Laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients with high-risk post-operative complications

Combined and intraoperative risk modelling for oesophagectomy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal cancer is the eighth most common malignancy worldwide and is associated with a poor prognosis. Oesophagectomy remains the best prospect for a cure if diagnosed in the early disease stages. However, the procedure is associated with significant morbidity and mortality and is undertaken only after careful consideration. Appropriate patient selection, counselling and resource allocation is essential. Numerous risk models have been devised to guide surgeons in making these decisions.

AIM

To evaluate which multivariate risk models, using intraoperative information with or without preoperative information, best predict perioperative oesophagectomy outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases was undertaken from 2000-2020. The search terms used were [(Oesophagectomy) AND (Model OR Predict OR Risk OR score) AND (Mortality OR morbidity OR complications OR outcomes OR anastomotic leak OR length of stay)]. Articles were included if they assessed multivariate based tools incorporating preoperative and intraoperative variables to forecast patient outcomes after oesophagectomy. Articles were excluded if they only required preoperative or any post-operative data. Studies appraising univariate risk predictors such as preoperative sarcopenia, cardiopulmonary fitness and American Society of Anesthesiologists score were also excluded. The review was conducted following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses model. All captured risk models were appraised for clinical credibility, methodological quality, performance, validation and clinical effectiveness.

RESULTS

Twenty published studies were identified which examined eleven multivariate risk models. Eight of these combined preoperative and intraoperative data and the remaining three used only intraoperative values. Only two risk models were identified as promising in predicting mortality, namely the Portsmouth physiological and operative severity score for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity (POSSUM) and POSSUM scores. A further two studies, the intraoperative factors and Esophagectomy surgical Apgar score based nomograms, adequately forecasted major morbidity. The latter two models are yet to have external validation and none have been tested for clinical effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Despite the presence of some promising models in forecasting perioperative oesophagectomy outcomes, there is more research required to externally validate these models and demonstrate clinical benefit with the adoption of these models guiding postoperative care and allocating resources.

Laparoscopic-assisted transhiatal oesophagectomy: An experience from a tertiary care centre over 10 years

Background

Minimally invasive surgeries have become the standard of care in oesophageal surgeries, but the transhiatal approach is still not widely in practice. As in the open surgical approach, laparoscopic transhiatal oesophagectomy has been accepted by many centres worldwide. The laparoscopic-assisted transhiatal oesophagectomy (LATE) has become a time-tested surgery. Many centres across the world have shown its feasibility and superiority regarding the lymph node yield with less morbidity with the added advantage of laparoscopy. We are pleased to share our 10-year experience with LATE and the long-term follow-up.

Materials and Methods

Retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained data from our tertiary care centre from January 2010 to January 2021. Forty-six out of 74 patients with carcinoma of the lower end of the oesophagus who underwent LATE were analysed retrospectively.

Results

Our study group included 46 patients. Six patients who required conversion to open surgery and those who underwent different procedures were excluded. The mean operative time was 220 (140-360) min. The mean blood loss was 230 (100-500) ml. Four (8.69%) patients had neck leaks. Twelve (26.08%) patients had minor pulmonary complications and one (2.17%) patient had a major pulmonary complication in the form of acute respiratory distress syndrome. The median hospital stay was 10.5 (8-28) days and 90-day mortality was 2.17%. 45 (97.82%) patients had an R0 resection rate with a median lymph node yield of 21 (16-28). The median overall survival was 44 months, with a 3 years disease-free survival rate of 63.04% and a 5-year overall survival rate of 36.50%.

Conclusion

LATE is feasible and safe for adenocarcinoma of lower third esophagus and GEJ (gastroesophageal junction). The laparoscopic magnified view of lower mediastinum provides a better vision for lymphadenectomy especially in the neoadjuvant group. It has all the added benefits of minimal invasive surgery with acceptable short and long term oncological results.

Tocilizumab in SARS-COVID19 following postoperative laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy for the adenocarcinoma of esophagogastric tumor: A case report

Introduction and importance

Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is one of the most challenging surgical procedures, with high rates of morbidity, especially from respiratory complications. SARS-COVID19 represents a health threat nowadays. Peri-operative SARS-COVID19 infection after esophagectomy might negatively affect the postoperative outcomes. The use of tocilizumab as an alternative to reduce the inflammatory response in SARS-COVID19 is an option that has not been described in the literature after esophagectomy.

Case presentation

A SARS-COVID19-vaccinated (CORONAVAC) 73-year-old man with pulmonary emphysema, coronary artery disease, previous asymptomatic pulmonary embolism, and adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction tumor was submitted to laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy (ypT2N0M0) after perioperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy. He was also infected with SARS-COVID19, confirmed by PCR test at the 14th postoperative day. During follow-up, mild hypoxemia persisted without evidence of infection except for SARS-COVID19, and a high-flow cannula was required to maintain oxygenation. Tocilizumab was administered following high parameters of a high-flow cannula, and invasive mechanical ventilation was avoided.

Discussion

Besides of the risk of secondary infection, after administration of tocilizumab, the parameters of oxygen supplementation were systematically reduced, and he stayed in the ICU for seven days. He was discharged from the ward six days later. He developed late cervical anastomotic leakage, which was treated with conservative therapy.

Conclusion

Although the patient had high-risk comorbidities, esophagectomy, and SARS-COVID19 infection, the use of tocilizumab was safe and improved the pulmonary recovery.

•

Esophagectomy has been considered high morbidity surgery in pandemic COVID-19

•

SARS-COVID-19 after esophagectomy could be fatal

•

Tocilizumab for SARS COVID19 might be useful avoiding invasive ventilation