Comparison of Esophagectomy outcomes between a National Center, a National Audit Collaborative, and an International database using the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) standardized definitions

Impact of pulmonary complications following esophagectomy on long-term survival: multivariate meta-analysis and restricted mean survival time assessment

Pulmonary complications (PC) are common after esophagectomy and their impact on long-term survival is not defined yet. The present study aimed to assess the effect of postoperative PCs on long-term survival after esophagectomy for cancer. Systematic review of the literature through February 1, 2023, was performed. The included studies evaluated the effect of PC on long-term survival. Primary outcome was long-term overall survival (OS). Cancer-specific survival (CSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were secondary outcomes. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. Eleven studies were included (3423 patients). Overall, 674 (19.7%) patients developed PC. The RMSTD analysis shows that at 60-month follow-up, patients not experiencing PC live an average of 8.5 (95% CI 6.2-10.8; p < 0.001) months longer compared with those with PC. Similarly, patients not experiencing postoperative PC seem to have significantly longer CSS (8 months; 95% CI 3.7-12.3; p < 0.001) and DFS (5.4 months; 95% CI 1.6-9.1; p = 0.005). The time-dependent HRs analysis shows a reduced mortality hazard in patients without PC at 12 (HR 0.6, 95% CI 0.51-0.69), 24 (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.55-0.73), 36 (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.55-0.79), and 60 months (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.51-0.89). This study suggests a moderate clinical impact of PC on long-term OS, CSS, and DFS after esophagectomy. Patients not experiencing PC seem to have a significantly reduced mortality hazard up to 5 years of follow-up.

A descriptive comparison of postoperative outcomes between hybrid mediastino-thoracoscopic approach and conventional thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the hybrid mediastino-thoracoscopic approach with that of the conventional thoracoscopic approach and to identify the advantages and disadvantages of the hybrid approach.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 172 patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer from July 2009 to June 2021, excluding salvage surgery. In the mediastinoscopic approach, the lymph nodes were dissected from a small incision in the left aspect of the neck to the aortic arch with supine double-lung ventilation. Thereafter, the middle-to-lower mediastinum and right superior mediastinum were dissected thoracoscopically in the prone position. The patients' demographics, surgical outcomes, postoperative complications, and postoperative recurrence patterns were compared between 51 patients in the hybrid approach and 121 patients in the conventional approach.

RESULTS

The hybrid group had more elderly patients (71 years vs. 67 years; P = 0.010), more cardiovascular disease (33.3% vs. 16.7%; P = 0.021), lower rates of preoperative chemotherapy (49.0% vs. 69.4%; P = 0.015), and shorter right lung collapse time (196 min vs. 264 min; P < 0.001). Postoperative hoarseness was not different between the two groups (31.4% vs. 27.3%; P = 0.584), and there was a significant difference in the sternal-vertebral distance at the level of the sternal notch (41 mm in the hybrid group vs. 48 mm in the conventional group; P = 0.029). The sternal-vertebral distance of less than 45 mm was an independent risk factor for postoperative hoarseness in the logistic analysis (odds ratio 3.636, 95% confidence interval 1.054-12.546; P = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

The hybrid mediastino-thoracoscopic approach could be safely adapted to elderly or cardiopulmonary diseased patients; however, short sternal-vertebral distance might be a risk factor of postoperative recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy.

The Implementation of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Treatment of Esophageal Cancer: A Step Toward Better Outcomes?

Esophagectomy is considered the cornerstone of the radical treatment of esophageal cancer. In the past decades, minimally invasive techniques including robot-assisted approaches have become popular. The aim of minimally invasive surgery is to reduce the surgical trauma, resulting in faster recovery, reduction in complications, and better quality of life after surgery. Secondly, a more precise dissection may lead to better oncological outcomes. As such, minimally invasive esophagectomy is now seen by many as the standard surgical approach. However, evidence supporting this viewpoint is limited. This narrative review summarizes recent prospectively designed studies on minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Prevalence, nature and trajectory of dysphagia postoesophageal cancer surgery: a prospective longitudinal study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Dysphagia is a common problem following oesophagectomy, and is associated with aspiration pneumonia, malnutrition, weight loss, prolonged enteral feeding tube dependence, in addition to an extended in-hospital stay and compromised quality of life (QOL). To date, the prevalence, nature and trajectory of post-oesophagectomy dysphagia has not been systematically studied in a prospective longitudinal design. The study aims (1) to evaluate the prevalence, nature and trajectory of dysphagia for participants undergoing an oesophagectomy as part of curative treatment, (2) to determine the risk factors for, and post-operative complications of dysphagia in this population and (3) to examine the impact of oropharyngeal dysphagia on health-related QOL across time points.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A videofluoroscopy will be completed and analysed on both post-operative day (POD) 4 or 5 and at 6-months post-surgery. Other swallow evaluations will be completed preoperatively, POD 4 or 5, 1-month and 6-month time points will include a swallowing screening test, tongue pressure measurement, cough reflex testing and an oral hygiene evaluation. Nutritional measurements will include the Functional Oral Intake Scale to measure feeding tube reliance, Malnutrition Screening Tool and the Strength, Assistance With Walking, Rise From a Chair, Climb Stairs and Falls questionnaire. The Reflux Symptom Index will be administered to investigate aerodigestive symptoms commonly experienced by adults post-oesophagectomy. Swallowing-related QOL outcome measures will be determined using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-18, MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory and the Swallowing Quality of Life Questionnaire.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been granted by the Tallaght University Hospital/St. James' Hospital Research Ethics Committee (JREC), Dublin, Ireland (Ref. No. 2021-Jul-310). The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national and international scientific conferences.

Advances in the curative management of oesophageal cancer

The incidence of oesophageal cancer, in particular adenocarcinoma, has markedly increased over the last four decades with adenocarcinoma becoming the dominant subtype in the West, and mortality rates are high. Nevertheless, overall survival of patients with oesophageal cancer has doubled in the past 20 years, with earlier diagnosis and improved treatments benefiting those patients who can be treated with curative intent. Advances in endotherapy, surgical approaches, and multimodal and other combination therapies have been reported. New vistas have emerged in targeted therapies and immunotherapy, informed by new knowledge in genomics and molecular biology, which present opportunities for personalised cancer therapy and novel clinical trials. This review focuses exclusively on the curative intent treatment pathway, and highlights emerging advances.

Surgical Therapy of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma-Current Standards and Future Perspectives

Simple Summary

Subtotal resection of the esophagus with resection of local lymph nodes is the oncological procedure of choice for advanced esophageal cancer. Reconstruction of the intestinal tract is predominantly performed with a gastric tube. Even in specialized centers, this surgical procedure is associated with a high complication but low mortality rate. Therefore, clinical research aims to develop peri- and intra-operative strategies to improve the patient related outcome.

Abstract

Transthoracic esophagectomy is currently the predominant curative treatment option for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma. The majority of carcinomas present as locally advanced tumors requiring multimodal strategies with either neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy alone. Minimally invasive, including robotic, techniques are increasingly applied with a broad spectrum of technical variations existing for the oncological resection as well as gastric reconstruction. At the present, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is the preferred technique of reconstruction (Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). With standardized surgical procedures, a complete resection of the primary tumor can be achieved in almost 95% of patients. Even in expert centers, postoperative morbidity remains high, with an overall complication rate of 50–60%, whereas 30- and 90-day mortality are reported to be <2% and <6%, respectively. Due to the complexity of transthoracic esophagetomy and its associated morbidity, esophageal surgery is recommended to be performed in specialized centers with an appropriate caseload yet to be defined. In order to reduce postoperative morbidity, the selection of patients, preoperative rehabilitation and postoperative fast-track concepts are feasible strategies of perioperative management. Future directives aim to further centralize esophageal services, to individualize surgical treatment for high-risk patients and to implement intraoperative imaging modalities modifying the oncological extent of resection and facilitating surgical reconstruction.

ERAS 2.0: Continued Refinement of an Established Enhanced Recovery Protocol for Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

We have previously demonstrated that implementing an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) improved outcomes after esophagectomy. We sought to examine if, after a decade of an established ERP, further improvements in postoperative outcomes could be made after continually optimizing and revising the pathway.

METHODS

Patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer from January 2019 to January 2020 were compared with our early-experience group within the initial ERP (June 2010-May 2011) and pre-ERP traditional care (June 2009-May 2010). The original ERP was initiated on June 2010 and underwent several revisions from 2014 to 2018, incorporating the following, amongst other elements: shorten the planned length of stay from 7 to 6 days, elimination of nasogastric tubes, use of soft closed-suction chest drains, and increased application of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Thirty-day outcomes (complications, length of stay, readmission) were compared for patients undergoing esophagectomy during the initial and most recent ERPs.

RESULTS

Overall, 175 patients were identified; 47 underwent esophagectomy before ERP implementation (traditional care), 59 patients underwent esophagectomy after implementation of the original ERP, and 69 patients underwent esophagectomy after the most recent ERP (ERP 2.0). The groups were similar with respect to age, sex, and diagnosis. There were three times more MIEs in the ERP 2.0 group with a shorter median length of stay (7 [6-9] vs. 8 [7-17] vs. 10 [9-17]; p < 0.001) without impacting postoperative morbidity or readmission rate.

CONCLUSION

Continued evaluation of institutional outcomes after esophagectomy should be performed to identify target areas for optimization and revision of established enhanced recovery protocols. ERPs are dynamic processes that can be further refined to yield greater improvements in outcomes.

Successful maintenance of process and outcomes for oesophageal cancer surgery in Ireland during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction

The emergence of the novel coronavirus Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the coronavirus disease COVID-19 has impacted enormously on non-COVID-19-related hospital care. Curtailment of intensive care unit (ICU) access threatens complex surgery, particularly impacting on outcomes for time-sensitive cancer surgery. Oesophageal cancer surgery is a good example. This study explored the impact of the pandemic on process and short-term surgical outcomes, comparing the first wave of the pandemic from April to June in 2020 with the same period in 2019.

Methods

Data from all four Irish oesophageal cancer centres were reviewed. All patients undergoing resection for oesophageal malignancy from 1 April to 30 June inclusive in 2020 and 2019 were included. Patient, disease, and peri-operative outcomes (including COVID-19 infection) were compared.

Results

In 2020, 45 patients underwent oesophagectomy, and 53 in the equivalent period in 2019. There were no differences in patient demographics, co-morbidities, or use of neoadjuvant therapy. The median time to surgery from neoadjuvant therapy was 8 weeks in both 2020 and 2019. There were no significant differences in operative interventions between the two time periods. There was no difference in operative morbidity in 2020 and 2019 (28% vs 40%, p = 0.28). There was no in-hospital mortality in either period. No patient contracted COVID-19 in the perioperative period.

Conclusions

Continuing surgical resection for oesophageal cancer was feasible and safe during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. The national response to this threat was therefore successful by these criteria in the curative management of oesophageal cancer.

Embolization or disruption of thoracic duct and cisterna chyli leaks post oesophageal cancer surgery should be first line management for ECCG-defined type III chyle fistulae

Chyle leakage from the thoracic duct or cisterna chyli is a relatively rare complication of oesophageal cancer surgery. The majority of cases settle with conservative measures, but high volume leaks may be refractory and result in significant morbidity and require intervention with reoperation or embolization. In the experience of this high-volume centre over the last decade, 3 (0.5%) patients required reoperation and ligation of the thoracic duct; for the so-called type III leaks, interventional radiological approaches were not considered. This article is built around two recent cases, where interventional radiology to embolize and disrupt complex fistulae was successfully performed. The lessons from this experience will change practice at this centre to initial lymphangiography with a view to embolization or disruption of thoracic duct and cisterna chyli leaks as first line therapy for type III chyle leaks, with surgery reserved for where this fails.