Skip to main content
. 2019 Jun;8(3):828–835. doi: 10.21037/tcr.2019.05.06

Table 3. A multivariate analysis of the risk factor for the development of anastomotic stricture after esophagectomy.

Risk factors and coding Regression coefficient Wald value Odds ratio 95% CI P value
Hypertension (0= no; 1= yes) −1.065 3.027 0.345 0.104–1.144 0.082
Surgical approach (0= McKeown; 1= Sweet; 2= Ivor-Lewis) 0.039 0.024 1.040 0.639–1.691 0.876
Anastomotic technique (0= s-HS; 1=CS; 2= d-HS; 3= SM) −0.689 14.228 0.502 0.351–0.718 0.000*
Anastomosis site (0= cervical; 1= below aortic arch; 2= above aortic arch) −0.586 8.001 0.556 0.371–0.835 0.005*
Total number of removed lymph node (0= less than 16; 1= more than or equal to 16) −0.309 1.165 0.734 0.418–1.287 0.280
Anastomotic leakage (0= no; 1= yes) 0.655 1.925 1.926 0.763–4.861 0.165

*, P<0.05. s-HS, single-layer hand sewn; CS, circular stapled; d-HS, double-layer hand-sewn; SM, semi-mechanical; CI, confidence interval.