Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Aug;11(Suppl 12):S1633-S1642.
doi: 10.21037/jtd.2019.07.88.

Regionalization of esophagectomy: where are we now?

Affiliations
Review

Regionalization of esophagectomy: where are we now?

James M Clark et al. J Thorac Dis. 2019 Aug.

Abstract

The morbidity and mortality benefits of performing high-risk operations in high-volume centers by high-volume surgeons are evident. Regionalization is a proposed strategy to leverage high-volume centers for esophagectomy to improve quality outcomes. Internationally, regionalization occurs under national mandates. Those mandates do not exist in the United States and spontaneous regionalization of esophagectomy has only modestly occurred in the U.S. Regionalization must strike a careful balance and not limit access to optimal oncologic care to our most vulnerable cancer patient populations in rural and disadvantaged socioeconomic areas. We reviewed the recent literature highlighting: the justification of hospital and surgeon annual esophagectomy volumes for regionalization; how safety performance metrics could influence regionalization; whether regionalization is occurring in the US; what impact regionalization may have on esophagectomy costs; and barriers to patients traveling to receive oncologic treatment at regionalized centers of excellence.

Keywords: Esophagectomy; regionalization; regionalization of surgeries; surgical outcome-volume relationships.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

    1. Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality 1979. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007;457:3-9. 10.1097/BLO.0b013e318034285e - DOI - PubMed
    1. Meguid RA, Weiss ES, Chang DC, et al. The effect of volume on esophageal cancer resections: What constitutes acceptable resection volumes for centers of excellence? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;137:23-9. 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.09.040 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. David EA, Cooke DT, Chen Y, et al. Surgery in high-volume hospitals not commission on cancer accreditation leads to increased cancer-specific survival for early-stage lung cancer. Am J Surg 2015;210:643-7. 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2015.05.002 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Phillips P, Poku E, Essat M, et al. Systematic review of carotid artery procedures and the volume-outcome relationship in Europe. Br J Surg 2017;104:1273-83. 10.1002/bjs.10593 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kim LK, Looser P, Swaminathan RV, et al. Outcomes in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery in the United States based on hospital volume, 2007 to 2011. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2016;151:1686-92. 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.01.050 - DOI - PubMed