Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 23, Issue 6, pp 2106–2114 | Cite as

Postoperative Infectious Complications are Associated with Adverse Oncologic Outcomes in Esophageal Cancer Patients Undergoing Preoperative Chemotherapy

  • Kotaro Yamashita
  • Tomoki Makino
  • Hiroshi Miyata
  • Yasuhiro Miyazaki
  • Tsuyoshi Takahashi
  • Yukinori Kurokawa
  • Makoto Yamasaki
  • Kiyokazu Nakajima
  • Shuji Takiguchi
  • Masaki Mori
  • Yuichiro Doki
Thoracic Oncology

Abstract

Background

For some types of cancer, postoperative complications can negatively influence survival, but the association between these complications and oncological outcomes is unclear for patients with esophageal cancer who receive preoperative treatments.

Methods

Data were retrospectively analyzed for patients who underwent curative resection following preoperative chemotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma from 2001 to 2011. Clinicopathological parameters and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were compared between patients with and without severe postoperative complications, grade III or higher, using the Clavien–Dindo classification.

Results

Of 255 patients identified, 104 (40.8 %) postoperatively developed severe complications. The most common complication was atelectasis in 61 (23.9 %), followed by pulmonary infection in 22 (8.6 %). Three-field lymphadenectomy, longer operation time, and more blood loss were significantly associated with a higher incidence of severe complications. Multivariate analysis of CSS revealed severe complications [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.642, 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) 1.095–2.460, p = 0.016] as a significant prognostic factor along with pT stage [HR = 2.081, 95 % CI 1.351–3.266, p < 0.001] and pN stage [HR = 3.724, 95 % CI 2.111–7.126, p < 0.001], whereas postoperative serum C-reactive protein value was not statistically significant. Among all complications, severe pulmonary infection was the only independent prognostic factor [HR = 2.504, 95 % CI 1.308–4.427, p = 0.007].

Conclusions

The incidence of postoperative infectious complications, in particular pulmonary infection, is associated with unfavorable prognosis in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing preoperative chemotherapy.

Keywords

Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Anastomotic Leakage Preoperative Chemotherapy Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patient Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Conflict of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

10434_2015_5045_MOESM1_ESM.pptx (75 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 74 kb)
10434_2015_5045_MOESM2_ESM.pptx (77 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PPTX 77 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Medical Research Council Oesophageal Cancer Working Surgical resection with or without preoperative chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;359(9319):1727–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ando N, Kato H, Igaki H, et al. A randomized trial comparing postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil versus preoperative chemotherapy for localized advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus (JCOG9907). Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(1):68–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mariette C, Dahan L, Mornex F, et al. Surgery alone versus chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for stage I and II esophageal cancer: final analysis of randomized controlled phase III trial FFCD 9901. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(23):2416–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hamai Y, Hihara J, Emi M, et al. Results of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with docetaxel and 5-fluorouracil followed by esophagectomy to treat locally advanced esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gronnier C, Trechot B, Duhamel A, et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer resection: results of a European multicenter study. Ann Surg. 2014;260(5):764-70; discussion 770–1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Walker KG, Bell SW, Rickard MJFX, et al. Anastomotic leakage is predictive of diminished survival after potentially curative resection for colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):255–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ptok H, Marusch F, Meyer F, Schubert D, Gastinger I, Lippert H. Impact of anastomotic leakage on oncological outcome after rectal cancer resection. Br J Surg. 2007;94(12):1548–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sierzega M, Kolodziejczyk P, Kulig J. Impact of anastomotic leakage on long-term survival after total gastrectomy for carcinoma of the stomach. Br J Surg. 2010;97(7):1035–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yoo HM, Lee HH, Shim JH, Jeon HM, Park CH, Song KY. Negative impact of leakage on survival of patients undergoing curative resection for advanced gastric cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2011;104(7):734–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kubota T, Hiki N, Sano T, et al. Prognostic significance of complications after curative surgery for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(3):891–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Xia X, Wu W, Zhang K, et al. Prognostic significance of complications after laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e108348.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krarup PM, Nordholm-Carstensen A, Jorgensen LN, Harling H. Anastomotic leak increases distant recurrence and long-term mortality after curative resection for colonic cancer: a nationwide cohort study. Ann Surg. 2014;259(5):930–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jiang N, Deng JY, Ding XW, et al. Prognostic nutritional index predicts postoperative complications and long-term outcomes of gastric cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2014;20(30):10537–44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Andalib A, Ramana-Kumar AV, Bartlett G, Franco EL, Ferri LE. Influence of postoperative infectious complications on long-term survival of lung cancer patients: a population-based cohort study. J Thorac Oncol. 2013;8(5):554–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kinugasa S, Tachibana M, Yoshimura H, et al. Postoperative pulmonary complications are associated with worse short- and long-term outcomes after extended esophagectomy. J Surg Oncol. 2004;88(2):71–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rizk NP, Bach PB, Schrag D, et al. The impact of complications on outcomes after resection for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;198(1):42–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lagarde SM, de Boer JD, ten Kate FJ, Busch OR, Obertop H, van Lanschot JJ. Postoperative complications after esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus are related to timing of death due to recurrence. Ann Surg. 2008;247(1):71–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lerut T, Moons J, Coosemans W, et al. Postoperative complications after transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction are correlated with early cancer recurrence: role of systematic grading of complications using the modified Clavien classification. Ann Surg. 2009;250(5):798–807.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ancona E, Cagol M, Epifani M, et al. Surgical complications do not affect longterm survival after esophagectomy for carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus and cardia. J Am Coll Surg. Nov 2006;203(5):661–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Matsuda S, Takeuchi H, Kawakubo H, et al. Correlation between intense postoperative inflammatory response and survival of esophageal cancer patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Makino T, Miyata H, Yamasaki M, et al. Utility of response evaluation to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy by (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Surgery. 2010;148(5):908–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Miyata H, Yamasaki M, Miyazaki Y, et al. Clinical importance of supraclavicular lymph node metastasis after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Ann Surg. 2014.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mantovani A, Allavena P, Sica A, Balkwill F. Cancer-related inflammation. Nature. 2008;454(7203):436–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McMillan DC. Systemic inflammation, nutritional status and survival in patients with cancer. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2009;12(3):223–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bohle B, Pera M, Pascual M, et al. Postoperative intra-abdominal infection increases angiogenesis and tumor recurrence after surgical excision of colon cancer in mice. Surgery. 2010;147(1):120–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cools-Lartigue J, Spicer J, McDonald B, et al. Neutrophil extracellular traps sequester circulating tumor cells and promote metastasis. J. Clin. Invest. 2013;123(8), 3446.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Spicer JD, McDonald B, Cools-Lartigue JJ, et al. Neutrophils promote liver metastasis via Mac-1-mediated interactions with circulating tumor cells. Cancer Res. 2012;72(16):3919–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yoshida N, Watanabe M, Baba Y, et al. Risk factors for pulmonary complications after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Today. 2014;44(3):526–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wang SL, Liao Z, Vaporciyan AA, et al. Investigation of clinical and dosimetric factors associated with postoperative pulmonary complications in esophageal cancer patients treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64(3):692–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg. 2012;256(1):95–103.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Smithers BM, Gotley DC, Martin I, Thomas JM. Comparison of the outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2007;245(2):232–40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Watanabe M, Baba Y, Nagai Y, Baba H. Minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: an updated review. Surg Today. 2013;43(3):237–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Iwahashi M, Nakamori M, Nakamura M, et al. Clinical benefits of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Surg Today. 2014;44(9):1708–15.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Takeuchi H, Miyata H, Gotoh M, et al. A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a Japanese nationwide web-based database. Ann Surg. 2014;260(2):259–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mori K, Yamagata Y, Aikou S, et al. Short-term outcomes of robotic radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer by a nontransthoracic approach compared with conventional transthoracic surgery. Dis Esophagus. 2015.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kotaro Yamashita
    • 1
  • Tomoki Makino
    • 1
  • Hiroshi Miyata
    • 2
  • Yasuhiro Miyazaki
    • 1
  • Tsuyoshi Takahashi
    • 1
  • Yukinori Kurokawa
    • 1
  • Makoto Yamasaki
    • 1
  • Kiyokazu Nakajima
    • 1
  • Shuji Takiguchi
    • 1
  • Masaki Mori
    • 1
  • Yuichiro Doki
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Gastroenterological SurgeryOsaka University Graduate School of MedicineOsakaJapan
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryOsaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular DiseaseOsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations