1
|
Ascari F, De Pascale S, Rosati R, Giacopuzzi S, Puccetti F, Weindelmayer J, Cusin S, Leone B, Fumagalli Romario U. Multicenter study on the incidence and treatment of mediastinal leaks after esophagectomy (MuMeLe 2). J Gastrointest Surg 2024; 28:1072-1077. [PMID: 38705367 DOI: 10.1016/j.gassur.2024.04.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2024] [Revised: 04/23/2024] [Accepted: 04/27/2024] [Indexed: 05/07/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Management of mediastinal anastomotic leaks (MALs) after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy includes conservative, endoscopic, or surgical management. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVAC) is becoming a routine approach for MALs, although the outcomes have not been defined. This study aimed to describe the incidence, treatment, and outcomes of MALs in patients who underwent esophagectomy in 3 Italian high-volume centers that routinely use EVAC for MAL. METHODS Patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between September 2018 and March 2023 were included. RESULTS A total of 681 patients underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, of whom 88 had MAL. The MAL rates for open, minimally invasive, and robotic esophagectomies were 11.5%, 13.4%, and 14.8%, respectively. Global and specific 30- and 90-day mortality rates for MAL were 0.9% and 2.1% and 6.8% and 15.9%, respectively. Nonoperative management (NOM) as the primary treatment was chosen for 62 patients. EVAC was the most common NOM (62.9%), and the most common operative management (OM) was anastomotic redo (53.8%). Diversion was the OM for 7 patients, of whom 3 patients died. Primary treatment proved successful in 40 patients. Among them, EVAC alone was successful in 35.9% of patients. Globally, endoscopic treatment, including EVAC, was successful in 79.0% of NOM and 55.7% of MALs. NOM and OM were chosen as secondary treatments for 27 and 10 patients, respectively. Secondary treatment proved successful in 21 patients. CONCLUSION The incidence of MALs after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is approximately 13%. Endoscopic techniques have a success rate of almost 80%, with EVAC representing a significant part of this treatment process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Filippo Ascari
- Division of Digestive Surgery, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefano De Pascale
- Division of Digestive Surgery, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Milan, Italy
| | - Riccardo Rosati
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ospedale San Raffaele, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Simone Giacopuzzi
- Division of General and Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Francesco Puccetti
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ospedale San Raffaele, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Jacopo Weindelmayer
- Division of General and Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Sofia Cusin
- Division of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Ospedale San Raffaele, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy
| | - Barbara Leone
- Division of General and Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona, Verona, Italy
| | - Uberto Fumagalli Romario
- Division of Digestive Surgery, Istituto Europeo di Oncologia, Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Milan, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ubels S, Verstegen MHP, Klarenbeek BR, Bouwense S, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Daams F, van Det MJ, Griffiths EA, Haveman JW, Heisterkamp J, Nieuwenhuijzen G, Polat F, Schouten J, Siersema PD, Singh P, Wijnhoven B, Hannink G, van Workum F, Rosman C. Treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: large, collaborative, observational TENTACLE cohort study. Br J Surg 2023; 110:852-863. [PMID: 37196149 PMCID: PMC10364505 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znad123] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2022] [Revised: 03/16/2023] [Accepted: 04/13/2023] [Indexed: 05/19/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Anastomotic leak is a severe complication after oesophagectomy. Anastomotic leak has diverse clinical manifestations and the optimal treatment strategy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of treatment strategies for different manifestations of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy. METHODS A retrospective cohort study was performed in 71 centres worldwide and included patients with anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy (2011-2019). Different primary treatment strategies were compared for three different anastomotic leak manifestations: interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (that is no intrathoracic collections; well perfused conduit); drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations; and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS Of 1508 patients with anastomotic leak, 28.2 per cent (425 patients) had local manifestations, 36.3 per cent (548 patients) had intrathoracic manifestations, 9.6 per cent (145 patients) had conduit ischaemia/necrosis, 17.5 per cent (264 patients) were allocated after multiple imputation, and 8.4 per cent (126 patients) were excluded. After propensity score matching, no statistically significant differences in 90-day mortality were found regarding interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (risk difference 3.2 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.8 to 8.2 per cent), drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations (risk difference 5.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.2 to 12.8 per cent), and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis (risk difference 0.1 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -21.4 to 1.6 per cent). In general, less morbidity was found after less extensive primary treatment strategies. CONCLUSION Less extensive primary treatment of anastomotic leak was associated with less morbidity. A less extensive primary treatment approach may potentially be considered for anastomotic leak. Future studies are needed to confirm current findings and guide optimal treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sander Ubels
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Moniek H P Verstegen
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Bastiaan R Klarenbeek
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Stefan Bouwense
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Mark I van Berge Henegouwen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Marc J van Det
- Department of Surgery, ZGT Hospital Group, Almelo, The Netherlands
| | - Ewen A Griffiths
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
- Institute of Cancer and Genomic Sciences, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Jan Willem Haveman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Joos Heisterkamp
- Department of Surgery, Elisabeth-TweeSteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands
| | | | - Fatih Polat
- Department of Surgery, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Schouten
- Department of Intensive Care, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Peter D Siersema
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Pritam Singh
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
- Department of Surgery, Regional Oesophago-Gastric Unit, Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford, UK
| | - Bas Wijnhoven
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Gerjon Hannink
- Department of Operating Rooms, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Frans van Workum
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Surgery, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - Camiel Rosman
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Ubels S, Matthée E, Verstegen M, Klarenbeek B, Bouwense S, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Daams F, Dekker JWT, van Det MJ, van Esser S, Griffiths EA, Haveman JW, Nieuwenhuijzen G, Siersema PD, Wijnhoven B, Hannink G, van Workum F, Rosman C, Heisterkamp J, Polat F, Schouten J, Singh P, Eshuis WJ, Kalff MC, Feenstra ML, van der Peet DL, Stam WT, Van Etten B, Poelmann F, Vuurberg N, Willem van den Berg J, Martijnse IS, Matthijsen RM, Luyer M, Curvers W, Nieuwenhuijzen T, Taselaar AE, Kouwenhoven EA, Lubbers M, Sosef M, Lecot F, Geraedts TC, van den Wildenberg F, Kelder W, Lubbers M, Baas PC, de Haas JW, Hartgrink HH, Bahadoer RR, van Sandick JW, Hartemink KJ, Veenhof X, Stockmann H, Gorgec B, Weeder P, Wiezer MJ, Genders CM, Belt E, Blomberg B, van Duijvendijk P, Claassen L, Reetz D, Steenvoorde P, Mastboom W, Klein Ganseij HJ, van Dalsen AD, Joldersma A, Zwakman M, Groenendijk RP, Montazeri M, Mercer S, Knight B, van Boxel G, McGregor RJ, Skipworth RJ, Frattini C, Bradley A, Nilsson M, Hayami M, Huang B, Bundred J, Evans R, Grimminger PP, van der Sluis PC, Eren U, Saunders J, Theophilidou E, Khanzada Z, Elliott JA, Ponten J, King S, Reynolds JV, Sgromo B, Akbari K, Shalaby S, Gutschow CA, Schmidt H, Vetter D, Moorthy K, Ibrahim MA, Christodoulidis G, Räsänen JV, Kauppi J, Söderström H, Koshy R, Manatakis DK, Korkolis DP, Balalis D, Rompu A, Alkhaffaf B, Alasmar M, Arebi M, Piessen G, Nuytens F, Degisors S, Ahmed A, Boddy A, Gandhi S, Fashina O, Van Daele E, Pattyn P, Robb WB, Arumugasamy M, Al Azzawi M, Whooley J, Colak E, Aybar E, Sari AC, Uyanik MS, Ciftci AB, Sayyed R, Ayub B, Murtaza G, Saeed A, Ramesh P, Charalabopoulos A, Liakakos T, Schizas D, Baili E, Kapelouzou A, Valmasoni M, Pierobon ES, Capovilla G, Merigliano S, Constantinoiu S, Birla R, Achim F, Rosianu CG, Hoara P, Castro RG, Salcedo AF, Negoi I, Negoita VM, Ciubotaru C, Stoica B, Hostiuc S, Colucci N, Mönig SP, Wassmer CH, Meyer J, Takeda FR, Aissar Sallum RA, Ribeiro U, Cecconello I, Toledo E, Trugeda MS, Fernández MJ, Gil C, Castanedo S, Isik A, Kurnaz E, Videira JF, Peyroteo M, Canotilho R, Weindelmayer J, Giacopuzzi S, De Pasqual CA, Bruna M, Mingol F, Vaque J, Pérez C, Phillips AW, Chmelo J, Brown J, Koshy R, Han LE, Gossage JA, Davies AR, Baker CR, Kelly M, Saad M, Bernardi D, Bonavina L, Asti E, Riva C, Scaramuzzo R, Elhadi M, Ahmed HA, Elhadi A, Elnagar FA, Msherghi AA, Wills V, Campbell C, Cerdeira MP, Whiting S, Merrett N, Das A, Apostolou C, Lorenzo A, Sousa F, Barbosa JA, Devezas V, Barbosa E, Fernandes C, Smith G, Li EY, Bhimani N, Chan P, Kotecha K, Hii MW, Ward SM, Johnson M, Read M, Chong L, Hollands MJ, Allaway M, Richardson A, Johnston E, Chen AZ, Kanhere H, Prasad S, McQuillan P, Surman T, Trochsler M, Schofield W, Ahmed SK, Reid JL, Harris MC, Gananadha S, Farrant J, Rodrigues N, Fergusson J, Hindmarsh A, Afzal Z, Safranek P, Sujendran V, Rooney S, Loureiro C, Fernández SL, Díez del Val I, Jaunoo S, Kennedy L, Hussain A, Theodorou D, Triantafyllou T, Theodoropoulos C, Palyvou T, Elhadi M, Ben Taher FA, Ekheel M, Msherghi AA. Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: Unravelling differences in failure to rescue. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2023; 49:974-982. [PMID: 36732207 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.01.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/29/2022] [Revised: 12/20/2022] [Accepted: 01/11/2023] [Indexed: 01/21/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Failure to rescue (FTR) is an important outcome measure after esophagectomy and reflects mortality after postoperative complications. Differences in FTR have been associated with hospital resection volume. However, insight into how centers manage complications and achieve their outcomes is lacking. Anastomotic leak (AL) is a main contributor to FTR. This study aimed to assess differences in FTR after AL between centers, and to identify factors that explain these differences. METHODS TENTACLE - Esophagus is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. Differences in FTR were assessed between low-volume (<20 resections), middle-volume (20-60 resections) and high-volume centers (≥60 resections). Mediation analysis was performed using logistic regression, including possible mediators for FTR: case-mix, hospital resources, leak severity and treatment. RESULTS FTR after AL was 11.7%. After adjustment for confounders, FTR was lower in high-volume vs. low-volume (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.2-0.8), but not versus middle-volume centers (OR 0.67, 95%CI 0.5-1.0). After mediation analysis, differences in FTR were found to be explained by lower leak severity, lower secondary ICU readmission rate and higher availability of therapeutic modalities in high-volume centers. No statistically significant direct effect of hospital volume was found: high-volume vs. low-volume 0.86 (95%CI 0.4-1.7), high-volume vs. middle-volume OR 0.86 (95%CI 0.5-1.4). CONCLUSION Lower FTR in high-volume compared with low-volume centers was explained by lower leak severity, less secondary ICU readmissions and higher availability of therapeutic modalities. To reduce FTR after AL, future studies should investigate effective strategies to reduce leak severity and prevent secondary ICU readmission.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sander Ubels
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
| | - Eric Matthée
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Moniek Verstegen
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Bastiaan Klarenbeek
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Stefan Bouwense
- Department of Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center+, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Mark I van Berge Henegouwen
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Freek Daams
- Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC, Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Marc J van Det
- Department of Surgery, ZGT Hospital Group, Almelo, the Netherlands
| | - Stijn van Esser
- Department of Surgery, Reinier de Graaf Gasthuis, Delft, the Netherlands
| | - Ewen A Griffiths
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
| | - Jan Willem Haveman
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | | | - Peter D Siersema
- Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Bas Wijnhoven
- Department of Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Gerjon Hannink
- Department of Operating Rooms, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Frans van Workum
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Camiel Rosman
- Department of Surgery, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | | | | | | | - Fatih Polat
- Canisius-Wilhelmina Ziekenhuis, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Jeroen Schouten
- Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Pritam Singh
- Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Postoperative and Pathological Outcomes of CROSS and FLOT as Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophageal and Junctional Adenocarcinoma: An International Cohort Study From the Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA). Ann Surg 2023; 277:e1026-e1034. [PMID: 35099168 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000005394] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to compare the postoperative and pathological outcomes between carboplatin, paclitaxel, radiotherapy (CROSS) and 5-FU, leucovorine, oxaliplatin and docetaxel (FLOT) in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) patients from an international, multicenter cohort. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Ongoing debate exists around optimum approach to locally advanced EAC, with proponents for perioperative chemotherapy, such as FLOT, or multimodal therapy, in particular the CROSS regimen. METHODS Patients undergoing CROSS (n = 350) and FLOT (n = 368), followed by curative esophagectomy for EAC were identified from the Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit. RESULTS The 90-day mortality was higher after CROSS than FLOT (5% vs 1%, P = 0.005), even on adjusted analyses [odds ratio (OR): 3.97, confidence interval (CI) 95% : 1.34-13.67]. Postoperative mortality in CROSS were related to higher pulmonary (74% vs 60%) and cardiac complications (42% vs 20%) compared to FLOT. CROSS was associated with higher pathologic complete response (pCR) rates (18% vs 10%, P = 0.004) and margin-negative resections (93% vs 76%, P < 0.001) compared with FLOT. On adjusted analyses, CROSS was associated with higher pCR rates (OR: 2.05, CI 95% : 1.26-3.34) and margin-negative resections (OR: 4.55, CI 95% : 2.70-7.69) compared to FLOT. CONCLUSIONS This study provides real-world data CROSS was associated with higher 90-day mortality than FLOT, related to cardio-pulmonary complications with CROSS. These warrant a further review into causes and mechanisms in selected patients, and at minimum suggest the need for strict radiation therapy quality assurance. Research into impact of higher pCR rates and R0 resections with CROSS compared to FLOT on long-term survival is needed.
Collapse
|
5
|
Vagliasindi A, Franco FD, Degiuli M, Papis D, Migliore M. Extension of lymph node dissection in the surgical treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer: seven questions and answers. Future Oncol 2023; 19:327-339. [PMID: 36942741 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2021-0545] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/23/2023] Open
Abstract
The role of two- or three-field nodal dissection in the surgical treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer in the minimally invasive era is still controversial. This review aims to clarify the extension of nodal dissection in esophageal and gastroesophageal junctional cancer. A basic evidence-based analysis was designed, and seven research questions were formulated and answered with a narrative review. Reports with little or no data, single cases, small series and review articles were not included. Three-field lymph node dissection improves staging accuracy, enhances locoregional disease control and might improve survival in the group of patients with cervical and upper mediastinal metastatic lymph nodal involvement from middle and proximal-third esophageal cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessio Vagliasindi
- Department of General Surgery & Emergency Unit, S. Maria delle Croci Hospital, Ravenna, Italy
- Unit of abdominal Oncological Surgery, IRCS CROB, Rionero del Vulture(PZ), ITALY
| | - Filippo Di Franco
- Department of Surgery, North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust, Huntingdon, PE29 6NT, UK
| | - Maurizio Degiuli
- Department of Oncology, Surgical Oncology & Digestive Surgery, San Luigi University Hospital, University of Torino, Orbassano Torino, Italy
| | - Davide Papis
- Department of General Surgery, Sant'Anna Hospital, ASST Lariana, Como
| | - Marcello Migliore
- Department of Surgery & Medical Specialties, Section of Thoracic Surgery, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
- Thoracic Surgery & Lung Transplant, Lung Health Centre, Organ Transplant Center of Excellence (OTCoE), King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Center, Riyadh, KSA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Rebecchi F, Ugliono E, Allaix ME, Morino M. Why pay more for robot in esophageal cancer surgery? Updates Surg 2023; 75:367-372. [PMID: 35953621 PMCID: PMC9852204 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01351-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/17/2022] [Accepted: 08/01/2022] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
Abstract
Esophagectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer. Traditionally, it is performed through a laparotomy and a thoracotomy, and is associated with high rates of postoperative complications and mortality. The advent of robotic surgery has represented a technological evolution in the field of esophageal cancer treatment. Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been progressively widely adopted following the first reports on the safety and feasibility of this procedure in 2004. The robotic approach has better short-term postoperative outcomes than open esophagectomy, without jeopardizing oncologic radicality. The results of the comparison between RAMIE and conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy are less conclusive. This article will focus on the role of RAMIE in the current clinical scenario with particular attention to its possible benefits and perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Elettra Ugliono
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Torino, Italy
| | | | - Mario Morino
- Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Torino, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Kamarajah S, Evans R, Nepogodiev D, Hodson J, Bundred J, Gockel I, Gossage J, Isik A, Kidane B, Mahendran H, Negoi I, Okonta K, Sayyed R, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra R, Wijnhoven B, Singh P, Griffiths E, Kamarajah S, Hodson J, Griffiths E, Alderson D, Bundred J, Evans R, Gossage J, Griffiths E, Jefferies B, Kamarajah S, McKay S, Mohamed I, Nepogodiev D, Siaw-Acheampong K, Singh P, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra R, Wanigasooriya K, Whitehouse T, Gjata A, Moreno J, Takeda F, Kidane B, Guevara Castro R, Harustiak T, Bekele A, Kechagias A, Gockel I, Kennedy A, Da Roit A, Bagajevas A, Azagra J, Mahendran H, Mejía-Fernández L, Wijnhoven B, El Kafsi J, Sayyed R, Sousa M, Sampaio A, Negoi I, Blanco R, Wallner B, Schneider P, Hsu P, Isik A, Gananadha S, Wills V, Devadas M, Duong C, Talbot M, Hii M, Jacobs R, Andreollo N, Johnston B, Darling G, Isaza-Restrepo A, Rosero G, Arias-Amézquita F, Raptis D, Gaedcke J, Reim D, Izbicki J, Egberts J, Dikinis S, Kjaer D, Larsen M, Achiam M, Saarnio J, Theodorou D, Liakakos T, Korkolis D, Robb W, Collins C, Murphy T, Reynolds J, Tonini V, Migliore M, Bonavina L, Valmasoni M, Bardini R, Weindelmayer J, Terashima M, White R, Alghunaim E, Elhadi M, Leon-Takahashi A, Medina-Franco H, Lau P, Okonta K, Heisterkamp J, Rosman C, van Hillegersberg R, Beban G, Babor R, Gordon A, Rossaak J, Pal K, Qureshi A, Naqi S, Syed A, Barbosa J, Vicente C, Leite J, Freire J, Casaca R, Costa R, Scurtu R, Mogoanta S, Bolca C, Constantinoiu S, Sekhniaidze D, Bjelović M, So J, Gačevski G, Loureiro C, Pera M, Bianchi A, Moreno Gijón M, Martín Fernández J, Trugeda Carrera M, Vallve-Bernal M, Cítores Pascual M, Elmahi S, Halldestam I, Hedberg J, Mönig S, Gutknecht S, Tez M, Guner A, Tirnaksiz M, Colak E, Sevinç B, Hindmarsh A, Khan I, Khoo D, Byrom R, Gokhale J, Wilkerson P, Jain P, Chan D, Robertson K, Iftikhar S, Skipworth R, Forshaw M, Higgs S, Gossage J, Nijjar R, Viswanath Y, Turner P, Dexter S, Boddy A, Allum W, Oglesby S, Cheong E, Beardsmore D, Vohra R, Maynard N, Berrisford R, Mercer S, Puig S, Melhado R, Kelty C, Underwood T, Dawas K, Lewis W, Al-Bahrani A, Bryce G, Thomas M, Arndt A, Palazzo F, Meguid R, Fergusson J, Beenen E, Mosse C, Salim J, Cheah S, Wright T, Cerdeira M, McQuillan P, Richardson M, Liem H, Spillane J, Yacob M, Albadawi F, Thorpe T, Dingle A, Cabalag C, Loi K, Fisher O, Ward S, Read M, Johnson M, Bassari R, Bui H, Cecconello I, Sallum R, da Rocha J, Lopes L, Tercioti V, Coelho J, Ferrer J, Buduhan G, Tan L, Srinathan S, Shea P, Yeung J, Allison F, Carroll P, Vargas-Barato F, Gonzalez F, Ortega J, Nino-Torres L, Beltrán-García T, Castilla L, Pineda M, Bastidas A, Gómez-Mayorga J, Cortés N, Cetares C, Caceres S, Duarte S, Pazdro A, Snajdauf M, Faltova H, Sevcikova M, Mortensen P, Katballe N, Ingemann T, Morten B, Kruhlikava I, Ainswort A, Stilling N, Eckardt J, Holm J, Thorsteinsson M, Siemsen M, Brandt B, Nega B, Teferra E, Tizazu A, Kauppila J, Koivukangas V, Meriläinen S, Gruetzmann R, Krautz C, Weber G, Golcher H, Emons G, Azizian A, Ebeling M, Niebisch S, Kreuser N, Albanese G, Hesse J, Volovnik L, Boecher U, Reeh M, Triantafyllou S, Schizas D, Michalinos A, Balli E, Mpoura M, Charalabopoulos A, Manatakis D, Balalis D, Bolger J, Baban C, Mastrosimone A, McAnena O, Quinn A, Ó Súilleabháin C, Hennessy M, Ivanovski I, Khizer H, Ravi N, Donlon N, Cervellera M, Vaccari S, Bianchini S, Sartarelli L, Asti E, Bernardi D, Merigliano S, Provenzano L, Scarpa M, Saadeh L, Salmaso B, De Manzoni G, Giacopuzzi S, La Mendola R, De Pasqual C, Tsubosa Y, Niihara M, Irino T, Makuuchi R, Ishii K, Mwachiro M, Fekadu A, Odera A, Mwachiro E, AlShehab D, Ahmed H, Shebani A, Elhadi A, Elnagar F, Elnagar H, Makkai-Popa S, Wong L, Tan Y, Thannimalai S, Ho C, Pang W, Tan J, Basave H, Cortés-González R, Lagarde S, van Lanschot J, Cords C, Jansen W, Martijnse I, Matthijsen R, Bouwense S, Klarenbeek B, Verstegen M, van Workum F, Ruurda J, van der Sluis P, de Maat M, Evenett N, Johnston P, Patel R, MacCormick A, Young M, Smith B, Ekwunife C, Memon A, Shaikh K, Wajid A, Khalil N, Haris M, Mirza Z, Qudus S, Sarwar M, Shehzadi A, Raza A, Jhanzaib M, Farmanali J, Zakir Z, Shakeel O, Nasir I, Khattak S, Baig M, MA N, Ahmed H, Naeem A, Pinho A, da Silva R, Bernardes A, Campos J, Matos H, Braga T, Monteiro C, Ramos P, Cabral F, Gomes M, Martins P, Correia A, Videira J, Ciuce C, Drasovean R, Apostu R, Ciuce C, Paitici S, Racu A, Obleaga C, Beuran M, Stoica B, Ciubotaru C, Negoita V, Cordos I, Birla R, Predescu D, Hoara P, Tomsa R, Shneider V, Agasiev M, Ganjara I, Gunjić D, Veselinović M, Babič T, Chin T, Shabbir A, Kim G, Crnjac A, Samo H, Díez del Val I, Leturio S, Ramón J, Dal Cero M, Rifá S, Rico M, Pagan Pomar A, Martinez Corcoles J, Rodicio Miravalles J, Pais S, Turienzo S, Alvarez L, Campos P, Rendo A, García S, Santos E, Martínez E, Fernández Díaz M, Magadán Álvarez C, Concepción Martín V, Díaz López C, Rosat Rodrigo A, Pérez Sánchez L, Bailón Cuadrado M, Tinoco Carrasco C, Choolani Bhojwani E, Sánchez D, Ahmed M, Dzhendov T, Lindberg F, Rutegård M, Sundbom M, Mickael C, Colucci N, Schnider A, Er S, Kurnaz E, Turkyilmaz S, Turkyilmaz A, Yildirim R, Baki B, Akkapulu N, Karahan O, Damburaci N, Hardwick R, Safranek P, Sujendran V, Bennett J, Afzal Z, Shrotri M, Chan B, Exarchou K, Gilbert T, Amalesh T, Mukherjee D, Mukherjee S, Wiggins T, Kennedy R, McCain S, Harris A, Dobson G, Davies N, Wilson I, Mayo D, Bennett D, Young R, Manby P, Blencowe N, Schiller M, Byrne B, Mitton D, Wong V, Elshaer A, Cowen M, Menon V, Tan L, McLaughlin E, Koshy R, Sharp C, Brewer H, Das N, Cox M, Al Khyatt W, Worku D, Iqbal R, Walls L, McGregor R, Fullarton G, Macdonald A, MacKay C, Craig C, Dwerryhouse S, Hornby S, Jaunoo S, Wadley M, Baker C, Saad M, Kelly M, Davies A, Di Maggio F, McKay S, Mistry P, Singhal R, Tucker O, Kapoulas S, Powell-Brett S, Davis P, Bromley G, Watson L, Verma R, Ward J, Shetty V, Ball C, Pursnani K, Sarela A, Sue Ling H, Mehta S, Hayden J, To N, Palser T, Hunter D, Supramaniam K, Butt Z, Ahmed A, Kumar S, Chaudry A, Moussa O, Kordzadeh A, Lorenzi B, Wilson M, Patil P, Noaman I, Willem J, Bouras G, Evans R, Singh M, Warrilow H, Ahmad A, Tewari N, Yanni F, Couch J, Theophilidou E, Reilly J, Singh P, van Boxel Gijs, Akbari K, Zanotti D, Sgromo B, Sanders G, Wheatley T, Ariyarathenam A, Reece-Smith A, Humphreys L, Choh C, Carter N, Knight B, Pucher P, Athanasiou A, Mohamed I, Tan B, Abdulrahman M, Vickers J, Akhtar K, Chaparala R, Brown R, Alasmar M, Ackroyd R, Patel K, Tamhankar A, Wyman A, Walker R, Grace B, Abbassi N, Slim N, Ioannidi L, Blackshaw G, Havard T, Escofet X, Powell A, Owera A, Rashid F, Jambulingam P, Padickakudi J, Ben-Younes H, Mccormack K, Makey I, Karush M, Seder C, Liptay M, Chmielewski G, Rosato E, Berger A, Zheng R, Okolo E, Singh A, Scott C, Weyant M, Mitchell J. The influence of anastomotic techniques on postoperative anastomotic complications: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2022; 164:674-684.e5. [PMID: 35249756 DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2022.01.033] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/24/2021] [Revised: 12/22/2021] [Accepted: 01/18/2022] [Indexed: 12/08/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The optimal anastomotic techniques in esophagectomy to minimize rates of anastomotic leakage and conduit necrosis are not known. The aim of this study was to assess whether the anastomotic technique was associated with anastomotic failure after esophagectomy in the international Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit cohort. METHODS This prospective observational multicenter cohort study included patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer over 9 months during 2018. The primary exposure was the anastomotic technique, classified as handsewn, linear stapled, or circular stapled. The primary outcome was anastomotic failure, namely a composite of anastomotic leakage and conduit necrosis, as defined by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to identify the association between anastomotic techniques and anastomotic failure, after adjustment for confounders. RESULTS Of the 2238 esophagectomies, the anastomosis was handsewn in 27.1%, linear stapled in 21.0%, and circular stapled in 51.9%. Anastomotic techniques differed significantly by the anastomosis sites (P < .001), with the majority of neck anastomoses being handsewn (69.9%), whereas most chest anastomoses were stapled (66.3% circular stapled and 19.3% linear stapled). Rates of anastomotic failure differed significantly among the anastomotic techniques (P < .001), from 19.3% in handsewn anastomoses, to 14.0% in linear stapled anastomoses, and 12.1% in circular stapled anastomoses. This effect remained significant after adjustment for confounding factors on multivariable analysis, with an odds ratio of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.46-0.86; P = .004) for circular stapled versus handsewn anastomosis. However, subgroup analysis by anastomosis site suggested that this effect was predominantly present in neck anastomoses, with anastomotic failure rates of 23.2% versus 14.6% versus 5.9% for handsewn versus linear stapled anastomoses versus circular stapled neck anastomoses, compared with 13.7% versus 13.8% versus 12.2% for chest anastomoses. CONCLUSIONS Handsewn anastomoses appear to be independently associated with higher rates of anastomotic failure compared with stapled anastomoses. However, this effect seems to be largely confined to neck anastomoses, with minimal differences between techniques observed for chest anastomoses. Further research into standardization of anastomotic approach and techniques may further improve outcomes.
Collapse
|
8
|
Kamarajah SK, Evans RPT, Nepogodiev D, Hodson J, Bundred JR, Gockel I, Gossage JA, Isik A, Kidane B, Mahendran HA, Negoi I, Okonta KE, Sayyed R, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra RS, Wijnhoven BPL, Singh P, Griffiths EA, Kamarajah SK, Hodson J, Griffiths EA, Alderson D, Bundred J, Evans RPT, Gossage J, Griffiths EA, Jefferies B, Kamarajah SK, McKay S, Mohamed I, Nepogodiev D, Siaw-Acheampong K, Singh P, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra R, Wanigasooriya K, Whitehouse T, Gjata A, Moreno JI, Takeda FR, Kidane B, Guevara Castro R, Harustiak T, Bekele A, Kechagias A, Gockel I, Kennedy A, Da Roit A, Bagajevas A, Azagra JS, Mahendran HA, Mejía-Fernández L, Wijnhoven BPL, El Kafsi J, Sayyed RH, Sousa M M, Sampaio AS, Negoi I, Blanco R, Wallner B, Schneider PM, Hsu PK, Isik A, Gananadha S, Wills V, Devadas M, Duong C, Talbot M, Hii MW, Jacobs R, Andreollo NA, Johnston B, Darling G, Isaza-Restrepo A, Rosero G, Arias-Amézquita F, Raptis D, Gaedcke J, Reim D, Izbicki J, Egberts JH, Dikinis S, Kjaer DW, Larsen MH, Achiam MP, Saarnio J, Theodorou D, Liakakos T, Korkolis DP, Robb WB, Collins C, Murphy T, Reynolds J, Tonini V, Migliore M, Bonavina L, Valmasoni M, Bardini R, Weindelmayer J, Terashima M, White RE, Alghunaim E, Elhadi M, Leon-Takahashi AM, Medina-Franco H, Lau PC, Okonta KE, Heisterkamp J, Rosman C, van Hillegersberg R, Beban G, Babor R, Gordon A, Rossaak JI, Pal KMI, Qureshi AU, Naqi SA, Syed AA, Barbosa J, Vicente CS, Leite J, Freire J, Casaca R, Costa RCT, Scurtu RR, Mogoanta SS, Bolca C, Constantinoiu S, Sekhniaidze D, Bjelović M, So JBY, Gačevski G, Loureiro C, Pera M, Bianchi A, Moreno Gijón M, Martín Fernández J, Trugeda Carrera MS, Vallve-Bernal M, Cítores Pascual MA, Elmahi S, Halldestam I, Hedberg J, Mönig S, Gutknecht S, Tez M, Guner A, Tirnaksiz MB, Colak E, Sevinç B, Hindmarsh A, Khan I, Khoo D, Byrom R, Gokhale J, Wilkerson P, Jain P, Chan D, Robertson K, Iftikhar S, Skipworth R, Forshaw M, Higgs S, Gossage J, Nijjar R, Viswanath YKS, Turner P, Dexter S, Boddy A, Allum WH, Oglesby S, Cheong E, Beardsmore D, Vohra R, Maynard N, Berrisford R, Mercer S, Puig S, Melhado R, Kelty C, Underwood T, Dawas K, Lewis W, Bryce G, Thomas M, Arndt AT, Palazzo F, Meguid RA, Fergusson J, Beenen E, Mosse C, Salim J, Cheah S, Wright T, Cerdeira MP, McQuillan P, Richardson M, Liem H, Spillane J, Yacob M, Albadawi F, Thorpe T, Dingle A, Cabalag C, Loi K, Fisher OM, Ward S, Read M, Johnson M, Bassari R, Bui H, Cecconello I, Sallum RAA, da Rocha JRM, Lopes LR, Tercioti Jr V, Coelho JDS, Ferrer JAP, Buduhan G, Tan L, Srinathan S, Shea P, Yeung J, Allison F, Carroll P, Vargas-Barato F, Gonzalez F, Ortega J, Nino-Torres L, Beltrán-García TC, Castilla L, Pineda M, Bastidas A, Gómez-Mayorga J, Cortés N, Cetares C, Caceres S, Duarte S, Pazdro A, Snajdauf M, Faltova H, Sevcikova M, Mortensen PB, Katballe N, Ingemann T, Morten B, Kruhlikava I, Ainswort AP, Stilling NM, Eckardt J, Holm J, Thorsteinsson M, Siemsen M, Brandt B, Nega B, Teferra E, Tizazu A, Kauppila JH, Koivukangas V, Meriläinen S, Gruetzmann R, Krautz C, Weber G, Golcher H, Emons G, Azizian A, Ebeling M, Niebisch S, Kreuser N, Albanese G, Hesse J, Volovnik L, Boecher U, Reeh M, Triantafyllou S, Schizas D, Michalinos A, Balli E, Mpoura M, Charalabopoulos A, Manatakis DK, Balalis D, Bolger J, Baban C, Mastrosimone A, McAnena O, Quinn A, Ó Súilleabháin CB, Hennessy MM, Ivanovski I, Khizer H, Ravi N, Donlon N, Cervellera M, Vaccari S, Bianchini S, Asti E, Bernardi D, Merigliano S, Provenzano L, Scarpa M, Saadeh L, Salmaso B, De Manzoni G, Giacopuzzi S, La Mendola R, De Pasqual CA, Tsubosa Y, Niihara M, Irino T, Makuuchi R, Ishii K K, Mwachiro M, Fekadu A, Odera A, Mwachiro E, AlShehab D, Ahmed HA, Shebani AO, Elhadi A, Elnagar FA, Elnagar HF, Makkai-Popa ST, Wong LF, Tan YR, Thannimalai S, Ho CA, Pang WS, Tan JH, Basave HNL, Cortés-González R, Lagarde SM, van Lanschot JJB, Cords C, Jansen WA, Martijnse I, Matthijsen R, Bouwense S, Klarenbeek B, Verstegen M, van Workum F, Ruurda JP, van der Sluis PC, de Maat M, Evenett N, Johnston P, Patel R, MacCormick A, Smith B, Ekwunife C, Memon AH, Shaikh K, Wajid A, Khalil N, Haris M, Mirza ZU, Qudus SBA, Sarwar MZ, Shehzadi A, Raza A, Jhanzaib MH, Farmanali J, Zakir Z, Shakeel O, Nasir I, Khattak S, Baig M, Noor MA, Ahmed HH, Naeem A, Pinho AC, da Silva R, Bernardes A, Campos JC, Matos H, Braga T, Monteiro C, Ramos P, Cabral F, Gomes MP, Martins PC, Correia AM, Videira JF, Ciuce C, Drasovean R, Apostu R, Ciuce C, Paitici S, Racu AE, Obleaga CV, Beuran M, Stoica B, Ciubotaru C, Negoita V, Cordos I, Birla RD, Predescu D, Hoara PA, Tomsa R, Shneider V, Agasiev M, Ganjara I, Gunjić D, Veselinović M, Babič T, Chin TS, Shabbir A, Kim G, Crnjac A, Samo H, Díez del Val I, Leturio S, Ramón JM, Dal Cero M, Rifá S, Rico M, Pagan Pomar A, Martinez Corcoles JA, Rodicio Miravalles JL, Pais SA, Turienzo SA, Alvarez LS, Campos PV, Rendo AG, García SS, Santos EPG, Martínez ET, Fernández Díaz MJ, Magadán Álvarez C, Concepción Martín V, Díaz López C, Rosat Rodrigo A, Pérez Sánchez LE, Bailón Cuadrado M, Tinoco Carrasco C, Choolani Bhojwani E, Sánchez DP, Ahmed ME, Dzhendov T, Lindberg F, Rutegård M, Sundbom M, Mickael C, Colucci N, Schnider A, Er S, Kurnaz E, Turkyilmaz S, Turkyilmaz A, Yildirim R, Baki BE, Akkapulu N, Karahan O, Damburaci N, Hardwick R, Safranek P, Sujendran V, Bennett J, Afzal Z, Shrotri M, Chan B, Exarchou K, Gilbert T, Amalesh T, Mukherjee D, Mukherjee S, Wiggins TH, Kennedy R, McCain S, Harris A, Dobson G, Davies N, Wilson I, Mayo D, Bennett D, Young R, Manby P, Blencowe N, Schiller M, Byrne B, Mitton D, Wong V, Elshaer A, Cowen M, Menon V, Tan LC, McLaughlin E, Koshy R, Sharp C, Brewer H, Das N, Cox M, Al Khyatt W, Worku D, Iqbal R, Walls L, McGregor R, Fullarton G, Macdonald A, MacKay C, Craig C, Dwerryhouse S, Hornby S, Jaunoo S, Wadley M, Baker C, Saad M, Kelly M, Davies A, Di Maggio F, McKay S, Mistry P, Singhal R, Tucker O, Kapoulas S, Powell-Brett S, Davis P, Bromley G, Watson L, Verma R, Ward J, Shetty V, Ball C, Pursnani K, Sarela A, Sue Ling H, Mehta S, Hayden J, To N, Palser T, Hunter D, Supramaniam K, Butt Z, Ahmed A, Kumar S, Chaudry A, Moussa O, Kordzadeh A, Lorenzi B, Wilson M, Patil P, Noaman I, Bouras G, Evans R, Singh M, Warrilow H, Ahmad A, Tewari N, Yanni F, Couch J, Theophilidou E, Reilly JJ, Singh P, van Boxel G, Akbari K, Zanotti D, Sanders G, Wheatley T, Ariyarathenam A, Reece-Smith A, Humphreys L, Choh C, Carter N, Knight B, Pucher P, Athanasiou A, Mohamed I, Tan B, Abdulrahman M, Vickers J, Akhtar K, Chaparala R, Brown R, Alasmar MMA, Ackroyd R, Patel K, Tamhankar A, Wyman A, Walker R, Grace B, Abbassi N, Slim N, Ioannidi L, Blackshaw G, Havard T, Escofet X, Powell A, Owera A, Rashid F, Jambulingam P, Padickakudi J, Ben-Younes H, Mccormack K, Makey IA, Karush MK, Seder CW, Liptay MJ, Chmielewski G, Rosato EL, Berger AC, Zheng R, Okolo E, Singh A, Scott CD, Weyant MJ, Mitchell JD. Textbook outcome following oesophagectomy for cancer: international cohort study. Br J Surg 2022. [DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znac016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Textbook outcome has been proposed as a tool for the assessment of oncological surgical care. However, an international assessment in patients undergoing oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer has not been reported. This study aimed to assess textbook outcome in an international setting.
Methods
Patients undergoing curative resection for oesophageal cancer were identified from the international Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) from April 2018 to December 2018. Textbook outcome was defined as the percentage of patients who underwent a complete tumour resection with at least 15 lymph nodes in the resected specimen and an uneventful postoperative course, without hospital readmission. A multivariable binary logistic regression model was used to identify factors independently associated with textbook outcome, and results are presented as odds ratio (OR) and 95 per cent confidence intervals (95 per cent c.i.).
Results
Of 2159 patients with oesophageal cancer, 39.7 per cent achieved a textbook outcome. The outcome parameter ‘no major postoperative complication’ had the greatest negative impact on a textbook outcome for patients with oesophageal cancer, compared to other textbook outcome parameters. Multivariable analysis identified male gender and increasing Charlson comorbidity index with a significantly lower likelihood of textbook outcome. Presence of 24-hour on-call rota for oesophageal surgeons (OR 2.05, 95 per cent c.i. 1.30 to 3.22; P = 0.002) and radiology (OR 1.54, 95 per cent c.i. 1.05 to 2.24; P = 0.027), total minimally invasive oesophagectomies (OR 1.63, 95 per cent c.i. 1.27 to 2.08; P < 0.001), and chest anastomosis above azygous (OR 2.17, 95 per cent c.i. 1.58 to 2.98; P < 0.001) were independently associated with a significantly increased likelihood of textbook outcome.
Conclusion
Textbook outcome is achieved in less than 40 per cent of patients having oesophagectomy for cancer. Improvements in centralization, hospital resources, access to minimal access surgery, and adoption of newer techniques for improving lymph node yield could improve textbook outcome.
Collapse
|
9
|
Kamarajah SK, Evans RPT, Nepogodiev D, Hodson J, Bundred JR, Gockel I, Gossage JA, Isik A, Kidane B, Mahendran HA, Negoi I, Okonta KE, Sayyed R, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra RS, Wijnhoven BPL, Singh P, Griffiths EA, Kamarajah SK, Hodson J, Griffiths EA, Alderson D, Bundred J, Evans RPT, Gossage J, Griffiths EA, Jefferies B, Kamarajah SK, McKay S, Mohamed I, Nepogodiev D, Siaw-Acheampong K, Singh P, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra R, Wanigasooriya K, Whitehouse T, Gjata A, Moreno JI, Takeda FR, Kidane B, Guevara Castro R, Harustiak T, Bekele A, Kechagias A, Gockel I, Kennedy A, Da Roit A, Bagajevas A, Azagra JS, Mahendran HA, Mejía-Fernández L, Wijnhoven BPL, El Kafsi J, Sayyed RH, Sousa M M, Sampaio AS, Negoi I, Blanco R, Wallner B, Schneider PM, Hsu PK, Isik A, Gananadha S, Wills V, Devadas M, Duong C, Talbot M, Hii MW, Jacobs R, Andreollo NA, Johnston B, Darling G, Isaza-Restrepo A, Rosero G, Arias-Amézquita F, Raptis D, Gaedcke J, Reim D, Izbicki J, Egberts JH, Dikinis S, Kjaer DW, Larsen MH, Achiam MP, Saarnio J, Theodorou D, Liakakos T, Korkolis DP, Robb WB, Collins C, Murphy T, Reynolds J, Tonini V, Migliore M, Bonavina L, Valmasoni M, Bardini R, Weindelmayer J, Terashima M, White RE, Alghunaim E, Elhadi M, Leon-Takahashi AM, Medina-Franco H, Lau PC, Okonta KE, Heisterkamp J, Rosman C, van Hillegersberg R, Beban G, Babor R, Gordon A, Rossaak JI, Pal KMI, Qureshi AU, Naqi SA, Syed AA, Barbosa J, Vicente CS, Leite J, Freire J, Casaca R, Costa RCT, Scurtu RR, Mogoanta SS, Bolca C, Constantinoiu S, Sekhniaidze D, Bjelović M, So JBY, Gačevski G, Loureiro C, Pera M, Bianchi A, Moreno Gijón M, Martín Fernández J, Trugeda Carrera MS, Vallve-Bernal M, Cítores Pascual MA, Elmahi S, Halldestam I, Hedberg J, Mönig S, Gutknecht S, Tez M, Guner A, Tirnaksiz MB, Colak E, Sevinç B, Hindmarsh A, Khan I, Khoo D, Byrom R, Gokhale J, Wilkerson P, Jain P, Chan D, Robertson K, Iftikhar S, Skipworth R, Forshaw M, Higgs S, Gossage J, Nijjar R, Viswanath YKS, Turner P, Dexter S, Boddy A, Allum WH, Oglesby S, Cheong E, Beardsmore D, Vohra R, Maynard N, Berrisford R, Mercer S, Puig S, Melhado R, Kelty C, Underwood T, Dawas K, Lewis W, Bryce G, Thomas M, Arndt AT, Palazzo F, Meguid RA, Fergusson J, Beenen E, Mosse C, Salim J, Cheah S, Wright T, Cerdeira MP, McQuillan P, Richardson M, Liem H, Spillane J, Yacob M, Albadawi F, Thorpe T, Dingle A, Cabalag C, Loi K, Fisher OM, Ward S, Read M, Johnson M, Bassari R, Bui H, Cecconello I, Sallum RAA, da Rocha JRM, Lopes LR, Tercioti Jr V, Coelho JDS, Ferrer JAP, Buduhan G, Tan L, Srinathan S, Shea P, Yeung J, Allison F, Carroll P, Vargas-Barato F, Gonzalez F, Ortega J, Nino-Torres L, Beltrán-García TC, Castilla L, Pineda M, Bastidas A, Gómez-Mayorga J, Cortés N, Cetares C, Caceres S, Duarte S, Pazdro A, Snajdauf M, Faltova H, Sevcikova M, Mortensen PB, Katballe N, Ingemann T, Morten B, Kruhlikava I, Ainswort AP, Stilling NM, Eckardt J, Holm J, Thorsteinsson M, Siemsen M, Brandt B, Nega B, Teferra E, Tizazu A, Kauppila JH, Koivukangas V, Meriläinen S, Gruetzmann R, Krautz C, Weber G, Golcher H, Emons G, Azizian A, Ebeling M, Niebisch S, Kreuser N, Albanese G, Hesse J, Volovnik L, Boecher U, Reeh M, Triantafyllou S, Schizas D, Michalinos A, Balli E, Mpoura M, Charalabopoulos A, Manatakis DK, Balalis D, Bolger J, Baban C, Mastrosimone A, McAnena O, Quinn A, Ó Súilleabháin CB, Hennessy MM, Ivanovski I, Khizer H, Ravi N, Donlon N, Cervellera M, Vaccari S, Bianchini S, Asti E, Bernardi D, Merigliano S, Provenzano L, Scarpa M, Saadeh L, Salmaso B, De Manzoni G, Giacopuzzi S, La Mendola R, De Pasqual CA, Tsubosa Y, Niihara M, Irino T, Makuuchi R, Ishii K K, Mwachiro M, Fekadu A, Odera A, Mwachiro E, AlShehab D, Ahmed HA, Shebani AO, Elhadi A, Elnagar FA, Elnagar HF, Makkai-Popa ST, Wong LF, Tan YR, Thannimalai S, Ho CA, Pang WS, Tan JH, Basave HNL, Cortés-González R, Lagarde SM, van Lanschot JJB, Cords C, Jansen WA, Martijnse I, Matthijsen R, Bouwense S, Klarenbeek B, Verstegen M, van Workum F, Ruurda JP, van der Sluis PC, de Maat M, Evenett N, Johnston P, Patel R, MacCormick A, Smith B, Ekwunife C, Memon AH, Shaikh K, Wajid A, Khalil N, Haris M, Mirza ZU, Qudus SBA, Sarwar MZ, Shehzadi A, Raza A, Jhanzaib MH, Farmanali J, Zakir Z, Shakeel O, Nasir I, Khattak S, Baig M, Noor MA, Ahmed HH, Naeem A, Pinho AC, da Silva R, Bernardes A, Campos JC, Matos H, Braga T, Monteiro C, Ramos P, Cabral F, Gomes MP, Martins PC, Correia AM, Videira JF, Ciuce C, Drasovean R, Apostu R, Ciuce C, Paitici S, Racu AE, Obleaga CV, Beuran M, Stoica B, Ciubotaru C, Negoita V, Cordos I, Birla RD, Predescu D, Hoara PA, Tomsa R, Shneider V, Agasiev M, Ganjara I, Gunjić D, Veselinović M, Babič T, Chin TS, Shabbir A, Kim G, Crnjac A, Samo H, Díez del Val I, Leturio S, Ramón JM, Dal Cero M, Rifá S, Rico M, Pagan Pomar A, Martinez Corcoles JA, Rodicio Miravalles JL, Pais SA, Turienzo SA, Alvarez LS, Campos PV, Rendo AG, García SS, Santos EPG, Martínez ET, Fernández Díaz MJ, Magadán Álvarez C, Concepción Martín V, Díaz López C, Rosat Rodrigo A, Pérez Sánchez LE, Bailón Cuadrado M, Tinoco Carrasco C, Choolani Bhojwani E, Sánchez DP, Ahmed ME, Dzhendov T, Lindberg F, Rutegård M, Sundbom M, Mickael C, Colucci N, Schnider A, Er S, Kurnaz E, Turkyilmaz S, Turkyilmaz A, Yildirim R, Baki BE, Akkapulu N, Karahan O, Damburaci N, Hardwick R, Safranek P, Sujendran V, Bennett J, Afzal Z, Shrotri M, Chan B, Exarchou K, Gilbert T, Amalesh T, Mukherjee D, Mukherjee S, Wiggins TH, Kennedy R, McCain S, Harris A, Dobson G, Davies N, Wilson I, Mayo D, Bennett D, Young R, Manby P, Blencowe N, Schiller M, Byrne B, Mitton D, Wong V, Elshaer A, Cowen M, Menon V, Tan LC, McLaughlin E, Koshy R, Sharp C, Brewer H, Das N, Cox M, Al Khyatt W, Worku D, Iqbal R, Walls L, McGregor R, Fullarton G, Macdonald A, MacKay C, Craig C, Dwerryhouse S, Hornby S, Jaunoo S, Wadley M, Baker C, Saad M, Kelly M, Davies A, Di Maggio F, McKay S, Mistry P, Singhal R, Tucker O, Kapoulas S, Powell-Brett S, Davis P, Bromley G, Watson L, Verma R, Ward J, Shetty V, Ball C, Pursnani K, Sarela A, Sue Ling H, Mehta S, Hayden J, To N, Palser T, Hunter D, Supramaniam K, Butt Z, Ahmed A, Kumar S, Chaudry A, Moussa O, Kordzadeh A, Lorenzi B, Wilson M, Patil P, Noaman I, Bouras G, Evans R, Singh M, Warrilow H, Ahmad A, Tewari N, Yanni F, Couch J, Theophilidou E, Reilly JJ, Singh P, van Boxel G, Akbari K, Zanotti D, Sanders G, Wheatley T, Ariyarathenam A, Reece-Smith A, Humphreys L, Choh C, Carter N, Knight B, Pucher P, Athanasiou A, Mohamed I, Tan B, Abdulrahman M, Vickers J, Akhtar K, Chaparala R, Brown R, Alasmar MMA, Ackroyd R, Patel K, Tamhankar A, Wyman A, Walker R, Grace B, Abbassi N, Slim N, Ioannidi L, Blackshaw G, Havard T, Escofet X, Powell A, Owera A, Rashid F, Jambulingam P, Padickakudi J, Ben-Younes H, Mccormack K, Makey IA, Karush MK, Seder CW, Liptay MJ, Chmielewski G, Rosato EL, Berger AC, Zheng R, Okolo E, Singh A, Scott CD, Weyant MJ, Mitchell JD. Textbook outcome following oesophagectomy for cancer: international cohort study. Br J Surg 2022; 109:439-449. [PMID: 35194634 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znac016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/27/2021] [Revised: 10/08/2021] [Accepted: 01/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/14/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Textbook outcome has been proposed as a tool for the assessment of oncological surgical care. However, an international assessment in patients undergoing oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer has not been reported. This study aimed to assess textbook outcome in an international setting. METHODS Patients undergoing curative resection for oesophageal cancer were identified from the international Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) from April 2018 to December 2018. Textbook outcome was defined as the percentage of patients who underwent a complete tumour resection with at least 15 lymph nodes in the resected specimen and an uneventful postoperative course, without hospital readmission. A multivariable binary logistic regression model was used to identify factors independently associated with textbook outcome, and results are presented as odds ratio (OR) and 95 per cent confidence intervals (95 per cent c.i.). RESULTS Of 2159 patients with oesophageal cancer, 39.7 per cent achieved a textbook outcome. The outcome parameter 'no major postoperative complication' had the greatest negative impact on a textbook outcome for patients with oesophageal cancer, compared to other textbook outcome parameters. Multivariable analysis identified male gender and increasing Charlson comorbidity index with a significantly lower likelihood of textbook outcome. Presence of 24-hour on-call rota for oesophageal surgeons (OR 2.05, 95 per cent c.i. 1.30 to 3.22; P = 0.002) and radiology (OR 1.54, 95 per cent c.i. 1.05 to 2.24; P = 0.027), total minimally invasive oesophagectomies (OR 1.63, 95 per cent c.i. 1.27 to 2.08; P < 0.001), and chest anastomosis above azygous (OR 2.17, 95 per cent c.i. 1.58 to 2.98; P < 0.001) were independently associated with a significantly increased likelihood of textbook outcome. CONCLUSION Textbook outcome is achieved in less than 40 per cent of patients having oesophagectomy for cancer. Improvements in centralization, hospital resources, access to minimal access surgery, and adoption of newer techniques for improving lymph node yield could improve textbook outcome.
Collapse
|
10
|
Tzortzakakis A, Kalarakis G, Huang B, Terezaki E, Koltsakis E, Kechagias A, Tsekrekos A, Rouvelas I. Role of Radiology in the Preoperative Detection of Arterial Calcification and Celiac Trunk Stenosis and Its Association with Anastomotic Leakage Post Esophagectomy, an Up-to-Date Review of the Literature. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:cancers14041016. [PMID: 35205764 PMCID: PMC8870074 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14041016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2021] [Revised: 01/10/2022] [Accepted: 02/15/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Esophageal cancer is the sixth deadliest among all cancers worldwide. Multimodal treatment, including surgical resection of the esophagus, offers the potential for cure even in advanced cases, but esophagectomy is still associated with serious complications. Among these, anastomotic leakage has the most significant clinical impact, both in terms of prognosis and health-related quality of life. Identifying patients at a high risk for leakage is of great importance in order to modify their treatment and, if possible, avoid this complication. This review aims to study the current literature regarding the role of radiology in detecting potential risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage. The measurement of calcium plaques on the aorta, as well as the detection of narrowing of the celiac trunk and its branches, can be easily assessed by preoperative computed tomography, and can be used to individualize perioperative patient management to effectively reduce the rate of leakage. Abstract Surgical resection of the esophagus remains a critical component of the multimodal treatment of esophageal cancer. Anastomotic leakage (AL) is the most significant complication following esophagectomy, in terms of clinical implications. Identifying risk factors for AL is important for modifying patient management and improving surgical outcomes. This review aims to examine the role of radiological risk factors for AL after esophagectomy, and in particular, arterial calcification and celiac trunk stenosis. Eligible publications prior to 25 August 2021 were retrieved from Medline and Google Scholar using a predefined search algorithm. A total of 68 publications were identified, of which 9 original studies remained for in-depth analysis. The majority of these studies found correlations between calcifications in the aorta, celiac trunk, and right post-celiac arteries and AL following esophagectomy. Some studies suggest celiac trunk stenosis as a more appropriate surrogate. Our up-to-date review highlights the need for automated quantification of aortic calcifications, as well as the degree of celiac trunk stenosis in preoperative computed tomography in patients undergoing esophagectomy, to obtain robust and reproducible measurements that can be used for a definite correlation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Antonios Tzortzakakis
- Department of Clinical Science, Division of Radiology, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden; (A.T.); (G.K.)
- Medical Radiation Physics and Nuclear Medicine, Functional Unit of Nuclear Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, 141 86 Huddinge, Sweden
| | - Georgios Kalarakis
- Department of Clinical Science, Division of Radiology, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden; (A.T.); (G.K.)
- Department of Radiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Biying Huang
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden; (B.H.); (A.T.)
- Department of General Surgery, Södertälje Hospital, 152 86 Södertälje, Sweden
| | - Eleni Terezaki
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Karolinska University Hospital, 171 64 Stockholm, Sweden;
| | - Emmanouil Koltsakis
- Department of Radiology, Karolinska University Hospital, Solna, 171 64 Stockholm, Sweden;
| | - Aristotelis Kechagias
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Kanta-Häme Central Hospital, 13530 Hämeenlinna, Finland;
| | - Andrianos Tsekrekos
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden; (B.H.); (A.T.)
- Department of Clinical Science, Division of Surgery, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ioannis Rouvelas
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden; (B.H.); (A.T.)
- Department of Clinical Science, Division of Surgery, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, 141 86 Stockholm, Sweden
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +46-70-797-68-14
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Rates of Anastomotic Complications and Their Management Following Esophagectomy: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA). Ann Surg 2022; 275:e382-e391. [PMID: 33630459 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000004649] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aimed to characterize rates and management of anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) after esophagectomy in an international cohort. BACKGROUND Outcomes in patients with anastomotic complications of esophagectomy are currently uncertain. Optimum strategies to manage AL/CN are unknown, and have not been assessed in an international cohort. METHODS This prospective multicenter cohort study included patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between April 2018 and December 2018 (with 90 days of follow-up). The primary outcomes were AL and CN, as defined by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group. The secondary outcomes included 90-day mortality and successful AL/CN management, defined as patients being alive at 90 day postoperatively, and requiring no further AL/CN treatment. RESULTS This study included 2247 esophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. The AL rate was 14.2% (n = 319) and CN rate was 2.7% (n = 60). The overall 90-day mortality rate for patients with AL was 11.3%, and increased significantly with severity of AL (Type 1: 3.2% vs. Type 2: 13.2% vs. Type 3: 24.7%, P < 0.001); a similar trend was observed for CN. Of the 329 patients with AL/CN, primary management was successful in 69.6% of cases. Subsequent rounds of management lead to an increase in the rate of successful treatment, with cumulative success rates of 85.4% and 88.1% after secondary and tertiary management, respectively. CONCLUSION Patient outcomes worsen significantly with increasing AL and CN severity. Reintervention after failed primary anastomotic complication management can be successful, hence surgeons should not be deterred from trying alternative management strategies.
Collapse
|
12
|
Comment on "Anastomotic Techniques and Associated Morbidity in Total Minimally Invasive Transthoracic Esophagectomy: Results From the EsoBenchmark Database". Ann Surg 2021; 274:e685-e686. [PMID: 32068559 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000003842] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
13
|
Burke JR, Helliwell J, Wong J, Quyn A, Herrick S, Jayne D. The use of mesenchymal stem cells in animal models for gastrointestinal anastomotic leak: A systematic review. Colorectal Dis 2021; 23:3123-3140. [PMID: 34363723 DOI: 10.1111/codi.15864] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2021] [Revised: 07/29/2021] [Accepted: 07/29/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
AIM Anastomotic leak is the most feared complication of gastrointestinal surgery. Mesenchymal stem cell technology is used clinically to promote wound healing; however, the safety and efficacy of this technology on anastomotic healing has yet to be defined. The aim of this study was to investigate whether mesenchymal stem cells confer any benefit when applied to animal models for gastrointestinal anastomotic leak, identify the methodology and how efficacy is assessed. METHODS The MEDLINE, EMBASE, WebofScience and Cochrane Library databases were interrogated between 1 January1947 to 1 May 2020. All studies where mesenchymal stem cells were applied to laboratory animal leak models to demonstrate a healing effect were considered. All experimental and histological outcomes were examined. Compliance to ARRIVE and current International Consensus was assessed. RESULTS A total of 1205 studies were screened. Twelve studies reported on 438 gastrointestinal anastomoses in four species using 11 models; seven in the colon. No studies utilised a model with a known leak rate. Significant variance was observed in histological outcomes with efficacy demonstrated in five out of 12 studies. One study demonstrated a benefit in leak rate. Colorectal studies had a greater median ARRIVE compliance, 60.8% (IQR 63.2-64.5) compared to noncolorectal 45.4% (IQR 43.8-49.0). CONCLUSIONS Mesenchymal stem cell delivery to an animal anastomosis is safe and feasible. Use may confer benefit but findings are currently limited to surrogate histological outcomes. There is consistency in outcome measures reported but variance in how this is assessed. Poor compliance to ARRIVE but good compliance to current international consensus in leak models of the colon was observed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joshua Richard Burke
- The John Goligher Colorectal Surgery Unit, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Jack Helliwell
- The John Goligher Colorectal Surgery Unit, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Jason Wong
- Division of Cell Matrix Biology & Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - Aaron Quyn
- The John Goligher Colorectal Surgery Unit, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust, Leeds, UK
| | - Sarah Herrick
- Division of Cell Matrix Biology & Regenerative Medicine, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
| | - David Jayne
- The John Goligher Colorectal Surgery Unit, St. James's University Hospital, Leeds Teaching Hospital Trust, Leeds, UK
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Bartella I, Fransen LFC, Gutschow CA, Bruns CJ, van Berge Henegouwen ML, Chaudry MA, Cheong E, Cuesta MA, Van Daele E, Gisbertz SS, van Hillegersberg R, Hölscher A, Mercer S, Moorthy K, Nafteux P, Nilsson M, Pattyn P, Piessen G, Räsanen J, Rosman C, Ruurda JP, Schneider PM, Sgromo B, Nieuwenhuijzen GA, Luyer MDP, Schröder W. Technique of open and minimally invasive intrathoracic reconstruction following esophagectomy-an expert consensus based on a modified Delphi process. Dis Esophagus 2021; 34:6102597. [PMID: 33846718 DOI: 10.1093/dote/doaa127] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/29/2020] [Revised: 10/11/2020] [Accepted: 11/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND In recent years, minimally invasive Ivor Lewis (IL) esophagectomy with high intrathoracic anastomosis has emerged as surgical standard of care for esophageal cancer in expert centers. Alongside this process, many divergent technical aspects of this procedure have been devised in different centers. This study aims at achieving international consensus on the surgical steps of IL reconstruction using Delphi methodology. METHODS The expert panel consisted of specialized esophageal surgeons from 8 European countries. During a two-round Delphi process, a detailed analysis and consensus on key steps of intrathoracic gastric tube reconstruction (IL esophagectomy) was performed. RESULTS Response rates in Delphi rounds 1 and 2 were 100% (22 of 22 experts) and 83.3% (20 of 24 experts), respectively. Three essential technical areas of intrathoracic gastric tube reconstruction were identified: first, vascularization of the gastric conduit, second, gastric mobilization, tube formation and pull-up, and third, anastomotic technique. In addition, 3 main techniques for minimally invasive intrathoracic anastomosis are currently practiced: (i) end-to-side circular stapled, (ii) end-to-side double stapling, and (iii) side-to-side linear stapled technique. The step-by-step procedural analysis unveiled common approaches but also different expert practice. CONCLUSION This precise technical description may serve as a clinical guideline for intrathoracic reconstruction after esophagectomy. In addition, the results may aid to harmonize the technical evolution of this complex surgical procedure and thereby facilitate surgical training.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Isabel Bartella
- Department of General, Visceral and Cancer Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Laura F C Fransen
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Christian A Gutschow
- Department of General and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Christiane J Bruns
- Department of General, Visceral and Cancer Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Mark L van Berge Henegouwen
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - M Asif Chaudry
- Department of Surgery, The Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
| | - Edward Cheong
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK
| | - Miguel A Cuesta
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | - Elke Van Daele
- Department of GI Surgery, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Suzanne S Gisbertz
- Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
| | | | - Arnulf Hölscher
- Center for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer Surgery, Markushospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
| | - Stuart Mercer
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Krishna Moorthy
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, St. Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - Philippe Nafteux
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Magnus Nilsson
- Department of Upper Abdominal Disease, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Piet Pattyn
- Department of GI Surgery, University Hospital Ghent, Ghent, Belgium
| | - Guillaume Piessen
- Department of Digestive and Oncological Surgery, Lille University Hospital, Lille, France
| | - Jari Räsanen
- Department of General Thoracic and Esophageal Surgery, Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Camiel Rosman
- Department of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands
| | - Jelle P Ruurda
- Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands
| | - Paul M Schneider
- Department of General and Transplantation Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Bruno Sgromo
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Misha D P Luyer
- Department of Surgery, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands
| | - Wolfgang Schröder
- Department of General, Visceral and Cancer Surgery, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Evans RPT, Kamarajah SK, Bundred J, Nepogodiev D, Hodson J, van Hillegersberg R, Gossage J, Vohra R, Griffiths EA, Singh P, Evans RPT, Hodson J, Kamarajah SK, Griffiths EA, Singh P, Alderson D, Bundred J, Evans RPT, Gossage J, Griffiths EA, Jefferies B, Kamarajah SK, McKay S, Mohamed I, Nepogodiev D, Siaw- Acheampong K, Singh P, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra R, Wanigasooriya K, Whitehouse T, Gjata A, Moreno JI, Takeda FR, Kidane B, Guevara Castro R, Harustiak T, Bekele A, Kechagias A, Gockel I, Kennedy A, Da Roit A, Bagajevas A, Azagra JS, Mahendran HA, Mejía-Fernández L, Wijnhoven BPL, El Kafsi J, Sayyed RH, Sousa M, Sampaio AS, Negoi I, Blanco R, Wallner B, Schneider PM, Hsu PK, Isik A, Gananadha S, Wills V, Devadas M, Duong C, Talbot M, Hii MW, Jacobs R, Andreollo NA, Johnston B, Darling G, Isaza-Restrepo A, Rosero G, Arias-Amézquita F, Raptis D, Gaedcke J, Reim D, Izbicki J, Egberts JH, Dikinis S, Kjaer DW, Larsen MH, Achiam MP, Saarnio J, Theodorou D, Liakakos T, Korkolis DP, Robb WB, Collins C, Murphy T, Reynolds J, Tonini V, Migliore M, Bonavina L, Valmasoni M, Bardini R, Weindelmayer J, Terashima M, White RE, Alghunaim E, Elhadi M, Leon-Takahashi AM, Medina-Franco H, Lau PC, Okonta KE, Heisterkamp J, Rosman C, van Hillegersberg R, Beban G, Babor R, Gordon A, Rossaak JI, Pal KMI, Qureshi AU, Naqi SA, Syed AA, Barbosa J, Vicente CS, Leite J, Freire J, Casaca R, Costa RCT, Scurtu RR, Mogoanta SS, Bolca C, Constantinoiu S, Sekhniaidze D, Bjelović M, So JBY, Gačevski G, Loureiro C, Pera M, Bianchi A, Moreno Gijón M, Martín Fernández J, Trugeda Carrera MS, Vallve-Bernal M, Cítores Pascual MA, Elmahi S, Hedberg J, Mönig S, Gutknecht S, Tez M, Guner A, Tirnaksiz TB, Colak E, Sevinç B, Hindmarsh A, Khan I, Khoo D, Byrom R, Gokhale J, Wilkerson P, Jain P, Chan D, Robertson K, Iftikhar S, Skipworth R, Forshaw M, Higgs S, Gossage J, Nijjar R, Viswanath YKS, Turner P, Dexter S, Boddy A, Allum WH, Oglesby S, Cheong E, Beardsmore D, Vohra R, Maynard N, Berrisford R, Mercer S, Puig S, Melhado R, Kelty C, Underwood T, Dawas K, Lewis W, Al-Bahrani A, Bryce G, Thomas M, Arndt AT, Palazzo F, Meguid RA, Fergusson J, Beenen E, Mosse C, Salim J, Cheah S, Wright T, Cerdeira MP, McQuillan P, Richardson M, Liem H, Spillane J, Yacob M, Albadawi F, Thorpe T, Dingle A, Cabalag C, Loi K, Fisher OM, Ward S, Read M, Johnson M, Bassari R, Bui H, Cecconello I, Sallum RAA, da Rocha JRM, Lopes LR, Tercioti V, Coelho JDS, Ferrer JAP, Buduhan G, Tan L, Srinathan S, Shea P, Yeung J, Allison F, Carroll P, Vargas-Barato F, Gonzalez F, Ortega J, Nino-Torres L, Beltrán-García TC, Castilla L, Pineda M, Bastidas A, Gómez-Mayorga J, Cortés N, Cetares C, Caceres S, Duarte S, Pazdro A, Snajdauf M, Faltova H, Sevcikova M, Mortensen PB, Katballe N, Ingemann T, Morten B, Kruhlikava I, Ainswort AP, Stilling NM, Eckardt J, Holm J, Thorsteinsson M, Siemsen M, Brandt B, Nega B, Teferra E, Tizazu A, Kauppila JS, Koivukangas V, Meriläinen S, Gruetzmann R, Krautz C, Weber G, Golcher H, Emons G, Azizian A, Ebeling M, Niebisch S, Kreuser N, Albanese G, Hesse J, Volovnik L, Boecher U, Reeh M, Triantafyllou S, Schizas D, Michalinos A, Baili E, Mpoura M, Charalabopoulos A, Manatakis DK, Balalis D, Bolger J, Baban C, Mastrosimone A, McAnena O, Quinn A, Súilleabháin CBÓ, Hennessy MM, Ivanovski I, Khizer H, Ravi N, Donlon N, Cervellera M, Vaccari S, Bianchini S, Sartarelli L, Asti E, Bernardi D, Merigliano S, Provenzano L, Scarpa M, Saadeh L, Salmaso B, De Manzoni G, Giacopuzzi S, La Mendola R, De Pasqual CA, Tsubosa Y, Niihara M, Irino T, Makuuchi R, Ishii K, Mwachiro M, Fekadu A, Odera A, Mwachiro E, AlShehab D, Ahmed HA, Shebani AO, Elhadi A, Elnagar FA, Elnagar HF, Makkai-Popa ST, Wong LF, Yunrong T, Thanninalai S, Aik HC, Soon PW, Huei TJ, Basave HNL, Cortés-González R, Lagarde SM, van Lanschot JJB, Cords C, Jansen WA, Martijnse I, Matthijsen R, Bouwense S, Klarenbeek B, Verstegen M, van Workum F, Ruurda JP, van der Veen A, van den Berg JW, Evenett N, Johnston P, Patel R, MacCormick A, Young M, Smith B, Ekwunife C, Memon AH, Shaikh K, Wajid A, Khalil N, Haris M, Mirza ZU, Qudus SBA, Sarwar MZ, Shehzadi A, Raza A, Jhanzaib MH, Farmanali J, Zakir Z, Shakeel O, Nasir I, Khattak S, Baig M, Noor MA, Ahmed HH, Naeem A, Pinho AC, da Silva R, Matos H, Braga T, Monteiro C, Ramos P, Cabral F, Gomes MP, Martins PC, Correia AM, Videira JF, Ciuce C, Drasovean R, Apostu R, Ciuce C, Paitici S, Racu AE, Obleaga CV, Beuran M, Stoica B, Ciubotaru C, Negoita V, Cordos I, Birla RD, Predescu D, Hoara PA, Tomsa R, Shneider V, Agasiev M, Ganjara I, Gunjić D, Veselinović M, Babič T, Chin TS, Shabbir A, Kim G, Crnjac A, Samo H, Díez del Val I, Leturio S, Díez del Val I, Leturio S, Ramón JM, Dal Cero M, Rifá S, Rico M, Pagan Pomar A, Martinez Corcoles JA, Rodicio Miravalles JL, Pais SA, Turienzo SA, Alvarez LS, Campos PV, Rendo AG, García SS, Santos EPG, Martínez ET, Fernández Díaz MJ, Magadán Álvarez C, Concepción Martín V, Díaz López C, Rosat Rodrigo A, Pérez Sánchez LE, Bailón Cuadrado M, Tinoco Carrasco C, Choolani Bhojwani E, Sánchez DP, Ahmed ME, Dzhendov T, Lindberg F, Rutegård M, Sundbom M, Mickael C, Colucci N, Schnider A, Er S, Kurnaz E, Turkyilmaz S, Turkyilmaz A, Yildirim R, Baki BE, Akkapulu N, Karahan O, Damburaci N, Hardwick R, Safranek P, Sujendran V, Bennett J, Afzal Z, Shrotri M, Chan B, Exarchou K, Gilbert T, Amalesh T, Mukherjee D, Mukherjee S, Wiggins TH, Kennedy R, McCain S, Harris A, Dobson G, Davies N, Wilson I, Mayo D, Bennett D, Young R, Manby P, Blencowe N, Schiller M, Byrne B, Mitton D, Wong V, Elshaer A, Cowen M, Menon V, Tan LC, McLaughlin E, Koshy R, Sharp C, Brewer H, Das N, Cox M, Al Khyatt W, Worku D, Iqbal R, Walls L, McGregor R, Fullarton G, Macdonald A, MacKay C, Craig C, Dwerryhouse S, Hornby S, Jaunoo S, Wadley M, Baker C, Saad M, Kelly M, Davies A, Di Maggio F, McKay S, Mistry P, Singhal R, Tucker O, Kapoulas S, Powell-Brett S, Davis P, Bromley G, Watson L, Verma R, Ward J, Shetty V, Ball C, Pursnani K, Sarela A, Sue Ling H, Mehta S, Hayden J, To N, Palser T, Hunter D, Supramaniam K, Butt Z, Ahmed A, Kumar S, Chaudry A, Moussa O, Kordzadeh A, Lorenzi B, Wilson M, Patil P, Noaman I, Willem J, Bouras G, Evans R, Singh M, Warrilow H, Ahmad A, Tewari N, Yanni F, Couch J, Theophilidou E, Reilly JJ, Singh P, van Boxel G, Akbari K, Zanotti D, Sgromo B, Sanders G, Wheatley T, Ariyarathenam A, Reece-Smith A, Humphreys L, Choh C, Carter N, Knight B, Pucher P, Athanasiou A, Mohamed I, Tan B, Abdulrahman M, Vickers J, Akhtar K, Chaparala R, Brown R, Alasmar MMA, Ackroyd R, Patel K, Tamhankar A, Wyman A, Walker R, Grace B, Abbassi N, Slim N, Ioannidi L, Blackshaw G, Havard T, Escofet X, Powell A, Owera A, Rashid F, Jambulingam P, Padickakudi J, Ben-Younes H, McCormack K, Makey IA, Karush MK, Seder CW, Liptay MJ, Chmielewski G, Rosato EL, Berger AC, Zheng R, Okolo E, Singh A, Scott CD, Weyant MJ, Mitchell JD. Postoperative outcomes in oesophagectomy with trainee involvement. BJS Open 2021; 5:zrab132. [PMID: 35038327 PMCID: PMC8763367 DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrab132] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/05/2021] [Accepted: 11/15/2021] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The complexity of oesophageal surgery and the significant risk of morbidity necessitates that oesophagectomy is predominantly performed by a consultant surgeon, or a senior trainee under their supervision. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of trainee involvement in oesophagectomy on postoperative outcomes in an international multicentre setting. METHODS Data from the multicentre Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Study Group (OGAA) cohort study were analysed, which comprised prospectively collected data from patients undergoing oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer between April 2018 and December 2018. Procedures were grouped by the level of trainee involvement, and univariable and multivariable analyses were performed to compare patient outcomes across groups. RESULTS Of 2232 oesophagectomies from 137 centres in 41 countries, trainees were involved in 29.1 per cent of them (n = 650), performing only the abdominal phase in 230, only the chest and/or neck phases in 130, and all phases in 315 procedures. For procedures with a chest anastomosis, those with trainee involvement had similar 90-day mortality, complication and reoperation rates to consultant-performed oesophagectomies (P = 0.451, P = 0.318, and P = 0.382, respectively), while anastomotic leak rates were significantly lower in the trainee groups (P = 0.030). Procedures with a neck anastomosis had equivalent complication, anastomotic leak, and reoperation rates (P = 0.150, P = 0.430, and P = 0.632, respectively) in trainee-involved versus consultant-performed oesophagectomies, with significantly lower 90-day mortality in the trainee groups (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION Trainee involvement was not found to be associated with significantly inferior postoperative outcomes for selected patients undergoing oesophagectomy. The results support continued supervised trainee involvement in oesophageal cancer surgery.
Collapse
|
16
|
Pucher PH, White A, Padfield O, Davies AR, Maisey N, Qureshi A, Subesinghe M, Baker C, Gossage JA. Incidence and relevance of clinically indeterminate nonregional lymph nodes in the treatment of oesophageal cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2021; 42:1270-1276. [PMID: 34347657 DOI: 10.1097/mnm.0000000000001457] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Metastatic involvement of nonregional supraclavicular or superior mediastinal lymph nodes in distal oesophageal cancer is rare but has important implications for prognosis and management. The management of nonregional lymph nodes which appear indeterminate on CT and FDG PET-CT (subcentimeter nodes or those with preserved normal morphology, but increased FDG avidity) can present a diagnostic dilemma. This study investigates the incidence, work-up and clinical significance of nonregional clinically indeterminate FDG avid lymph nodes. METHODS A single-centre retrospective review of all FDG PET-CT scans conducted over 5 years was conducted. Patients with mid- or distal oesophageal cancer with nonregional FDG avid nodes were identified. Subsequent work-up, management and outcomes were retrieved from electronic health records. RESULTS Reports for 1189 PET-CT scans were reviewed. A total of 79 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 18 (23%) were deemed to have disease and performance status potentially amenable to radical surgery and underwent further assessment. The indeterminate lymph nodes were successfully sampled via endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) or ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (US-FNA) in 100% of cases. 15/18 (83.3%) of samples were benign and proceeded to surgery. Outcomes for patients who proceeded to surgery were similar to other cohorts. None had pathology suggesting false-negative lymph node sampling. CONCLUSIONS EBUS and US-FNA are effective means of sampling clinically indeterminate nonregional lymph nodes, and can significantly impact prognosis, and management. Further investigations in this context are of value in this cohort and should be pursued. Nonregional clinically indeterminate lymph nodes represent a diagnostic dilemma in oesophageal cancer staging. Additional investigations in the form of endobronchial ultrasound are effective at providing additional staging information, and can substantially influence patient care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip H Pucher
- Department of General Surgery, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
- Department of General Surgery, Portsmouth University Hospital NHS Trust, Portsmouth
| | - Annabelle White
- Department of General Surgery, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
| | - Olivia Padfield
- Department of General Surgery, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
| | - Andrew R Davies
- Department of General Surgery, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
- Division of Cancer Sciences, King's College London
| | - Nick Maisey
- Department of Oncology, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
| | - Asad Qureshi
- Department of Oncology, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
| | - Manil Subesinghe
- King's College London & Guy's and St. Thomas' PET Centre
- Department of Cancer Imaging, School of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, UK
| | - Cara Baker
- Department of General Surgery, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
| | - James A Gossage
- Department of General Surgery, Guys and St Thomas' Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Hayami M, Klevebro F, Tsekrekos A, Samola Winnberg J, Kamiya S, Rouvelas I, Nilsson M, Lindblad M. Endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: a single-center's early experience. Dis Esophagus 2021; 34:6046267. [PMID: 33367786 DOI: 10.1093/dote/doaa122] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/08/2020] [Revised: 08/28/2020] [Accepted: 10/25/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
Anastomotic leak is a serious complication after esophagectomy. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) has become increasingly popular in treating upper gastrointestinal anastomotic leaks over the last years. We are here reporting our current complete experience with EVT as primary treatment for anastomotic leak following esophagectomy. This is a retrospective study analyzing all patients with EVT as primary treatment for anastomotic leak after esophagectomy between November 2016 and January 2020 at Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. The primary endpoint was anastomotic fistula healing with EVT only. Twenty-three patients primarily treated with EVT after anastomotic leak following esophagectomy were included. Median duration of EVT was 17 days (range 5-56) with a median number of 3 (range 1-14) vacuum sponge changes per patient. A total number of 95 vacuum sponges were placed in the entire cohort, of which 93 (97.9%) were placed intraluminally and 2 (2.1%) extraluminally. The median changing time interval of sponges was 5 days (range 2-8). Successful fistula healing was achieved in 19 of 23 patients (82.6%), of which 17 (73.9%) fistulas healed with EVT only. There were 2 (8.7%) airway fistulas following EVT. No other adverse events occurred. Three patients (13%) died in-hospital. In conclusion EVT seems to be a safe and feasible therapy option for anastomotic leak following esophagectomy. The effect of EVT on the risk for development of airway fistulas needs to be addressed in future studies and until more data are available care should be taken regarding sponge positioning as well as extended treatment duration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Masaru Hayami
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Fredrik Klevebro
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.,Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Andrianos Tsekrekos
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.,Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Johanna Samola Winnberg
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.,Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Satoshi Kamiya
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Ioannis Rouvelas
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.,Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Magnus Nilsson
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.,Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| | - Mats Lindblad
- Department of Upper Abdominal Surgery, Centre for Digestive Diseases, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.,Division of Surgery, Department of Clinical Science, Intervention and Technology (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Migliore M. Which is the best approach for minimally invasive oesophagectomy? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2021; 59:1285-1286. [PMID: 33582758 DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezab041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/22/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Marcello Migliore
- Thoracic Surgery, Cardio-Thoracic Department, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.,Section of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery and Medical Specialties, University of Catania, Catania, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Kamarajah S, Nepogodiev D, Bekele A, Cecconello I, Evans R, Guner A, Gossage J, Harustiak T, Hodson J, Isik A, Kidane B, Leon-Takahashi A, Mahendran H, Negoi I, Okonta K, Rosero G, Sayyed R, Singh P, Takeda F, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra R, White R, Griffiths E, Alderson D, Bundred J, Evans R, Gossage J, Griffiths E, Jefferies B, Kamarajah S, McKay S, Mohamed I, Nepogodiev D, Siaw- Acheampong K, Singh P, van Hillegersberg R, Vohra R, Wanigasooriya K, Whitehouse T, Gjata A, Moreno J, Takeda F, Kidane B, Guevara CR, Harustiak T, Bekele A, Kechagias A, Gockel I, Kennedy A, Da Roit A, Bagajevas A, Azagra J, Mahendran H, Mejía-Fernández L, Wijnhoven B, El Kafsi J, Sayyed R, Sousa M, Sampaio A, Negoi I, Blanco R, Wallner B, Schneider P, Hsu P, Isik A, Gananadha S, Wills V, Devadas M, Duong C, Talbot M, Hii M, Jacobs R, Andreollo N, Johnston B, Darling G, Isaza-Restrepo A, Rosero G, Arias- Amézquita F, Raptis D, Gaedcke J, Reim D, Izbicki J, Egberts J, Dikinis S, Kjaer D, Larsen M, Achiam M, Saarnio J, Theodorou D, Liakakos T, Korkolis D, Robb W, Collins C, Murphy T, Reynolds J, Tonini V, Migliore M, Bonavina L, Valmasoni M, Bardini R, Weindelmayer J, Terashima M, White R, Alghunaim E, Elhadi M, Leon-Takahashi A, Medina-Franco H, Lau P, Okonta K, Heisterkamp J, Rosman C, van Hillegersberg R, Beban G, Babor R, Gordon A, Rossaak J, Pal K, Qureshi A, Naqi S, Syed A, Barbosa J, Vicente C, Leite J, Freire J, Casaca R, Costa R, Scurtu R, Mogoanta S, Bolca C, Constantinoiu S, Sekhniaidze D, Bjelović M, So J, Gačevski G, Loureiro C, Pera M, Bianchi A, Moreno GM, Martín Fernández J, Trugeda Carrera M, Vallve-Bernal M, Cítores Pascual M, Elmahi S, Halldestam I, Hedberg J, Mönig S, Gutknecht S, Tez M, Guner A, Tirnaksiz M, Colak E, Sevinç B, Hindmarsh A, Khan I, Khoo D, Byrom R, Gokhale J, Wilkerson P, Jain P, Chan D, Robertson K, Iftikhar S, Skipworth R, Forshaw M, Higgs S, Gossage J, Nijjar R, Viswanath Y, Turner P, Dexter S, Boddy A, Allum W, Oglesby S, Cheong E, Beardsmore D, Vohra R, Maynard N, Berrisford R, Mercer S, Puig S, Melhado R, Kelty C, Underwood T, Dawas K, Lewis W, Al-Bahrani A, Bryce G, Thomas M, Arndt A, Palazzo F, Meguid R, Fergusson J, Beenen E, Mosse C, Salim J, Cheah S, Wright T, Cerdeira M, McQuillan P, Richardson M, Liem H, Spillane J, Yacob M, Albadawi F, Thorpe T, Dingle A, Cabalag C, Loi K, Fisher O, Ward S, Read M, Johnson M, Bassari R, Bui H, Cecconello I, Sallum R, da Rocha J, Lopes L, Tercioti V, Coelho J, Ferrer J, Buduhan G, Tan L, Srinathan S, Shea P, Yeung J, Allison F, Carroll P, Vargas-Barato F, Gonzalez F, Ortega J, Nino-Torres L, Beltrán-García T, Castilla L, Pineda M, Bastidas A, Gómez-Mayorga J, Cortés N, Cetares C, Caceres S, Duarte S, Pazdro A, Snajdauf M, Faltova H, Sevcikova M, Mortensen P, Katballe N, Ingemann T, Morten B, Kruhlikava I, Ainswort A, Stilling N, Eckardt J, Holm J, Thorsteinsson M, Siemsen M, Brandt B, Nega B, Teferra E, Tizazu A, Kauppila J, Koivukangas V, Meriläinen S, Gruetzmann R, Krautz C, Weber G, Golcher H, Emons G, Azizian A, Ebeling M, Niebisch S, Kreuser N, Albanese G, Hesse J, Volovnik L, Boecher U, Reeh M, Triantafyllou S, Schizas D, Michalinos A, Mpali E, Mpoura M, Charalabopoulos A, Manatakis D, Balalis D, Bolger J, Baban C, Mastrosimone A, McAnena O, Quinn A, Ó Súilleabháin C, Hennessy M, Ivanovski I, Khizer H, Ravi N, Donlon N, Cervellera M, Vaccari S, Bianchini S, Sartarelli L, Asti E, Bernardi D, Merigliano S, Provenzano L, Scarpa M, Saadeh L, Salmaso B, De Manzoni G, Giacopuzzi S, La Mendola R, De Pasqual C, Tsubosa Y, Niihara M, Irino T, Makuuchi R, Ishii K, Mwachiro M, Fekadu A, Odera A, Mwachiro E, AlShehab D, Ahmed H, Shebani A, Elhadi A, Elnagar F, Elnagar H, Makkai-Popa S, Wong L, Tan Y, Thannimalai S, Ho C, Pang W, Tan J, Basave H, Cortés-González R, Lagarde S, van Lanschot J, Cords C, Jansen W, Martijnse I, Matthijsen R, Bouwense S, Klarenbeek B, Verstegen M, van Workum F, Ruurda J, van der Sluis P, de Maat M, Evenett N, Johnston P, Patel R, MacCormick A, Young M, Smith B, Ekwunife C, Memon A, Shaikh K, Wajid A, Khalil N, Haris M, Mirza Z, Qudus S, Sarwar M, Shehzadi A, Raza A, Jhanzaib M, Farmanali J, Zakir Z, Shakeel O, Nasir I, Khattak S, Baig M, Noor M, Ahmed H, Naeem A, Pinho A, da Silva R, Bernardes A, Campos J, Matos H, Braga T, Monteiro C, Ramos P, Cabral F, Gomes M, Martins P, Correia A, Videira J, Ciuce C, Drasovean R, Apostu R, Ciuce C, Paitici S, Racu A, Obleaga C, Beuran M, Stoica B, Ciubotaru C, Negoita V, Cordos I, Birla R, Predescu D, Hoara P, Tomsa R, Shneider V, Agasiev M, Ganjara I, Gunjić D, Veselinović M, Babič T, Chin T, Shabbir A, Kim G, Crnjac A, Samo H, Díez del Val I, Leturio S, Ramón J, Dal Cero M, Rifá S, Rico M, Pagan Pomar A, Martinez Corcoles J, Rodicio Miravalles J, Pais S, Turienzo S, Alvarez L, Campos P, Rendo A, García S, Santos E, Martínez E, Fernández DMJ, Magadán ÁC, Concepción MV, Díaz LC, Rosat RA, Pérez SLE, Bailón CM, Tinoco CC, Choolani Bhojwani E, Sánchez D, Ahmed M, Dzhendov T, Lindberg F, Rutegård M, Sundbom M, Mickael C, Colucci N, Schnider A, Er S, Kurnaz E, Turkyilmaz S, Turkyilmaz A, Yildirim R, Baki B, Akkapulu N, Karahan O, Damburaci N, Hardwick R, Safranek P, Sujendran V, Bennett J, Afzal Z, Shrotri M, Chan B, Exarchou K, Gilbert T, Amalesh T, Mukherjee D, Mukherjee S, Wiggins T, Kennedy R, McCain S, Harris A, Dobson G, Davies N, Wilson I, Mayo D, Bennett D, Young R, Manby P, Blencowe N, Schiller M, Byrne B, Mitton D, Wong V, Elshaer A, Cowen M, Menon V, Tan L, McLaughlin E, Koshy R, Sharp C, Brewer H, Das N, Cox M, Al Khyatt W, Worku D, Iqbal R, Walls L, McGregor R, Fullarton G, Macdonald A, MacKay C, Craig C, Dwerryhouse S, Hornby S, Jaunoo S, Wadley M, Baker C, Saad M, Kelly M, Davies A, Di Maggio F, McKay S, Mistry P, Singhal R, Tucker O, Kapoulas S, Powell-Brett S, Davis P, Bromley G, Watson L, Verma R, Ward J, Shetty V, Ball C, Pursnani K, Sarela A, Sue LH, Mehta S, Hayden J, To N, Palser T, Hunter D, Supramaniam K, Butt Z, Ahmed A, Kumar S, Chaudry A, Moussa O, Kordzadeh A, Lorenzi B, Wilson M, Patil P, Noaman I, Willem J, Bouras G, Evans R, Singh M, Warrilow H, Ahmad A, Tewari N, Yanni F, Couch J, Theophilidou E, Reilly J, Singh P, van Boxel G, Akbari K, Zanotti D, Sgromo B, Sanders G, Wheatley T, Ariyarathenam A, Reece-Smith A, Humphreys L, Choh C, Carter N, Knight B, Pucher P, Athanasiou A, Mohamed I, Tan B, Abdulrahman M, Vickers J, Akhtar K, Chaparala R, Brown R, Alasmar M, Ackroyd R, Patel K, Tamhankar A, Wyman A, Walker R, Grace B, Abbassi N, Slim N, Ioannidi L, Blackshaw G, Havard T, Escofet X, Powell A, Owera A, Rashid F, Jambulingam P, Padickakudi J, Ben-Younes H, Mccormack K, Makey I, Karush M, Seder C, Liptay M, Chmielewski G, Rosato E, Berger A, Zheng R, Okolo E, Singh A, Scott C, Weyant M, Mitchell J. Mortality from esophagectomy for esophageal cancer across low, middle, and high-income countries: An international cohort study. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY 2021; 47:1481-1488. [PMID: 33451919 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.12.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/28/2020] [Accepted: 12/09/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND No evidence currently exists characterising global outcomes following major cancer surgery, including esophageal cancer. Therefore, this study aimed to characterise impact of high income countries (HIC) versus low and middle income countries (LMIC) on the outcomes following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. METHOD This international multi-center prospective study across 137 hospitals in 41 countries included patients who underwent an esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, with 90-day follow-up. The main explanatory variable was country income, defined according to the World Bank Data classification. The primary outcome was 90-day postoperative mortality, and secondary outcomes were composite leaks (anastomotic leak or conduit necrosis) and major complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade III - V). Multivariable generalized estimating equation models were used to produce adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI95%). RESULTS Between April 2018 to December 2018, 2247 patients were included. Patients from HIC were more significantly older, with higher ASA grade, and more advanced tumors. Patients from LMIC had almost three-fold increase in 90-day mortality, compared to HIC (9.4% vs 3.7%, p < 0.001). On adjusted analysis, LMIC were independently associated with higher 90-day mortality (OR: 2.31, CI95%: 1.17-4.55, p = 0.015). However, LMIC were not independently associated with higher rates of anastomotic leaks (OR: 1.06, CI95%: 0.57-1.99, p = 0.9) or major complications (OR: 0.85, CI95%: 0.54-1.32, p = 0.5), compared to HIC. CONCLUSION Resections in LMIC were independently associated with higher 90-day postoperative mortality, likely reflecting a failure to rescue of these patients following esophagectomy, despite similar composite anastomotic leaks and major complication rates to HIC. These findings warrant further research, to identify potential issues and solutions to improve global outcomes following esophagectomy for cancer.
Collapse
|
20
|
Fergusson J, Beenen E, Mosse C, Salim J, Cheah S, Wright T, Cerdeira MP, McQuillan P, Richardson M, Liem H, Spillane J, Yacob M, Albadawi F, Thorpe T, Dingle A, Cabalag C, Loi K, Fisher OM, Ward S, Read M, Johnson M, Bassari R, Bui H, Cecconello I, Sallum RAA, da Rocha JRM, Lopes LR, Tercioti V, Coelho JDS, Ferrer JAP, Buduhan G, Tan L, Srinathan S, Shea P, Yeung J, Allison F, Carroll P, Vargas-Barato F, Gonzalez F, Ortega J, Nino-Torres L, Beltrán-García TC, Castilla L, Pineda M, Bastidas A, Gómez-Mayorga J, Cortés N, Cetares C, Caceres S, Duarte S, Pazdro A, Snajdauf M, Faltova H, Sevcikova M, Mortensen PB, Katballe N, Ingemann T, Morten B, Kruhlikava I, Ainswort AP, Stilling NM, Eckardt J, Holm J, Thorsteinsson M, Siemsen M, Brandt B, Nega B, Teferra E, Tizazu A, Kauppila JS, Koivukangas V, Meriläinen S, Gruetzmann R, Krautz C, Weber G, Golcher H, Emons G, Azizian A, Ebeling M, Niebisch S, Kreuser N, Albanese G, Hesse J, Volovnik L, Boecher U, Reeh M, Triantafyllou S, Schizas D, Michalinos A, Mpali E, Mpoura M, Charalabopoulos A, Manatakis DK, Balalis D, Bolger J, Baban C, Mastrosimone A, McAnena O, Quinn A, Ó Súilleabháin CB, Hennessy MM, Ivanovski I, Khizer H, Ravi N, Donlon N, Cervellera M, Vaccari S, Bianchini S, Sartarelli L, Asti E, Bernardi D, Merigliano S, Provenzano L, Scarpa M, Saadeh L, Salmaso B, De Manzoni G, Giacopuzzi S, La Mendola R, De Pasqual CA, Tsubosa Y, Niihara M, Irino T, Makuuchi R, Ishii K, Mwachiro M, Fekadu A, Odera A, Mwachiro E, AlShehab D, Ahmed HA, Shebani AO, Elhadi A, Elnagar FA, Elnagar HF, Makkai-Popa ST, Wong LF, Yunrong T, Thanninalai S, Aik HC, Soon PW, Huei TJ, Basave HNL, Cortés-González R, Lagarde SM, van Lanschot JJB, Cords C, Jansen WA, Martijnse I, Matthijsen R, Bouwense S, Klarenbeek B, Verstegen M, van Workum F, Ruurda JP, van der Sluis PC, de Maat M, Evenett N, Johnston P, Patel R, MacCormick A, Young M, Smith B, Ekwunife C, Memon AH, Shaikh K, Wajid A, Khalil N, Haris M, Mirza ZU, Qudus SBA, Sarwar MZ, Shehzadi A, Raza A, Jhanzaib MH, Farmanali J, Zakir Z, Shakeel O, Nasir I, Khattak S, Baig M, Noor MA, Ahmed HH, Naeem A, Pinho AC, da Silva R, Matos H, Braga T, Monteiro C, Ramos P, Cabral F, Gomes MP, Martins PC, Correia AM, Videira JF, Ciuce C, Drasovean R, Apostu R, Ciuce C, Paitici S, Racu AE, Obleaga CV, Beuran M, Stoica B, Ciubotaru C, Negoita V, Cordos I, Birla RD, Predescu D, Hoara PA, Tomsa R, Shneider V, Agasiev M, Ganjara I, Gunjic´ D, Veselinovic´ M, Babič T, Chin TS, Shabbir A, Kim G, Crnjac A, Samo H, Díez del Val I, Leturio S, Díez del Val I, Leturio S, Ramón JM, Dal Cero M, Rifá S, Rico M, Pagan Pomar A, Martinez Corcoles JA, Rodicio Miravalles JL, Pais SA, Turienzo SA, Alvarez LS, Campos PV, Rendo AG, García SS, Santos EPG, Martínez ET, Fernández Díaz MJ, Magadán Álvarez C, Concepción Martín V, Díaz López C, Rosat Rodrigo A, Pérez Sánchez LE, Bailón Cuadrado M, Tinoco Carrasco C, Choolani Bhojwani E, Sánchez DP, Ahmed ME, Dzhendov T, Lindberg F, Rutegård M, Sundbom M, Mickael C, Colucci N, Schnider A, Er S, Kurnaz E, Turkyilmaz S, Turkyilmaz A, Yildirim R, Baki BE, Akkapulu N, Karahan O, Damburaci N, Hardwick R, Safranek P, Sujendran V, Bennett J, Afzal Z, Shrotri M, Chan B, Exarchou K, Gilbert T, Amalesh T, Mukherjee D, Mukherjee S, Wiggins TH, Kennedy R, McCain S, Harris A, Dobson G, Davies N, Wilson I, Mayo D, Bennett D, Young R, Manby P, Blencowe N, Schiller M, Byrne B, Mitton D, Wong V, Elshaer A, Cowen M, Menon V, Tan LC, McLaughlin E, Koshy R, Sharp C, Brewer H, Das N, Cox M, Al Khyatt W, Worku D, Iqbal R, Walls L, McGregor R, Fullarton G, Macdonald A, MacKay C, Craig C, Dwerryhouse S, Hornby S, Jaunoo S, Wadley M, Baker C, Saad M, Kelly M, Davies A, Di Maggio F, McKay S, Mistry P, Singhal R, Tucker O, Kapoulas S, Powell-Brett S, Davis P, Bromley G, Watson L, Verma R, Ward J, Shetty V, Ball C, Pursnani K, Sarela A, Sue Ling H, Mehta S, Hayden J, To N, Palser T, Hunter D, Supramaniam K, Butt Z, Ahmed A, Kumar S, Chaudry A, Moussa O, Kordzadeh A, Lorenzi B, Willem J, Bouras G, Evans R, Singh M, Warrilow H, Ahmad A, Tewari N, Yanni F, Couch J, Theophilidou E, Reilly JJ, Singh P, van Boxel G, Akbari K, Zanotti D, Sgromo B, Sanders G, Wheatley T, Ariyarathenam A, Reece-Smith A, Humphreys L, Choh C, Carter N, Knight B, Pucher P, Athanasiou A, Mohamed I, Tan B, Abdulrahman M, Vickers J, Akhtar K, Chaparala R, Brown R, Alasmar MMA, Ackroyd R, Patel K, Tamhankar A, Wyman A, Walker R, Grace B, Abbassi N, Slim N, Ioannidi L, Blackshaw G, Havard T, Escofet X, Powell A, Owera A, Rashid F, Jambulingam P, Padickakudi J, Ben-Younes H, Mccormack K, Makey IA, Karush MK, Seder CW, Liptay MJ, Chmielewski G, Rosato EL, Berger AC, Zheng R, Okolo E, Singh A, Scott CD, Weyant MJ, Mitchell JD. Comparison of short-term outcomes from the International Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA), the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG), and the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA). BJS Open 2021; 5:zrab010. [PMID: 35179183 PMCID: PMC8140199 DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrab010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/15/2020] [Accepted: 01/27/2021] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) and the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) have set standards in reporting outcomes after oesophagectomy. Reporting outcomes from selected high-volume centres or centralized national cancer programmes may not, however, be reflective of the true global prevalence of complications. This study aimed to compare complication rates after oesophagectomy from these existing sources with those of an unselected international cohort from the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA). METHODS The OGAA was a prospective multicentre cohort study coordinated by the West Midlands Research Collaborative, and included patients undergoing oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer between April and December 2018, with 90 days of follow-up. RESULTS The OGAA study included 2247 oesophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. Comparisons with the ECCG and DUCA found differences in baseline demographics between the three cohorts, including age, ASA grade, and rates of chronic pulmonary disease. The OGAA had the lowest rates of neoadjuvant treatment (OGAA 75.1 per cent, ECCG 78.9 per cent, DUCA 93.5 per cent; P < 0.001). DUCA exhibited the highest rates of minimally invasive surgery (OGAA 57.2 per cent, ECCG 47.9 per cent, DUCA 85.8 per cent; P < 0.001). Overall complication rates were similar in the three cohorts (OGAA 63.6 per cent, ECCG 59.0 per cent, DUCA 62.2 per cent), with no statistically significant difference in Clavien-Dindo grades (P = 0.752). However, a significant difference in 30-day mortality was observed, with DUCA reporting the lowest rate (OGAA 3.2 per cent, ECCG 2.4 per cent, DUCA 1.7 per cent; P = 0.013). CONCLUSION Despite differences in rates of co-morbidities, oncological treatment strategies, and access to minimal-access surgery, overall complication rates were similar in the three cohorts.
Collapse
|
21
|
Bonavina L. Progress in the esophagogastric anastomosis and the challenges of minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgery. ANNALS OF TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE 2021; 9:907. [PMID: 34164541 PMCID: PMC8184442 DOI: 10.21037/atm.2020.03.66] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
The esophagogastric anastomosis is most commonly performed to restore digestive tract continuity after esophagectomy for cancer. Despite a long history of clinical research and development of high-tech staplers, this procedure is still feared by most surgeons and associated with a 10% leakage rate. Among specific factors that may contribute to failure of the esophageal anastomosis are the absence of serosa layer, longitudinal orientation of muscle fibers, and ischemia of the gastric conduit. It has recently been suggested that the gut microbiome may influence the healing process of the anastomosis through the presence of collagenolytic bacterial strains, indicating that suture breakdown is not only a matter of collagen biosynthesis. The esophagogastric anastomosis can be performed either in the chest or neck, and can be completely hand-sewn, completely stapled (circular or linear stapler), or semi-mechanical (linear stapler posterior wall and hand-sewn anterior wall). Because of the lack of randomized clinical trials, no conclusive evidence is available, and the debate between the hand-sewn and the stapling technique is still ongoing even in the present era of robotic surgery. Centralization of care has improved the overall postoperative outcomes of esophagectomy, but the esophagogastric anastomosis remains the Achille’s heel of the procedure. More research and network collaboration of experts is needed to improve safety and clinical outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luigi Bonavina
- Division of General and Foregut Surgery, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, University of Milan, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, San Donato Milanese (Milano), Italy
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Anastomotic leak following oesophagectomy: research priorities from an international Delphi consensus study. Br J Surg 2021; 108:66-73. [PMID: 33640931 DOI: 10.1093/bjs/znaa034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2020] [Revised: 08/23/2020] [Accepted: 09/18/2020] [Indexed: 01/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) is an international collaborative group set up to study anastomotic leak outcomes after oesophagectomy for cancer. This Delphi study aimed to prioritize future research areas of unmet clinical need in RCTs to reduce anastomotic leaks. METHODS A modified Delphi process was overseen by the OGAA committee, national leads, and engaged clinicians from high-income countries (HICs) and low/middle-income countries (LMICs). A three-stage iterative process was used to prioritize research topics, including a scoping systematic review (stage 1), and two rounds of anonymous electronic voting (stages 2 and 3) addressing research priority and ability to recruit. Stratified analyses were performed by country income. RESULTS In stage 1, the steering committee proposed research topics across six domains: preoperative optimization, surgical oncology, technical approach, anastomotic technique, enhanced recovery and nutrition, and management of leaks. In stages 2 and stage 3, 192 and 171 respondents respectively participated in online voting. Prioritized research topics include prehabilitation, anastomotic technique, and timing of surgery after neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy. Stratified analyses by country income demonstrated no significant differences in research priorities between HICs and LMICs. However, for ability to recruit, there were significant differences between LMICs and HICs for themes related to the technical approach (minimally invasive, width of gastric tube, ischaemic preconditioning) and location of the anastomosis. CONCLUSION Several areas of research priority are consistent across LMICs and HICs, but discrepancies in ability to recruit by country income will inform future study design.
Collapse
|
23
|
Parise P, Turi S, Talavera-Urquijo E, Carresi A, Barbieri L, Cossu A, Elmore U, Puccetti F, Rosati R. Application of ERAS protocol in esophagectomy: a national survey among Italian centers performing esophageal surgery. Updates Surg 2021; 73:297-303. [PMID: 33439468 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-020-00963-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2020] [Accepted: 12/23/2020] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
The application of enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines for esophageal surgery in different units remains unclear. This survey intended to investigate how such protocol is applied among Italian esophageal surgery units. A survey with 40 questions was mailed to Italian centers that performed at least 10 esophagectomies per year. It included questions about the type of hospital and unit and pre-, intra- and post-operative items. Difficulties encountered were investigated. Thirteen (65%) centers answered the survey, and all met the minimal safety requirements, e.g., the presence of intensive care units and 24-h on-call operative endoscopy and radiology facilities. Fifty percent of esophagectomies with a minimally invasive approach were performed in 84.6% of the centers. Regarding pre-operative items, the highest scores were for the application of nutritional support, dysphagia palliation and presence of a multidisciplinary tumor board, whereas the lowest score was for the use of immunonutrition. Regarding intra-operative items, hypothermia prevention and the use of goal-directed fluid therapy and volatile anesthesia were diffusely adopted, whereas the rate of using abdominal drains was high. Regarding post-operative items, nausea prevention, multimodal analgesia and early mobilization were applied frequently, whereas the use of nasogastric tubes and regular transfer to intensive care units was diffused. The primary barriers in enhanced recovery after surgery protocol application were resistance and a lack of paramedic personnel. This survey's results highlight the efforts undertaken by several centers to apply enhanced recovery after surgery philosophy and in this regard, demonstrate a good standing in Italy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paolo Parise
- Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, 60 Via Olgettina, 20132, Milan, Italy.
| | - Stefano Turi
- Neurosurgery Intensive Care Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Eider Talavera-Urquijo
- Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, 60 Via Olgettina, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Agnese Carresi
- Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, 60 Via Olgettina, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Lavinia Barbieri
- Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, 60 Via Olgettina, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Andrea Cossu
- Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, 60 Via Olgettina, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Ugo Elmore
- Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, 60 Via Olgettina, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesco Puccetti
- Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, 60 Via Olgettina, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | - Riccardo Rosati
- Gastrointestinal Surgery Unit, San Raffaele Hospital, 60 Via Olgettina, 20132, Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Takeda FR, Cecconello I. The complex assessment of anastomosis' perfusion following esophagectomy: Set in stone? Eur J Surg Oncol 2020; 47:1491-1492. [PMID: 33250235 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.11.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2020] [Accepted: 11/10/2020] [Indexed: 10/22/2022] Open
|
25
|
Huang YH, Chen KC, Lin SH, Huang PM, Yang PW, Lee JM. Robotic-assisted single-incision gastric mobilization for minimally invasive oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: preliminary results. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2020; 58:i65-i69. [PMID: 32617584 PMCID: PMC7594190 DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezaa212] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2020] [Revised: 04/14/2020] [Accepted: 04/17/2020] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES With the gradual acceptance of robotic-assisted surgery to treat oesophageal cancer and the application of a single-port approach in several abdominal procedures, we adopted a single-port technique in robotic-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy during the abdominal phase for gastric mobilization and abdominal lymph node dissection. METHODS Robotic-assisted oesophagectomy and mediastinal lymph node dissection in the chest were followed by robotic-assisted gastric mobilization and conduit creation with abdominal lymph node dissection, which were performed via a periumbilicus single incision. The oesophagogastrostomy was accomplished either in the chest (Ivor Lewis procedure) or neck (McKeown procedure) depending on the status of the proximal resection margin. RESULTS The procedure was successfully performed on 11 patients with oesophageal cancer from January 2017 to December 2018 in our institute. No surgical or in-hospital deaths occurred, though we had one case each of anastomotic leakage, pneumonia and hiatal hernia (9%). CONCLUSIONS Robotic single-incision gastric mobilization for minimally invasive oesophagectomy for treating oesophageal cancer seems feasible. Its value in terms of perioperative outcome and long-term survival results awaits future evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yu-Han Huang
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ke-Cheng Chen
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Sian-Han Lin
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Pei-Ming Huang
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Pei-Wen Yang
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Jang-Ming Lee
- Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital and National Taiwan University College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|