic models for predicting mortality in elderly ICU patients: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med 2011; 37: 1258-1268.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hayden JA, Cote P, Bombardier C. Evaluation of the quality of prognosis studies in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med 2006; 144: 427-437.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Siontis GC, Tzoulaki I, Siontis KC, Ioannidis JP. Comparisons of established risk prediction models for cardiovascular disease: systematic review. BMJ 2012; 344: e3318.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Royston P, Moons KG, Altman DG, Vergouwe Y. Prognosis and prognostic research: Developing a prognostic model. BMJ 2009; 338: b604.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bartels H, Stein HJ, Siewert JR. Preoperative risk analysis and postoperative mortality of oesophagectomy for resectable oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg 1998; 85: 840-844.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang GH, Fujita H, Yamana H, Kakegawa T. A prediction of hospital mortality after surgical treatment for esophageal cancer. Surg Today 1994; 24: 122-127.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ra J, Paulson EC, Kucharczuk J et al. Postoperative mortality after esophagectomy for cancer: development of a preoperative risk prediction model. Ann Surg Oncol 2008; 15: 1577-1584.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schröder W, Bollschweiler E, Kossow C, Holscher AH. Preoperative risk analysis--a reliable predictor of postoperative outcome after transthoracic esophagectomy? Langenbecks Arch Surg 2006; 391: 455-460.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Noble F, Curtis N, Harris S et al. Risk assessment using a novel score to predict anastomotic leak and major complications after oesophageal resection. J Gastrointest Surg 2012; 16: 1083-1095.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ferguson MK, Celauro AD, Prachand V. Prediction of major pulmonary complications after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2011; 91: 1494-1500; discussion 1500-1491.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lagarde SM, Reitsma JB, Maris AK et al. Preoperative prediction of the occurrence and severity of complications after esophagectomy for cancer with use of a nomogram. Ann Thorac Surg 2008; 85: 1938-1945.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Zafirellis KD, Fountoulakis A, Dolan K et al. Evaluation of POSSUM in patients with oesophageal cancer undergoing resection. Br J Surg 2002; 89: 1150-1155.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bosch DJ, Pultrum BB, de Bock GH et al. Comparison of different risk-adjustment models in assessing short-term surgical outcome after transthoracic esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer. Am J Surg 2011; 202: 303-309.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Charlson M, Szatrowski TP, Peterson J, Gold J. Validation of a combined comorbidity index. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 1245-1251.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40: 373-383.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Dutta S, Al-Mrabt NM, Fullarton GM et al. A comparison of POSSUM and GPS models in the prediction of post-operative outcome in patients undergoing oesophago-gastric cancer resection. Ann Surg Oncol 2011; 18: 2808-2817.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Internullo E, Moons J, Nafteux P et al. Outcome after esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and GEJ in patients aged over 75 years. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2008; 33: 1096-1104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Lai F, Kwan TL, Yuen WC et al. Evaluation of various POSSUM models for predicting mortality in patients undergoing elective oesophagectomy for carcinoma. Br J Surg 2007; 94: 1172-1178.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lagarde SM, Maris AK, de Castro SM et al. Evaluation of O-POSSUM in predicting in-hospital mortality after resection for oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg 2007; 94: 1521-1526.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zingg U, Langton C, Addison B et al. Risk prediction scores for postoperative mortality after esophagectomy: validation of different models. J Gastrointest Surg 2009; 13: 611-618.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Grotenhuis BA, van Hagen P, Reitsma JB et al. Validation of a nomogram predicting complications after esophagectomy for cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 2010; 90: 920-925.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Harrell FE, Jr., Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 1996; 15: 361-387.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Steyerberg EW, Harrell FE, Jr., Borsboom GJ et al. Internal validation of predictive models: efficiency of some procedures for logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2001; 54: 774-781.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Altman DG, Vergouwe Y, Royston P, Moons KG. Prognosis and prognostic research: validating a prognostic model. BMJ 2009; 338: b605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Dutta S, Horgan PG, McMillan DC. POSSUM and its related models as predictors of postoperative mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing surgery for gastro-oesophageal cancer: a systematic review. World J Surg 2010; 34: 2076-2082.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Van Calster B, Vickers AJ, Pencina MJ et al. Evaluation of markers and risk prediction models: overview of relationships between NRI and decision-analytic measures. Med Decis Making 2013; 33: 490-501.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Vickers AJ, Elkin EB. Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models. Med Decis Making 2006; 26: 565-574.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Steyerberg EW, Vickers AJ, Cook NR et al. Assessing the performance of prediction models: a framework for traditional and novel measures. Epidemiology 2010; 21: 128-138.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

JMF is supported by the Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oxford Oesophagogastric Centre, Churchill Hospital, Oxford, OX3 7LJ, UK

    John M. Findlay, Richard S. Gillies, Bruno Sgromo, Robert E. K. Marshall & Nicholas D. Maynard

  2. Oxford NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Department of Oncology, Block 60, The Churchill Hospital, Oxford, OX3 7LE, UK

    Mark R. Middleton

Authors
  1. John M. Findlay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard S. Gillies
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bruno Sgromo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Robert E. K. Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mark R. Middleton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Nicholas D. Maynard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John M. Findlay.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Findlay, J.M., Gillies, R.S., Sgromo, B. et al. Individual Risk Modelling for Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review. J Gastrointest Surg 18, 1532–1542 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-014-2524-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-014-2524-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation