IMPACT OF RESPIRATORY COMPLICATIONS AND ANASTOMOTIC LEAKAGE ON HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE FOLLOWING THORACOSCOPIC ESOPHAGECTOMY
Nội dung chính của bài viết
Tóm tắt
Objectives: To evaluate health-related quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) and the impact of respiratory complications and anastomotic leakage on health-related QoL at 3 months postoperatively. Methods: A prospective, descriptive study was conducted on 70 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent TE at Military Hospital 103 and 108 Military Central Hospital between June 2022 and June 2024. QoL was assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QoL Questionnaire - Esophageal Module (EORTC QLQ-OES18) preoperatively and at 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. Results: The incidences of respiratory complications and anastomotic leakage were 18.6% and 7.1%, respectively. At 3 months postoperatively, patients with respiratory complications had significantly higher scores for cough and esophageal pain compared with those without complications (68.2 vs. 52.1 and 64.1 vs. 51.8, respectively; p < 0.05). Anastomotic leakage was associated with significantly higher dysphagia scores (67.0 vs. 54.3; p = 0.04) and greater eating restrictions (73.1 vs. 53.0; p = 0.001). Overall QoL showed gradual improvement from 3 to 6 months after surgery. Conclusion: Respiratory complications and anastomotic leakage are major determinants of early deterioration in QoL after esophagectomy, particularly affecting cough, esophageal pain, and eating function.
Từ khóa
Esophageal cancer, Thoracoscopic esophagectomy, Health-related quality of life
Chi tiết bài viết
Tài liệu tham khảo
2. 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.
3. Sasaki K, Tsuruda Y, Shimonosono M, et al. Comparison of the subtotal and narrow gastric conduit for cervical esophagogastrostomy after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients: A propensity score-matched analysis. Esophagus. 2024; 21(1):41-50.
4. Collard JM, Tinton N, Malaise J, et al. Esophageal replacement: Gastric tube or whole stomach? Ann Thorac Surg. 1995; 60(2):261-266; discussion 267.
5. Blazeby JM, Conroy T, Hammerlid E, et al. Clinical and psychometric validation of an EORTC questionnaire module, the EORTC QLQ-OES18, to assess QoL in patients with esophageal cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2003; 39(10):1384-1394.
6. Jezerskyte E, Van Berge Henegouwen MI, Van Laarhoven HWM, et al. Postoperative complications and long-term QoL after multimodality treatment for esophageal cancer: An analysis of the prospective observational cohort study of esophageal- gastric cancer patients (POCOP). Ann Surg Oncol. 2021; 28(12):7259-7276.
7. Kauppila JH, Xie S, Johar A, et al. Meta-analysis of health-related QoL after minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Br J Surg. 2017; 104(9):1131-1140.
8. Nath VG, Govindaraj Raman SMT, et al. Short-term outcomes and QoL following minimally invasive esophagectomy in a tertiary care center in Southern India, Cureus. 2023; 15(11):e49245.
9. Van der Schaaf M, Lagergren J, and Lagergren P. Persisting symptoms after intrathoracic anastomotic leak following oesophagectomy for cancer. Br J Surg. 2012; 99(1):95-99.