Back

Nationwide Trends and Outcomes in Major Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery

espinoza, r. e. d. a.; Bastos, L. S. L.; Hamacher, S.; Salluh, J. I. F.; Bozza, F. A.

2026-05-27 oncology
10.64898/2026.05.26.26354087 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background Complex gastrointestinal (GI) oncologic surgeries carry substantial perioperative risk, and nationwide outcomes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are underreported. This study aimed to evaluate national trends in surgical volume, in-hospital mortality, and intensive care unit (ICU) utilization for major GI cancer surgery in Brazils Unified Health System (SUS) over a 14-year period. Methods A population-based analysis was performed using national administrative databases to identify all adult patients undergoing colectomy, gastrectomy, pancreatic resection or esophagectomy for cancer in the SUS from 2010-2023. Annual rates were age-standardized according to the WHO standard population. Temporal trends were assessed using Poisson regression to estimate average annual percent change (AAPC) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results A total of 179,337 hospital admissions were analyzed (median age 63 years; 48% female). Colectomies accounted for 72% of cases, followed by gastrectomies (19%), pancreatic resections (5%), and esophagectomies (3%). Although crude surgical volume increased, population-adjusted rates declined overall (AAPC -2.09%; 95% CI -2.58 to -1.59), mainly due to reductions in gastrectomies and esophagectomies. Median hospital stay decreased from 9 to 7 days (AAPC -1.93%; 95% CI -2.79 to -1.06). Overall in-hospital mortality declined from 8.1% to 5.7% (AAPC -2.88%; 95% CI -4.15 to -1.59). ICU utilization rose from 37% to 43% of admissions (AAPC +1.31%; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.71). Conclusion Over 14 years, in-hospital mortality and length of stay for major gastrointestinal cancer surgery declined within Brazils universal public health system. These temporal trends occurred alongside expansion of accredited oncology services and increased ICU utilization, although causal relationships cannot be established from administrative data. These findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating and highlight the need for more granular hospital-level data in LMIC settings.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 10%
18.3%
2
Frontiers in Oncology
95 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.4%
3
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
9.0%
4
Cancer Medicine
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.2%
5
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.8%
50% of probability mass above
6
International Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.8%
7
Annals of Oncology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.9%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 38%
3.5%
9
BMC Cancer
52 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.5%
10
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.7%
11
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.7%
12
British Journal of Cancer
42 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.3%
13
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.0%
14
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
15
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
16
Cancer Letters
32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
17
npj Precision Oncology
48 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.3%
18
The Lancet Regional Health - Americas
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.3%
19
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
16 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.3%
20
European Journal of Cancer
10 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.8%
21
JCO Precision Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
22
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
17 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
23
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%