Post Oesophagectomy Outcomes in a Single Regional Centre in Australia
NCT ID: NCT06662513
Last Updated: 2024-11-05
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
100 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2024-11-01
2024-11-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
* Oesophageal cancer is associated with a grim prognosis despite many advances in treatment. Oesophagectomy is a key component of the care of patients who are candidates for curative treatment, however it is associated with substantial morbidity.
* Several studies have suggested that oesophagectomies performed at higher volume tertiary centres are associated with lower morbidity and mortality than lower volume centres, and this has prompted changes to policy in countries such as Great Britain, Canada and the Netherlands with regards to the centralisation of these cases. A higher volume centre within Australia is likely to perform 6 or more procedures per year.
* Currently within Australia, centralisation on a large scale has not occurred. This has been limited in part by resource provision and geographical barriers. Therefore, oesophagectomies in Australia are still routinely performed in regional centres. However, there is a paucity of recent outcomes data from these centres.
Aims/objectives
* Retrospective review of oesophagectomies undertaken in a single regional centre in Tasmania, Australia over 10 years (January 2014 to December 2023)
* Assess outcomes (long and short-term complications and mortality) and compare to morbidity and mortality rates from larger international centres
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Outcomes After Esophagectomy With a Focus on Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy and Quality of Life
NCT00260559
Perioperative Management and Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy
NCT03378869
Esophagogastrectomy Versus Extended Gastrectomy in AEG II
NCT02302118
Non-gastric Conduit Reconstruction After Esophagectomy
NCT07064655
Nomogram for Predicting Difficult Transoral and Submental Thyroidectomy
NCT06671184
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
* Retrospective review of oesophagectomies undertaken in a single regional centre in Tasmania, Australia over 10 years (January 2014 to December 2023)
* Assess outcomes (long and short-term complications, mortality, survival) and compare to published outcomes from larger national and international centres
Project Design Research project setting: Launceston General Hospital (Tasmania, Australia)
Methodological approach: Retrospective case series
Participants
* Retrospective identification of patients who underwent oesophagectomy at Launceston General Hospital from January 2014 to December 2023 via coding in medical records and MBS codes
* Inclusion criteria: patients who underwent oeosphagectomy at LGH in the specified time frame
* Exclusion criteria: none
* Expected size of case series is approximately 100 patients (this is extrapolated from the number of oesophagectomies performed in 2023)
Participant recruitment strategies and timeframes: No active participation of patients in this case series, all information will be retrospectively collected from medical records
Consent: Given the number of expected patients (approximately 100) and the potential distress that could be caused to patients or their next of kin in seeking consent, an Application for the Waiver of the requirement for Consent will be submitted
Research Activities
* No participant commitment is required
* Project duration is approximately 4 weeks for data collection, 4 weeks for analysis and writing
* No Participant follow-up is planned as part of this project
Data Collection/Gathering
* Data will be collected by assessment medical records only
* Only the PI will access identifying details such as name and date of birth.
* Information that will be collected includes: Patient demographics: age, gender, neoadjuvant treatment, co-morbidities, BMI, ASA score, type of oesophagectomy (2 or 3 stage). Primary endpoints: mortality (in hospital, 30 day and 90 day), anastomotic leak, length of stay (ICU, acute inpatient). Secondary endpoints: chyle leak, pneumonia, reintubation, return to theatre, wound infection, intra-abdominal infection, cardiac complications, DVT/PE, anastomotic stricture, diaphragmatic hernia, disease recurrence, survival
Data Management
* Data will be entered into an excel spreadsheet kept on a password protected THS computer in the department of surgery in LGH
* Data will only be accessed by the named investigators that are based at LGH (no external researcher will have access to data)
* There will be no hard copies of this data
* Data will not be transferred to personal computers/laptops
* Data will be destroyed/deleted by the PI 5 years after publication date
Data Analysis
* Outcomes will be calculated as percentages and then compared to published outcomes data from other Australian centres and international centres Examples of some published studies that may be used to compare outcomes are listed in citations.
* Given the retrospective nature of the data collection it is anticipated that some information will be missing however the kind of data the investigators plan to collect is very likely to be found in the medical record.
* Any missing information will be acknowledged when assessing results and the impact of the missing information will also be acknowledged when making any conclusions from those results
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
CASE_ONLY
RETROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
oesophagectomy
patients who underwent oesophagectomy within the specified time frame
No Intervention: Observational Cohort
No intervention - retrospective observational study
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
No Intervention: Observational Cohort
No intervention - retrospective observational study
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Department of Health, Tasmania
OTHER_GOV
Launceston General Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Renishka Sellayah
Principal investigator
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Launceston General Hospital
Launceston, Tasmania, Australia
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Chang AC. Centralizing Esophagectomy to Improve Outcomes and Enhance Clinical Research: Invited Expert Review. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018 Sep;106(3):916-923. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.04.004. Epub 2018 May 5.
Pu S, Chen H, Zhou C, Yu S, Liao X, Zhu L, He J, Wang B. Major Postoperative Complications in Esophageal Cancer After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Compared With Open Esophagectomy: An Updated Meta-analysis. J Surg Res. 2021 Jan;257:554-571. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.08.011. Epub 2020 Sep 11.
De Silva I, Wee M, Cabalag CS, Fong R, Tran K, Wu M, Schloithe A, Bright T, Duong CP, Watson DI. Para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia following esophagectomy-the new price of minimally invasive surgery? Dis Esophagus. 2023 Apr 29;36(5):doad011. doi: 10.1093/dote/doad011.
Buchholz V, Hazard R, Lee DK, Liu DS, Zhang W, Chen S, Aly A, Barnett S, Le P, Weinberg L. Textbook outcomes after oesophagectomy: a single-centre observational study. BMC Surg. 2023 Dec 8;23(1):368. doi: 10.1186/s12893-023-02253-7.
Edmondson J, Hunter J, Bakis G, O'Connor A, Wood S, Qureshi AP. Understanding Post-Esophagectomy Complications and Their Management: The Early Complications. J Clin Med. 2023 Dec 11;12(24):7622. doi: 10.3390/jcm12247622.
Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Study Group on behalf of the West Midlands Research Collaborative. Comparison of short-term outcomes from the International Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA), the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG), and the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA). BJS Open. 2021 May 7;5(3):zrab010. doi: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrab010.
Anderson O, Ni Z, Moller H, Coupland VH, Davies EA, Allum WH, Hanna GB. Hospital volume and survival in oesophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2011 Nov;47(16):2408-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.07.001. Epub 2011 Aug 9.
Doran SLF, Digby MG, Green SV, Kelty CJ, Tamhankar AP. Risk factors for and treatment of anastomotic strictures after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Surg Endosc. 2024 Nov;38(11):6771-6777. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-11150-w. Epub 2024 Aug 19.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2024/ETH01712
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.