How radical should surgery be for early esophageal cancer?

Risk of lymph node metastasis in T1 esophageal adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis

Patients with early (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are increasingly having definitive local therapy endoscopically. Endoscopic resection is not able to pathologically stage or treat lymph node metastasis (LNM). Accurate identification of patients having nodal metastasis is critical to select endoscopic therapy over surgery. This study aimed to define the risk of LNM in T1 EAC. A meta-analysis of studies of patients who underwent surgery and lymphadenectomy with assessment of LNM was performed according to PRISMA. Main outcome was probability of LNM in T1a and T1b disease. Secondary outcomes were risk factors for LNM and rate of LNM in submucosal T1b (SM1, SM2, and SM3) disease. Registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022341794). Twenty cohort studies involving 2264 patients with T1 EAC met inclusion criteria: T1a (857 patients) with 36 (4.2%) node positive and T1b (1407 patients) with 327 (23.2%) node positive. Subgroup analysis of T1b lesions was available in 10 studies (405 patients). Node positivity for SM1, SM2, and SM3 was 16.3%, 16.2%, and 29.4%, respectively. T1 substage (odds ratio [OR] 7.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.45-13.38, P < 0.01), tumor differentiation (OR 2.82, 95% CI 2.06-3.87, P < 0.01), and lymphovascular invasion (OR 13.65, 95% CI 6.06-30.73, P < 0.01) were associated with LNM. T1a disease demonstrated a 4.2% nodal metastasis rate and T1b disease a rate of 23.2%. Endoscopic therapy should be reserved for T1a disease and perhaps select T1b disease, which has a moderately high rate of nodal metastasis. There were inadequate data to stratify T1b SM disease into 'low-risk' and 'high-risk' based on tumor differentiation and lymphovascular invasion.

TRANSHIATAL ESOPHAGECTOMY IN SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA OF THE ESOPHAGUS: WHAT ARE THE BEST INDICATIONS?

BACKGROUND

Overall survival in patients who underwent transhiatal esophagectomy submitted or not to neoadjuvant therapy. Southern Brazil has one of the highest incidences of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the world. Transthoracic esophagectomy allows more complete abdominal and thoracic lymphadenectomy than transhiatal. However, this one is associated with less morbidity.

AIM

To analyze the outcomes and prognostic factors of squamous esophageal cancer treated with transhiatal procedure.

METHODS

All patients selected for transhiatal approach were included as a potentially curative treatment and overall survival, operative time, lymph node analysis and use of neoadjuvant therapy were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 96 patients were evaluated. The overall 5-year survival was 41.2%. Multivariate analysis showed that operative time and presence of positive lymph nodes were both associated with a worse outcome, while neoadjuvant therapy was associated with better outcome. The negative lymph-node group had a 5-year survival rate of 50.2%.

CONCLUSION

Transhiatal esophagectomy can be safely used in patients with malnutrition degree that allows the procedure, in those with associated respiratory disorders and in the elderly. It provides considerable long-term survival, especially in the absence of metastases to local lymph nodes. The wider use of neoadjuvant therapy has the potential to further increase long-term survival.

Comparison of three digestive tract reconstruction methods for the treatment of Siewert II and III adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction: a prospective, randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric junction (AEG) has recently risen worldwide, including in Eastern Asia. The aim of the study was to explore the short-term and long-term clinical efficacy of piggyback jejunal interposition reconstruction single-tract reconstruction (PJIRSTR), piggyback jejunal interposition reconstruction double-tract reconstruction (PJIRDTR), and total gastrectomy esophageal jejunal Roux-en-Y anastomosis (TGRY) for the treatment of Siewert II and III AEG patients.

METHODS

A total of 300 Siewert II and III AEG patients admitted to Shanxi Tumor Hospital from June 2015 to December 2017 were prospectively selected. Patients were randomly divided into PJIRSTR group (n = 98), PJIRDTR group (n = 103), and TGRY group (n = 99) using the random number table method.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in total operation time, intraoperative blood loss, time of first anal exhaust, and postoperative hospital stay among the three groups (F = 2.526, 0.457, 0.234, 0.453; P > 0.05). The reconstruction time of PJIRSTR group and PJIRDTR group was longer than that of TGRY group (P < 0.01). There were no significant differences in cases of anastomotic leakage, anastomotic bleeding, abdominal infection, incision infection, ileus, and dumping syndrome in three groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of reflux esophagitis at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after surgery in the PJIRSTR group and the PJIRDTR group were significantly lower than TGRY group in the same period (P < 0.05). Compared with PJIRDTR group and TGRY group, PJIRSTR group had a small fluctuation range of postoperative nutrition indexes and had basically recovered to the preoperative level at 18 months. Four patients of Visick grade IV presented in TGRY group 18 months postoperatively, which was significantly higher compared with the other two groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared with PJIRDTR and TGRY, PJIRSTR can significantly reduce the incidence of postoperative reflux esophagitis and improve the long-term nutritional status of patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR-IIR-16007733. Registered 07 November 2015 - Retrospectively registered, http://www.chictr.org.cn/searchproj.aspx.

Esophagectomy versus endoscopic resection for patients with early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma: A National Cancer Database propensity-matched study

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic resection has been rapidly adopted in the treatment of early-stage esophageal tumors. We compared the outcomes after esophagectomy or endoscopic resection for stage T1a adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database for patients with T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent esophagectomy or endoscopic resection and generated a balanced cohort with 735 matched pairs using propensity-score matching. We then performed a multivariable Cox regression analysis on the matched and unmatched cohorts.

RESULTS

We identified 2173 patients; 1317 (60.6%) underwent esophagectomy, and 856 (39.4%) underwent endoscopic resection. In the unmatched cohort, patients who underwent esophagectomy were younger, more often not treated in academic settings, and more likely to have comorbidities (30.4% vs 22.5%, P = .002). They had longer hospital stays and more readmissions than patients who underwent endoscopic resection. Factors positively affecting overall survival were younger age, resection at an academic medical center, and lower Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score. In the matched cohort, patients who underwent esophagectomy had longer hospital stays and were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (7.0% vs 0.6%, P < .001). When a time period-specific partition was applied, endoscopic resection had a lower death hazard 0 to 90 days after resection (hazard ratio, 0.15; P = .003), but this was reversed for survival greater than 90 days (hazard ratio, 1.34; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, survival appears equivalent after endoscopic resection or esophagectomy, but endoscopic resection is associated with shorter hospital stays, fewer readmissions, and less 90-day mortality. In patients surviving more than 90 days, esophagectomy may provide better overall survival.

The sweet approach is still worthwhile in modern esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

The Ivor Lewis and Sweet approaches are the two most widely used open transthoracic esophagectomy techniques. We evaluated and compared the therapeutic efficacy of these two approaches to determine the appropriate method to treat middle or lower third esophageal carcinomas.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent esophagectomy with the Sweet (n=748) and Ivor Lewis (n=167) approaches at Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University between January 2007 and December 2010. Patients with preoperatively identified superior mediastinal lymph node metastases, high-level lesions (above the carina), and benign tumors were excluded. Perioperative-related indicators and 5-year survival rates were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Compared with the Ivor Lewis approach, the Sweet approach has a shorter operative time (181±71 minutes versus 208±63 minutes; p<0.001), less blood loss (167±71 mL versus 179±87 mL; p=0.043), and a lower incidence of transfusion (8.7% versus 13.8%; p=0.044) and postoperative complications (12.3% versus 20.4%; p=0.002). The Ivor Lewis approach was more likely to result in wound infection (3.2% versus 7.8%; p=0.010) and delayed gastric emptying (1.7% versus 4.7%; p=0.046). There was no significant difference between groups with regard to the number of lymph nodes harvested or total number of patients with lymph node metastases. There was no significant difference in locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence, or 5-year survival between approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

The Sweet approach has many advantages for the treatment of middle or lower third esophageal carcinomas. It is a safe, effective, and worthwhile approach in modern thoracic surgery.

Depth of submucosal tumor infiltration and its relevance in lymphatic metastasis formation for T1b squamous cell and adenocarcinomas of the esophagus

BACKGROUND

Surgery for early esophageal carcinoma has been challenged by less invasive endoscopic approaches. Selecting patients in need for surgical intervention according to their risk of lymphatic spread is mandatory.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate risk factors for lymphatic metastasis formation in T1b esophageal carcinomas.

METHODS

Histopathological specimens following surgical resection for T1b esophageal carcinomas were reevaluated for overall submucosal layer thickness, depth of submucosal tumor infiltration, tumor length as well as lymphatic and vascular infiltration. Depth of tumor infiltration to overall submucosal thickness was divided in thirds (SM1, SM2, and SM3) and factors influencing lymphatic metastasis formation were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 67 patients with pT1b tumors were analyzed, including 36 adenocarcinomas (53.7 %) and 31 squamous cell carcinomas (46.3 %). Lymph node involvement was seen in 22.4 % (15/67) patients without significant differences between SM1 3/11 (27.3 %), SM2, 4/18 (22.2 %), and SM3 (8/38) (21.8 %) (p = 0.909) carcinomas. On binomial log-regression models, only lymphangioinvasion and tumor length >2 cm was significantly associated with lymph node involvement.

CONCLUSION

As depth of submucosal tumor infiltration did not correlate with the formation of lymph node metastases and in regard of the risk of lymphatic spread in these cases, surgical resection is warranted in pT1b carcinomas.

Extent of lymphadenectomy does not predict survival in patients treated with primary esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

The number of lymph nodes resected and its impact on survival for patients with esophageal cancer remains undefined. Current guidelines recommend extended lymphadenectomy in patients not receiving neoadjuvant therapy. We reviewed our single institutional experience with nodal harvest for esophageal cancer in a non-neoadjuvant therapy setting.

METHODS

Patients who underwent esophagectomy as primary therapy were indentified from a prospectively maintained database consisting of 704 patients who underwent esophagectomy. Patients were stratified by number of lymph nodes (LN) resected: >5, 10, 12, 15, or 20. Survival, clinical, and pathologic parameters were analyzed with Kaplan-Meier curves, chi-square, or Fisher's exact tests where appropriate.

RESULTS

We identified 246 patients who underwent esophagectomy as initial treatment. The mean age was 65 ±10 years. The majority of patients were male (87%). Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy was performed for 71%, minimally invasive esophagectomy for 15%, transhiatal esophagectomy for 12%, and three-field esophagectomy for 2%. At 60 months follow-up, there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS) between patients with < vs. >5 LN resected (p = 0.74 and p = 0.67, respectively) or in the < vs. >10 (p = 0.33, p = 0.11), 12 (p = 0.82, p = 0.90), 15 (p = 0.45, p = 0.79), or 20 (p = 0.72, p = 0.86) resected LN groups. Patients were then subdivided into node-positive and node-negative cohorts and stratified by nodal harvest. In the subgroups of patients with node-negative and node-positive disease, OS and DFS also did not significantly differ between groups with respect to number of nodes resected (p > 0.05). A total of 49 (20%) patients developed recurrent disease; however, recurrence was not statistically associated with number of LN resected (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

We found no impact of extent of lymphadenectomy on overall or disease-free survival in patients treated with esophagectomy without neoadjuvant therapy. In addition, the number of nodes resected at esophagectomy did not affect recurrence rates. Current recommendations for increased nodal resection during esophagectomy in patients not receiving neoadjuvant therapy may not improve patient outcomes, and this phenomenon warrants further investigation.

Surgery of esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the only option for curative treatment in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Despite the debates related to the peri-operative therapy regime, a generally accepted consensus on surgical approach is not reached yet. The debate focuses mainly on pros and cons between radical transthoracic resection and the (limited) transhiatal resection in the last decade.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched for randomized trials, meta-analyses, and retrospective single-center studies. The search terms were "esophageal carcinoma," "esophageal junction carcinomas," "transhiatal," "transthoracic," "morbidity," "mortality," and "surgery."

RESULTS

The radical transthoracic approach should be the standard of care for esophageal carcinoma since it does not go along with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity or mortality but reveals an improved survival. Patient-related co-morbidities are the most influencing factors for the postoperative outcome. For type II esophageal junction carcinoma, treatment options from transhiatal extended gastrectomy to esophagectomy with hemigastrectomy or esophagogastrectomy with colonic interposition are existing. In type III esophagogastric junction carcinomas, the transhiatal extended gastrectomy is the standard of care, and the minimally invasive approach should be performed in specialized centers.

CONCLUSION

Based on current available study results, this expert review provides a decision support for the best surgical strategy depending on tumor localization and patients' characteristics.

Surgical treatment for early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

More studies are needed to clarify treatments and prognosis of early esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This retrospective study was designed to review the outcome of surgical treatment for early ESCC, evaluate the results of a left thoracotomy for selected patients with early ESCC, and identify factors affecting lymph node metastases and survival. The clinicopathological data of 228 patients with early ESCC who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy with lymphadenectomy without preoperative adjuvant treatment were reviewed. The χ(2) test or Fisher's exact test were used to detect factors related to lymph node metastasis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify prognostic factors. There were 152 males and 76 females with a median age of 55 years. Two hundred and eight patients underwent a left thoracotomy, and the remaining 20 patients with lymph nodes in the upper mediastinum more than 5 mm in short-axis diameter by computed tomography scan underwent a right thoracotomy. No lymph node metastasis was found in the 18 patients with carcinoma in situ, while lymph node metastases were detected in 1.6% (1/62) of patients with mucosal tumours and 18.2% (27/148) of patients with submucosal tumours. Only 7 patients showed upper mediastinal lymph node metastases in the follow-up. The 5- and 10-year overall survival rates were 81.4% and 70.1%, respectively. Only histologic grade (P<0.001) and pT category (P=0.001) significantly correlated with the presence of lymph node metastases. In multivariate analysis, only histologic grade (P=0.026) and pT category (P=0.008) were independent prognostic factors. A left thoracotomy is acceptable for selected patients with early ESCC. Histologic grade and pT category affected the presence of lymph node metastases and were independent prognostic factors for early ESCC.

The risk of lymph-node metastases in patients with high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal carcinoma in Barrett's esophagus: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic eradication therapy is used to treat mucosal neoplasms in Barrett's esophagus, but cannot cure cancers that have metastasized to lymph nodes. The risk of such metastases has been proposed as a reason to consider esophagectomy rather than endoscopic therapy for esophageal mucosal neoplasia. The objective of our study was to determine the frequency of lymph-node metastases in patients with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and intramucosal carcinoma in Barrett's esophagus.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review using the PRISMA guidelines to identify studies that included patients who had esophagectomy for HGD or intramucosal carcinoma in Barrett's esophagus, and that reported final pathology results after examination of esophagectomy specimens.

RESULTS

We identified 70 relevant reports that included 1,874 patients who had esophagectomy performed for HGD or intramucosal carcinoma in Barrett's esophagus. Lymph-node metastases were found in 26 patients (1.39 % , 95 % CI 0.86 – 1.92). No metastases were found in the 524 patients who had a final pathology diagnosis of HGD, whereas 26 (1.93 % , 95 % CI 1.19 – 2.66 %) of the 1,350 patients with a final pathology diagnosis of intramucosal carcinoma had positive lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of unexpected lymph-node metastases for patients with mucosal neoplasms in Barrett's esophagus is in the range of 1 – 2 %. Esophagectomy has a mortality rate that often exceeds 2 %, with substantial morbidity and no guarantee of curing metastatic disease. Therefore, the risk of lymph node metastases alone does not warrant the choice of esophagectomy over endoscopic therapy for HGD and intramucosal carcinoma in Barrett's esophagus.