Title

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Composite Score for Evaluating Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

Document Type

Article

Publication Title

Annals of Thoracic Surgery

Abstract

Background The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) has developed composite quality measures for cardiac surgical procedures and lobectomy for lung cancer. This study sought to develop a composite measure for esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Methods The STS esophagectomy composite score is derived from two risk-adjusted outcomes: mortality and major complications. General Thoracic Surgery Database data were included from 2012 to 2014, and 95% Bayesian credible intervals were established to determine “star” ratings. STS participants were compared with the National Inpatient Sample as a national benchmark (including non-STS participants). Results The study population included 4,321 patients who underwent esophagectomy from 167 participating centers. The operative mortality rate was 3.1% (N = 135), and the major complication rate was 33.1% (N = 1,429). Of the 167 participants, 70 reported an average yearly volume of five or more esophagectomies during the study period. With this threshold, reliability for the composite score was 0.58 (95% credible interval, 0.41 to 0.72). Of these 70 participants, 5 (7.1%) were three star, 63 (90.0%) were two star, and 2 (2.9%) were one star. A majority of STS participants, 58.1% (N = 97), did not have sufficient volume to receive a reliable composite score. Benchmarked to the 2012 National Inpatient Sample cohort, STS General Thoracic Surgery Database participants have comparable discharge mortality rates and shorter postoperative lengths of stay. Conclusions STS has developed a quality measure for esophageal cancer surgical procedures based on a composite score of risk-adjusted operative mortality rates and major complications. The composite rating for esophagectomy has good reliability for programs performing an average of five procedures annually, although almost 60% of participants are not eligible for a star rating because of lower procedure volumes.

First Page

1661

Last Page

1667

DOI

10.1016/j.athoracsur.2016.10.027

Publication Date

5-1-2017

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS