Nutritional considerations after gastrectomy and esophagectomy for malignancy

THE VALUE OF PREOPERATIVE PROGNOSTIC NUTRITIONAL INDEX IN GASTRIC CANCER AFTER CURATIVE RESECTION

BACKGROUND

Predicting short- and long-term outcomes of oncological therapies is crucial for developing effective treatment strategies. Malnutrition and the host immune status significantly affect outcomes in major surgeries.

AIMS

To assess the value of preoperative prognostic nutritional index (PNI) in predicting outcomes in gastric cancer patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted on patients undergoing curative-intent surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma between 2009 and 2020. PNI was calculated as follows: PNI=(10 x albumin [g/dL])+(0.005 x lymphocytes [nº/mm3]). The optimal cutoff value was determined by the receiver operating characteristic curve (PNI cutoff=52), and patients were grouped into low and high PNI.

RESULTS

Of the 529 patients included, 315 (59.5%) were classified as a low-PNI group (PNI<52) and 214 (40.5%) as a high-PNI group (PNI≥52). Older age (p=0.050), male sex (p=0.003), American Society of Anesthesiologists score (ASA) III/IV (p=0.001), lower hemoglobin level (p<0.001), lower body mass index (p=0.001), higher neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (p<0.001), D1 lymphadenectomy, advanced pT stage, pN+ and more advanced pTNM stage were related to low-PNI patient. Furthermore, 30-day (1.4 vs. 4.8%; p=0.036) and 90-day (3.3 vs. 10.5%; p=0.002) mortality rates were higher in low-PNI compared to high-PNI group. Disease-free and overall survival were worse in low-PNI patients compared to high-PNI (p<0.001 for both). ASA III/IV score, low-PNI, pT3/T4, and pN+ were independent risk factors for worse survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative PNI can predict short- and long-term outcomes of patients with gastric cancer after curative gastrectomy. Low PNI is an independent factor related to worse disease-free and overall survival.

Measurement and optimization of perioperative risk among patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer

Esophagectomy is an exemplar of complex oncological surgery and is associated with a relatively high risk of major morbidity and mortality. In the modern era, where specific complications are targeted in prevention and treatment pathways, and where the principles of enhanced recovery after surgery are espoused, optimum outcomes are targeted via a number of approaches. These include comprehensive clinical and physiological risk assessment, specialist perioperative care by a high-volume team, and multimodal inputs throughout the patient journey that aim to preserve or restore nutritional deficits, muscle mass and function.

Cessation of Routine Jejunostomy Tube Placement at Time of Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy and Impact on Body Mass Index

Jejunostomy tubes are frequently placed at time of esophagectomy. The purpose of this study is to evaluate cessation of routine j-tube placement on postoperative body mass index (BMI), return to the emergency room, and time until adjuvant therapy. We performed a retrospective review of an institutional database for consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy from 2014-2021 (after January 2019, routine j-tube placement was abandoned). Data was analyzed using Pearson's Chi-squared tests and Student's t test with 2-sided significance level of P < 0.05. In total,179 patients were included, 95 underwent j-tube placement and 84 did not. Cohorts had comparable baseline BMI's (no j-tube: 30.48 vs j-tube: 28.64, P = 0.06) and anastomotic leak rates (2.4% vs 4.2%, P = 0.5). Patients with no jejunostomy tubes were more likely to receive total parenteral nutrition (14.3% vs 5.3%, P < 0.05), but were no more likely to require total parenteral nutrition at discharge and had comparable durations of TPN requirement (7 days vs 12 days, P = 0.53). There was no difference in mean BMI reduction at 2 weeks (2.54 vs 2.09, P = 0.49) and 3-6 months postoperatively (6.11 vs 4.45 P = 0.15). There was no difference in return to the emergency room (8.3% vs 8.4%, P = 0.98) or readmissions (13.1% vs 11.6%, P = 0.76). There was a no difference in mean time to adjuvant therapy (83.5 days vs 72.6 days, P = 0.67). At esophagectomy centers with low anastomotic leak rates, cessation of routine j-tube placement at time of minimally esophagectomy can be undertaken without increasing risk of readmission, time until initiation of adjuvant therapy, or significantly impacting postoperative BMI loss.

The Problem of Appetite Loss After Major Abdominal Surgery

Objective:

To systematically review the problem of appetite loss after major abdominal surgery.

Summary of Background Data:

Appetite loss is a common problem after major abdominal surgery. Understanding of etiology and treatment options is limited.

Methods:

We searched Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science for studies describing postoperative appetite loss. Data were extracted to clarify definition, etiology, measurement, surgical influence, pharmacological, and nonpharmacological treatment. PROSPERO registration ID: CRD42021224489.

Results:

Out of 6144 articles, we included 165 studies, 121 of which were also analyzed quantitatively. A total of 19.8% were randomized, controlled trials (n = 24) and 80.2% were nonrandomized studies (n = 97). The studies included 20,506 patients undergoing the following surgeries: esophageal (n = 33 studies), gastric (n = 48), small bowel (n = 6), colon (n = 27), rectal (n = 20), hepatobiliary (n = 6), and pancreatic (n = 13). Appetite was mostly measured with the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC QLQ C30, n = 54). In a meta-analysis of 4 randomized controlled trials gum chewing reduced time to first hunger by 21.2 hours among patients who had bowel surgery. Other reported treatment options with positive effects on appetite but lower levels of evidence include, among others, intravenous ghrelin administration, the oral Japanese herbal medicine Rikkunshito, oral mosapride citrate, multidisciplin-ary-counseling, and watching cooking shows. No studies investigated the effect of well-known appetite stimulants such as cannabinoids, steroids, or megestrol acetate on surgical patients.

Conclusions:

Appetite loss after major abdominal surgery is common and associated with increased morbidity and reduced quality of life. Recent studies demonstrate the influence of reduced gastric volume and ghrelin secretion, and increased satiety hormone secretion. There are various treatment options available including level IA evidence for postoperative gum chewing. In the future, surgical trials should include the assessment of appetite loss as a relevant outcome measure.

Nasojejunal Feeding Is Safe and Effective Alternative to Feeding Jejunostomy for Postoperative Enteral Nutrition in Gastric Cancer Patients

Background and Aim  Carcinoma of the stomach is one of the leading causes of mortality worldwide. Surgery for gastric cancer in the form of total or distal gastrectomy is definitive treatment. Feeding jejunostomy (FJ) though improves postoperative nutritional status and outcome, it is not devoid of its complications. In this study, we present the outcomes of nasojejunal (NJ) feeding and FJ and complications associated with them.

Materials and Methods  It is both retrospective and prospective observational study in patients with gastric cancer undergoing surgery. Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent FJ and those who underwent NJ route of feeding placed intraoperatively.

Results  A total of 279 patients of gastric cancer who underwent surgery were taken into study, of which, 165 were male and 114 females. FJ was done in 42 and NJ in 237 patients, respectively. Gastrectomy + NJ was done in 128 patients, gastrectomy + FJ in 27 patients, gastrojejunostomy + NJ in 109 patients, and FJ in 15 patients. We had three patients of bile leaks in FJ group, of which one patient had intraperitoneal leak who needed re-exploration; rest of the two had peri-FJ external leaks, who were managed conservatively. Most of the complications of NJ group were minor.

Conclusion  Our study of 279 patients in gastric cancer has shown that FJ is sometimes associated with major complications with increased hospital stay and morbidity when compared with NJ tube feeding without any difference in nutritional outcomes. Hence, NJ route of postoperative enteral nutrition can be considered as an alternative to FJ wherever feasible in view of its technical safety and minor complications and morbidity.

Delayed Gastric Emptying after Esophagectomy: Management and Prevention

The quality of life associated with eating is becoming an increasingly significant problem for patients who undergo esophagectomy as a result of the improved survival rate after esophageal cancer surgery. Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication after esophagectomy. Although several strategies have been proposed for the management and prevention of DGE, no clear consensus exists. The purpose of this review is to present a brief overview of DGE and to help clinicians choose the most appropriate treatment through an analysis of DGE by cause. Furthermore, we would like to suggest some tips to prevent DGE based on our experience.

Impact on Short-Term Complications of Early Oral Feeding in Patients with Esophageal Cancer After Esophagectomy

To evaluate early oral feeding (EOF) in short-term outcomes of patients with esophageal cancer after esophagectomy. 179 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy between January 2016 and February 2018 were enrolled for this study. 87 patients with EOF without nasogastric tube or nasogastric tube was removed within 24 h, were selected as the experimental group, whereas 92 patients who received nasojejunal tube feeding were set as the control group. All laboratory testing, clinical features, and hospitalization expenses were compared between the two groups. No statistical significance was observed between the two groups in hemoglobin, albumin, and prealbumin levels after esophagectomy. Notably, there was no significant difference in the incidence of severe pneumonia and anastomotic leakage between the two groups. Admittance period, postoperative defecation time, and medical expenses were significantly decreased among patients with EOF (P < 0.001). Multivariate Cox multiple-factor regression analysis revealed that there was no correlation between EOF and the risk of anastomotic leakage. EOF might not be a risk factor for increasing the incidence of severe pneumonia and anastomotic leakage in patients with esophageal cancer after esophagectomy, and it could reduce the hospitalization period as well as control medical expenses.

Jejunostomy or nasojejunal tube after esophagectomy: a review of the literature

Patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer are a difficult to treat group of patients. At diagnosis they will present some degree of malnutrition in up to 80% and the causes are from multifactorial origin: the inability of food ingestion, advanced age, taste disturbances, and morbidity related to neoadjuvant treatment. In order to restaure the nutritional status, enteral nutritional support is preferable to parenteral support because of the risks of septic complications associated with venous catheters. During the postoperative period, the oral route is often inaccessible in these patients due to swallowing disorders and eventually mechanical ventilation, and if possible, often it does not provide sufficient caloric amounts for postoperative energy balance. For these reasons, it is usually recommended additional nutritional support. There are few studies in the literature that specifically address which is the most adequate route for enteral nutrition in patients undergoing esophagectomy. Nasojejunal catheters present a higher incidence of local complications, such as displacement and occlusion, whereas jejunostomy is more associated with reinterventions for the treatment of complications secondary to extravasation. Although there is weak evidence in the literature and a lack of randomized, prospective and multicenter studies evaluating the best enteral nutrition route in the postoperative period of esophagectomy, the use of the nasoenteric catheter seems to be adequate due to its simplicity of positioning and low rates of severe complications. In this paper a review is performed of the evidence about this subject.

Enteral Feeding Access Has an Impact on Outcomes for Patients with Esophageal Cancer Undergoing Esophagectomy: An Analysis of SEER-Medicare

BACKGROUND

Optimal nutrition after esophagectomy is challenging due to alterations in eating, both from the tumor and during surgical recovery. Enteral nutrition via feeding tube is commonly used. The impact of feeding tubes on post-esophagectomy outcomes was examined in a large national data set.

METHODS

Patients with esophageal cancer (1998-2013) undergoing esophagectomy were extracted from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare database. Chi-square and t tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables. Time trend analyses were performed with Cochran-Armitage survival using log-rank and multivariable analysis with generalized linear modeling.

RESULTS

The study examined 2495 patients. The majority had enteral feeding access (71%, n = 1794) during the perioperative period. Mortality among the patients with feeding tubes was lower at 30 days (5.4% vs 8.4%), 60 days (9.0% vs 13.0%), and 90 days (12.2% vs 15.8%). In the multivariable analysis, the patients with feeding tubes had improved short-term survival at 30 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.93), 60 days (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.49-0.85), and 90 days (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.90). The hospital stay was shorter for the patients undergoing enteral feeding tube placement (17.9 vs 19.5 days; p = 0.04). Discharge destination (home vs health care facility) showed no difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Feeding tubes in patients undergoing esophagectomy were associated with an increase in short-term survival up to 90 days after surgery. Feeding tube placement was not associated with higher rates of non-home discharges and did not prolong the hospital stay.

Role of rational diet in postoperative treatment of gastric cancer and application prospect of traditional Chinese medicine diet

The toxic side effects of postoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy in gastric cancer (GC) often cause patients to have cancer cachexia and poor quality of life. Dietary adjuvant therapy can significantly promote GC patients to recover the body function, alleviate inflammation, improve anticancer treatment tolerance, improve postoperative quality of life and prolong survival. Given the advantages of diet in the postoperative treatment of GC, this paper discusses the role of modern medicine's elemental nutrition diet and traditional Chinese medicine diet in the postoperative treatment of GC, which can help clinicians better understand traditional Chinese medicine treatment in relieving the overall dysfunction of the body. Furthermore, the combination of traditional Chinese medicine diet with the modern medical nutrition diet evaluation system can expand the use of traditional Chinese medicine diet in the clinical treatment of GC.

Nutrition therapy in esophageal cancer-Consensus statement of the Gastroenterological Society of Taiwan

A number of clinical guidelines on nutrition therapy in cancer patients have been published by national and international societies; however, most of the reviewed data focused on gastrointestinal cancer or non-cancerous abdominal surgery. To collate the corresponding data for esophageal cancer (EC), a consensus panel was convened to aid specialists from different disciplines, who are involved in the clinical nutrition care of EC patients. The literature was searched using MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the ISI Web of Knowledge. We searched for the best evidence pertaining to nutrition therapy in the case of EC. The panel summarized the findings in 3 sections of this consensus statement, based on which, after the diagnosis of EC, an initial distinction is made between the patients, as follows: (1) Assessment; (2) Therapy in patients with resectable disease; patients receiving chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy prior to resection, and patients with unresectable disease, requiring chemoradiotherapy or palliative therapy; and (3) Formula. The resulting consensus statement reflects the opinions of a multidisciplinary group of experts, and a review of the current literature, and outlines the essential aspects of nutrition therapy in the case of EC. The statements are: Patients with EC are among one of the highest risk to have malnutrition. Patient generated suggestive global assessment is correlated with performance status and prognosis. Nutrition assessment for patients with EC at the diagnosis, prior to definitive therapy and change of treatment strategy are suggested and the timing interval can be two weeks during the treatment period, and one month while the patient is stable. Patients identified as high risk of malnutrition should be considered for preoperative nutritional support (tube feeding) for at least 7-10 days. Various routes for tube feedings are available after esophagectomy with similar nutrition support benefits. Limited intrathoracic anastomotic leakage postesophagectomy can be managed with intravenous antibiotics and self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) or jejunal tube. Enteral nutrition in patients receiving preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiation provides benefits of maintaining weight, decreasing toxicity, and preventing treatment interruption. Tube feeding or SEMS can offer nutrition support in patients with unresectable esophageal cancer, but SEMS is not recommended for those with neoadjuvant chemoradiation before surgery. Enteral immunonutrition may preserve lean body mass and attenuates stress response after esophagectomy. Administration of glutamine may decrease the severity of chemotherapy induced mucositis. Enteral immunonutrition achieves greater nutrition status or maintains immune functions during concurrent chemoradiation.

Long-Term Nutritional Outcome and Health Related Quality of Life of Patients Following Esophageal Cancer Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

Long term health related quality of life (HRQL) and nutritional outcome of patients following esophagectomy for cancer has become increasingly significant as the 5-year survival rate in this patient group is increasing. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the HRQOL, nutritional impact symptoms and nutritional outcomes of patients following an esophagectomy at greater than 12 months after surgery. In studies reporting on HRQL as an outcome, global QOL score at 6-month compare to greater than 12-month showed no statistically significant difference (65.92 vs. 75.78, p = 0.07). Forty-one percent of patients reported a greater than 10% weight loss at six-month follow-up (95% CI: 20-65%; I2 = 94.27, p < 0.001), and at the greater than 12-month follow-up, 33% of patients had the greater than 10% weight loss (95% CI: 15-57%; I2 = 96.18, p < 0.001). At the 12-month or longer post esophagectomy, just over half the patients reported dysphagia (51%, 95% CI: 25-76%; I2 = 95.70, p < 0.001), nausea was reported by 11% (95% CI: 7-19%; I2 = 59.31, p = 0.09), dumping syndrome reported by 60% (95% CI: 43-76%; I2 = 96.92, p < 0.001). Symptoms such as dysphagia, diarrhea, reflux, dumping syndrome, and nausea were found to persist following esophagectomy. There were insufficient robust research investigating how these symptoms impact on the adequacy of dietary intake and micronutrient status.

Physiology, pathophysiology and therapeutic implications of enteroendocrine control of food intake

With the increasing prevalence of obesity and its associated comorbidities, strides to improve treatment strategies have enhanced our understanding of the function of the gut in the regulation of food intake. The most successful intervention for obesity to date, bariatric surgery effectively manipulates enteroendocrine physiology to enhance satiety and reduce hunger. Areas covered: In the present article, we provide a detailed overview of the physiology of enteroendocrine control of food intake, and discuss its pathophysiologic correlates and therapeutic implications in both obesity and gastrointestinal disease. Expert commentary: Ongoing research in the field of nutrient sensing by L-cells, as well as understanding the role of the microbiome and bile acid signaling may facilitate the development of novel strategies to combat the rising population health threat associated with obesity. Further refinement of post-prandial satiety gut hormone based therapies, including the development of chimeric peptides exploiting the pleiotropic nature of the gut hormone response, and identification of novel methods of delivery may hold the key to optimization of therapeutic modulation of gut hormone physiology in obesity.

Immediate Postoperative Oral Nutrition Following Esophagectomy: A Multicenter Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Immediate start of oral intake is beneficial following colorectal surgery. However, following esophagectomy the safety and feasibility of immediate oral intake is unclear, thus these patients are still kept nil by mouth. This study therefore aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of oral nutrition immediately after esophagectomy.

METHODS

A multicenter, prospective trial was conducted in 3 referral centers between August 2013 and May 2014, including 50 patients undergoing a minimally invasive esophagectomy. Oral nutrition was started postoperatively immediately (clear liquids on postoperative day [POD] 0, liquid nutrition on POD 1 to 6, solid food from POD 7). Nonoral enteral nutrition was started when <50% of caloric need was met on postoperative day POD 5 or when oral intake was impossible. A comparison was made with a retrospective cohort (n = 50) with a per-protocol delayed start of oral intake until POD 4 to 7.

RESULTS

The median caloric intake at POD 5 was 58% of required. In 38% of the patients nonoral nutrition was started, mainly due to complications (36%). The pneumonia rate was 28% following immediate oral intake and 40% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The aspiration pneumonia rate was 4% in both groups. The anastomotic leakage rate was 14% after immediate oral intake versus 24% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The 90-day mortality rate was 2% in both groups. Hospital stay and intensive care unit stay were significantly shorter following immediate oral intake.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate start of oral nutrition following esophagectomy seems to be feasible and does not increase complications compared to a retrospective cohort and literature. However, if complications arise an alternative nutritional route is required. This explorative study shows that a randomized controlled trial is needed.

Readmission predicts 90-day mortality after esophagectomy: Analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Registry linked to Medicare outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Postoperative readmission is an increasingly scrutinized quality metric that affects patient satisfaction and cost. Even more important is its implication for short-term prognosis. The purpose of this study is to characterize postesophagectomy readmissions and determine their relationship with subsequent 90-day mortality.

METHODS

Data were extracted for esophagectomy patients from the linked SEER-Medicare Registry (2000-2009), which provides longitudinal information about Medicare beneficiaries who have cancer. We assessed demographics, comorbidities, 30-day readmission, and 90-day mortality. Readmitting facility and diagnoses were identified. A hierarchic multivariable regression model clustered at the hospital level assessed the relationship between readmission within 30 days of discharge and 90-day mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 1543 patients discharged alive after esophagectomy. Among patients discharged alive, the readmission rate was 319 of 1543 (20.7%); 107 of 319 (33.5%) readmissions were to facilities that did not perform the index operation. Mortality rate at 90 days among patients discharged alive was 98 of 1543 (6.4%). Readmission was associated with a 4-fold increase in mortality (16.3% vs 3.8%, P < .001). Using multivariable regression, readmission was the strongest predictor of mortality (odds ratio 6.64, P < .001), with a stronger association than age, Charlson score, and index length of stay. Readmission diagnoses with the highest mortality rates were those associated with pulmonary, gastrointestinal, and cardiovascular diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients readmitted within 30 days of discharge after esophagectomy are at exceptionally high risk for early mortality. Early recognition of life-threatening readmission diagnoses is essential to providing optimal care.

Differences in the Survival of Gastric Cancer Patients after Gastrectomy according to the Medical Insurance Status

PURPOSE

In Korea, the entire population must enroll in the national health insurance system, and those who are classified as having a lower socioeconomic status are supported by the medical aid system. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of the medical insurance status of gastric cancer patients with their survival after gastrectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 247 patients who underwent surgical treatment for gastric cancer between January 1999 and December 2010 at the Seoul Medical Center were evaluated. Based on their medical insurance status, the patients were classified into two groups: the national health insurance registered group (n=183), and the medical aid covered group (n=64). The survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

The median postoperative duration of hospitalization was longer in the medical aid covered group and postoperative morbidity and mortality were higher in the medical aid group than in the national health insurance registered group (P<0.05). The overall 5-year survival rate was 43.9% in the medical aid covered group and 64.3% in the national health insurance registered group (P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The medical insurance status reflects the socioeconomic status of a patient and can influence the overall survival of gastric cancer patients. A more sophisticated analysis of the difference in the survival time between gastric cancer patients based on their socioeconomic status is necessary.

Treatment of mild non-chemotherapy-induced iron deficiency anemia in cancer patients: comparison between oral ferrous bisglycinate chelate and ferrous sulfate

In cancer patients mild-moderate non-chemotherapy-induced iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is usually treated with oral iron salts, mostly ferrous sulfate. In this study, we compare efficacy and toxicity of oral ferrous bisglycinate chelate and ferrous sulfate in cancer patients with mild IDA. Twenty-four patients operated on for solid tumors (10 breast, 12 colorectal, 2 gastric), aged 61±10 years (range 45-75), with non-chemotherapy-induced hemoglobin (Hb) values between 10 and 12 g/dL and ferritin lower than 30 ng/mL were randomized to receive oral ferrous bisglycinate chelate, 28 mg per day for 20 days, and then 14 mg per day for 40 days (12 patients) (A group) or oral ferrous sulphate, 105 mg per day for 60 days (12 patients) (B group). Values of hemoglobin and ferritin obtained at diagnosis, 1 and 2 months from the beginning of treatment were compared. Adverse events (AEs) related to the two treatments were recorded. In the 12 patients treated with ferrous bisglycinate chelate, basal hemoglobin and ferritin values (mean±SD) were 11.6±0.8 g/dL and 16.1±8.0 ng/mL. After 2 months of treatment, they were 13.0±1.4 g/dL and 33.8±22.0 ng/mL, respectively (P=0.0003 and P=0.020). In the group treated with ferrous sulphate, hemoglobin and ferritin mean values were 11.3±0.6 g/dL and 19.0±6.4 ng/mL basally, and 12.7±0.70 g/dL and 40.8±28.1 ng/mL (P<0.0001 and P=0.017) after 2 months of treatment. AEs occurred in six cases. In all these six cases, two (17%) treated with ferrous bisglycinate chelate and four (33%) with ferrous sulphate, toxicity was grade 1. In conclusion, these data suggest that ferrous bisglycinate chelate has similar efficacy and likely lower GI toxicity than ferrous sulphate given at the conventional dose of 105 mg per day for the same time.

Diagnostic evaluation, surgical technique, and perioperative management after esophagectomy: consensus statement of the German Advanced Surgical Treatment Study Group

PURPOSE

Correct diagnosis, surgical treatment, and perioperative management of patients with esophageal carcinoma remain crucial for prognosis within multimodal treatment procedures. This study aims to achieve a consensus regarding current management strategies in esophageal cancer by questioning a panel of experts from the German Advanced Surgical Treatment Study (GAST) group, comprised of 9 centers specialized in esophageal surgery, with a combined total of >220 esophagectomies per year.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Delphi method, a systematic and interactive, evidence-based approach, was used to obtain consensus statements from the GAST group regarding ambiguities and disparities in diagnosis, patient selection, surgical technique, and perioperative management of patients with esophageal carcinoma. After four rounds of surveys, agreement was measured by Likert scales and defined as full (100% agreement), near (≥66.6% agreement), or no consensus (<66.6% agreement).

RESULTS

Full or near consensus was obtained for essential aspects of esophageal cancer staging, proper surgical technique, perioperative management and indication for primary surgery, and neoadjuvant treatment or palliative treatment. No consensus was achieved regarding acceptability of minimally invasive technique and postoperative nutrition after esophagectomy.

CONCLUSION

The GAST consensus statement represents a position paper for treatment of patients with esophageal carcinoma which both contributes to the development of clinical treatment guidelines and outlines topics in need of further clinical studies.