Volume 201 - Issue 8

Survival, mortality and morbidity outcomes after oesophagogastric cancer surgery in New South Wales, 2001–2008

Authors:  Margaret Lee and Peter Gibbs

Med J Aust 2014; 201 (8): 447. || doi: 10.5694/mja14.00870
Published online: 20 October 2014
Does institutional volume matter?

To the Editor: Following a retrospective review of New South Wales data, Smith and colleagues concluded that the better long-term survival outcomes following surgery for oesophagogastric cancer at higher-volume centres support surgery only being done at these centres.1 However, much missing data creates uncertainty about this conclusion.

Survival outcomes directly relate to stage at diagnosis, so variable use of staging laparoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound and/or positron emission tomography, all of which can upstage a significant proportion of patients,2 and all more likely to be employed at higher-volume centres, could create considerable variation in recorded stage at diagnosis and in patient selection for surgery. Further, some patients considered surgical candidates at one hospital may be managed with definitive chemoradiation at another hospital.3 Most significantly, there are widely variable approaches to the use of adjuvant radiation and chemotherapy, including the timing and agents used,4 which have a significant impact on recurrence risk and survival. As 5-year survival is also confounded by deaths from other causes, this measure cannot be considered a reliable indicator of surgical quality. We note that more direct indicators — length of stay and 30-day mortality — did not differ for lower-volume versus higher-volume centres.

Attempting to compare hospital surgical outcomes where there are no data on the variable approaches to initial staging or multidisciplinary management is likely to end with an “apples versus oranges” comparison. While surgery at higher-volume centres may produce better outcomes, Smith et al do not have the data to conclusively show this.


Authors


Competing interests


References


More like this

Cancer Research 18 August 2026 Open Access

Uneven Ground: Survival Differences Among Victorian Lung Cancer Patients by Location of Residence (2011–2023): A Retrospective Cohort Study

Evangeline Samuel, Eldho Paul, Mike Lloyd, Sanuki Tissera, Craig Underhill, Sagun Parakh, Phillip Parente, Inger Olesen, Javier Torres, Katharine See, Gavin M. Wright, David Langton, Thomas John, Matthew Conron, James Bartlett, Nicola Atkin, Nikolajs Zeps, Susan V. Harden, Wasek Faisal, John R. Zalcberg, Rob G. Stirling

Cancer Research 18 August 2026 Open Access

Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer With Liver-Only Metastases: A Retrospective Cohort Study Integrating Prospectively Collected Real-World Clinical and Molecular Data From an Australian National Database (2009–2024) to Guide Treatment Planning

Savio G. Barreto, Christos S. Karapetis, Shahid Ullah, Matthew Burge, Susan Caird, Angus Campbell, Azim Jalali, Ross Jennens, Muhammad A. Khattak, Belinda Lee, Stephanie H. Lim, Shehara Mendis, Louise Nott, Timothy J. Price, Jeremy D. Shapiro, Jeanne Tie, Javier Torres, Colin Williams, Rachel Wong, Vanessa Wong, Peter Gibbs

Cancer Guideline summary 13 July 2026 Open Access

Program Guidelines for the National Lung Cancer Screening Program: Targeted Lung Cancer Screening in High-Risk Individuals in Australia

Nicole M. Rankin, Rebecca Zosel, Lisa J. Whop, Raglan Maddox, Annette McWilliams, Miranda Siemienowicz, Jon Emery, Maria A. R. Lantin, Georgia Bartlett, Mikayla Wolfe, Abbey Diaz, Katrina Anderson, Lillian Liu, Cindy Toms, Sarah McDermott, Peter Bligh, Jeremy Chalke, Stephen Melsom, Claire E. Nightingale, Alison Brown, Sam Pope, Julia Brotherton, Anne Fidler, Michel Itel, Mark Brooke, Diane M. Pascoe, Fraser Brims, Tracy L. Leong, Emily Stone, Dorothy Keefe, Vivienne Milch