Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26437667›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of gastroenterology2015

Management and Outcomes of Esophageal Perforation: A National Study of 2,564 Patients in England.

Sheraz R Markar, Hugh Mackenzie, Tom Wiggins, Alan Askari, Omar Faiz, Giovanni Zaninotto, George B Hanna

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of gastroenterology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Surgical Management of Esophageal Perforation: Examining Trends in a Multi-Institutional Cohort.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Current status of surgical treatment of Boerhaave's syndrome.Esophagus : official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Sheraz R MarkarDivision of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Hugh MackenzieDivision of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Tom WigginsDivision of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Alan AskariSurgical Epidemiology, Trials and Outcome Centre (SETOC), St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, UK.
Omar FaizSurgical Epidemiology, Trials and Outcome Centre (SETOC), St Mark's Hospital and Academic Institute, Harrow, UK.
Giovanni ZaninottoDivision of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.
George B HannaDivision of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTraditionally esophageal perforation is a rare clinical emergency that confers a high rate of mortality and major morbidity. The objective of this study was to establish the annual rate and mortality from esophageal perforation and determine the effect of hospital volume on clinical outcomes.

methodsHospital Episode Statistics database was used for the identification of patients admitted to hospitals within England with esophageal perforation between 2001 and 2012. The influence of hospital volume and treatment approach upon clinical outcomes was analyzed using multivariable analysis to control for patient age and medical comorbidities that may influence outcome.

resultsOver the 12-year study period 2,564 patients with esophageal perforation were treated at 158 hospitals. The 30- and 90-day mortality rates were 30.0 and 38.8%, respectively. Esophageal perforation etiology was spontaneous in 81.9% and iatrogenic in 5.9% of cases. There was a significant increase in the percentage of patients managed supportively and a reduction in surgical management over time. Furthermore there were significant reductions in 30-day (36.6% to 24.9%; P<0.001) and 90-day mortality (44.1% to 35.4%; P=0.006) over the 12-year study period. Important patient demographics associated with 30- and 90-day mortality included age ≥70 years, preoperative congestive cardiac failure, ischemic heart, liver, and renal disease. High hospital volume was associated with significant reductions in 30- (odds ratio (OR)=0.68; P=0.001) and 90-day mortality (OR=0.69; P=0.001). In a subset analysis of patients undergoing endoscopic intervention, hospital volume was identified as an important factor associated with mortality.

conclusionsThis study provides evidence for the centralization of management of esophageal perforation to high volume centers with appropriate multi-disciplinary infrastructure to treat these complex patients.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsEndoscopy, GastrointestinalEnglandEsophageal PerforationFemaleHeart FailureHospitals, High-VolumeHospitals, Low-VolumeHumansLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedMortalityMyocardial Ischemia

Identifiers

PMID26437667

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.