Impact of the site of XXXX after oncologic esophagectomy on quality of life--a prospective, longitudinal outcome study.

@entity1 @entity5 @entity254 @entity957 @entity418 @entity420
BACKGROUND: For @entity1 undergoing oncologic surgery, the quality of life (QoL) is generally accepted as an important outcome parameter in addition to long-term survival, mortality, and complication rates. Our study focused on outcome in terms of QoL in @entity1 with @entity418 , comparing the sites of @entity254 (cervical versus thoracic @entity254 ). METHODS: In a prospective longitudinal single-center study from 1998 to 2005, 105 @entity1 underwent surgery for @entity418 . To assess QoL the EORTC-QLQ-C-30 and a @entity5 -specific module were administered before surgery, at discharge, and three, six, 12, and 24 months after surgery. Clinical data were collected prospectively and follow-up was performed every six months. RESULTS: The histological type was @entity957 in 51.4% of the cases, @entity420 in 41.9%, and some other type in 6.7%. There was no significant difference between cervical and thoracic @entity254 with regard to morbidity, mortality, and survival rates (30% five-year survival rate), whereas @entity5 stage was a significant (p < 0.001) prognostic factor. Most QoL scores dropped significantly below baseline in the early postoperative period. Even though they recovered slowly during the follow-up period, they never reached preoperative levels again. There was no statistically significant difference in any of the QoL scales between @entity1 with a cervical or a thoracic @entity254 . CONCLUSIONS: Esophageal resections are associated with significant deterioration of QoL, which persists during the follow-up period. The surgical technique and position of the esophagogastrostomy did not affect QoL deterioration.
