Impact of preoperative risk factors on morbidity after esophagectomy: is there room for improvement?

BACKGROUND: Despite progress in multidisciplinary treatment of esophageal cancer, oncologic esophagectomy is still the cornerstone of therapeutic strategies. Several scoring systems are used to predict postoperative morbidity, but in most cases they identify nonmodifiable parameters. The aim of this study was to identify potentially modifiable risk factors associated with complications after oncologic esophagectomy. METHODS: All consecutive patients with complete data sets undergoing oncologic esophagectomy in our department during 2001-2011 were included in this study. As potentially modifiable risk factors we assessed nutritional status depicted by body mass index (BMI) and preoperative serum albumin levels, excessive alcohol consumption, and active smoking. Postoperative complications were graded according to a validated 5-grade system. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify preoperative risk factors associated with the occurrence and severity of complications. RESULTS: Our series included 93 patients. Overall morbidity rate was 81 % (n = 75), with 56 % (n = 52) minor complications and 18 % (n = 17) major complications. Active smoking and excessive alcohol consumption were associated with the occurrence of severe complications, whereas BMI and low preoperative albumin levels were not. The simultaneous presence of two or more of these risk factors significantly increased the risk of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of malnutrition, active smoking and alcohol consumption were found to have a negative impact on postoperative morbidity rates. Therefore, preoperative smoking and alcohol cessation counseling and monitoring and improving the nutritional status are strongly recommended.

A Legislator under Surveillance: The Creation and Implementation of Swiss Banking Legislation 1910-1934

This paper analyses how banking regulation was introduced in Switzerland - one of the world's most prominent financial centres - which remained in place until the beginning of the twenty-first century. It shows that the law adopted on 8 November 1934 is a perfect example of capture of the regulator by the regulated. Essentially a political response in the context of the economic crisis of the 1930s, it largely reflected the interests of banking circles by limiting the intervention of the State as much as possible. The introduction of the new legislation was facilitated by the temporary weakness of Swiss banking circles, as they depended on the State to delay or prevent the collapse of many major credit institutions. They did not manage to derail the law as they had two decades earlier when they scuppered the federal bill on banks drawn up between 1914 and 1916. But this time they were better organized and more united, and intervened all the more effectively in the legislative process itself. The 1934 law is thus distinctive in that it made no structural changes to the architecture of the financial centre but merely codified its practices through flexible legislation meant to reassure the public. The law was aimed less at controlling banking activity than at keeping - thanks to skilfully calibrated political concessions - the State from having to intervene more directly in the internal management of banks or in the fixing of interest rates and the export of capital.