Rates of Anastomotic Complications and Their Management Following Esophagectomy: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA)

Multicenter study on the incidence and treatment of mediastinal leaks after esophagectomy (MuMeLe 2)

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.

Prediction of Anastomotic Leakage in Esophageal Cancer Surgery: A Multimodal Machine Learning Model Integrating Imaging and Clinical Data

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Surgery in combination with chemo/radiotherapy is the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. Even after the introduction of minimally invasive techniques, esophagectomy carries significant morbidity and mortality. One of the most common and feared complications of esophagectomy is anastomotic leakage (AL). Our work aimed to develop a multimodal machine-learning model combining CT-derived and clinical data for predicting AL following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A total of 471 patients were prospectively included (Jan 2010-Dec 2022). Preoperative computed tomography (CT) was used to evaluate celia trunk stenosis and vessel calcification. Clinical variables, including demographics, disease stage, operation details, postoperative CRP, and stage, were combined with CT data to build a model for AL prediction. Data was split into 80%:20% for training and testing, and an XGBoost model was developed with 10-fold cross-validation and early stopping. ROC curves and respective areas under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and F1-scores were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients (24.8%) exhibited post-operative AL. The XGboost model achieved an AUC of 79.2% (95%CI 69%-89.4%) with a specificity of 77.46%, a sensitivity of 65.22%, PPV of 48.39%, NPV of 87.3%, and F1-score of 56%. Shapley Additive exPlanation analysis showed the effect of individual variables on the result of the model. Decision curve analysis showed that the model was particularly beneficial for threshold probabilities between 15% and 48%.

CONCLUSION

A clinically relevant multimodal model can predict AL, which is especially valuable in cases with low clinical probability of AL.

Predictors of anastomotic leak and conduit necrosis after oesophagectomy: Results from the oesophago-gastric anastomosis audit (OGAA)

BACKGROUND

Both anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) after oesophagectomy are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the identification of preoperative, modifiable risk factors is desirable. The aim of this study was to generate a risk scoring model for AL and CN after oesophagectomy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing curative resection for oesophageal cancer were identified from the international Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) from April 2018-December 2018. Definitions for AL and CN were those set out by the Oesophageal Complications Consensus Group. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for both AL and CN. A risk score was then produced for both AL and CN using the derivation set, then internally validated using the validation set.

RESULTS

This study included 2247 oesophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. The AL rate was 14.2% and CN rate was 2.7%. Preoperative factors that were independent predictors of AL were cardiovascular comorbidity and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The risk scoring model showed insufficient predictive ability in internal validation (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.618). Preoperative factors that were independent predictors of CN were: body mass index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, previous myocardial infarction and smoking history. These were converted into a risk-scoring model and internally validated using the validation set with an AUROC of 0.775.

CONCLUSION

Despite a large dataset, AL proves difficult to predict using preoperative factors. The risk-scoring model for CN provides an internally validated tool to estimate a patient's risk preoperatively.

Systemic Inflammatory Response and the Noble and Underwood (NUn) Score as Early Predictors of Anastomotic Leakage after Esophageal Reconstructive Surgery

Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains the main cause of post-esophagectomy morbidity and mortality. Early detection can avoid sepsis and reduce morbidity and mortality. This study evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of the Nun score and its components as early detectors of AL. This single-center observational cohort study included all esophagectomies from 2010 to 2020. C-reactive protein (CRP), albumin (Alb), and white cell count (WCC) were analyzed and NUn scores were calculated. The area under the curve statistic (AUC) was used to assess their predictive accuracy. A total of 74 of the 668 patients (11%) developed an AL. CRP and the NUn-score proved to be good diagnostic accuracy tests on postoperative day (POD) 2 (CRP AUC: 0.859; NUn score AUC: 0.869) and POD 4 (CRP AUC: 0.924; NUn score AUC: 0.948). A 182 mg/L CRP cut-off on POD 4 yielded a 87% sensitivity, 88% specificity, a negative predictive value (NPV) of 98%, and a positive predictive value (PPV) of 47.7%. A NUn score cut-off > 10 resulted in 92% sensitivity, 95% specificity, 99% NPV, and 68% PPV. Albumin and WCC have limited value in the detection of post-esophagectomy AL. Elevated CRP and a high NUn score on POD 4 provide high accuracy in predicting AL after esophageal cancer surgery. Their high negative predictive value allows to select patients who can safely proceed with enhanced recovery protocols.

Understanding Post-Esophagectomy Complications and Their Management: The Early Complications

Esophagectomy is a technically complex operation performed for both benign and malignant esophageal disease. Medical and surgical advancements have led to improved outcomes in esophagectomy patients over the past several decades; however, surgeons must remain vigilant as complications happen often and can be severe. Post-esophagectomy complications can be grouped into early and late categories. The aim of this review is to discuss the early complications of esophagectomy along with their risk factors, work-up, and management strategies with special attention given to anastomotic leaks.

Impact of perioperative decreased serum albumin level on anastomotic leakage in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a severe complication following esophagectomy with high mortality. Perioperative decreased serum albumin level is considered a predictive of AL, however, its impact on AL incidence in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is not well defined.

METHODS

The data of 318 consecutive esophageal cancer patients who underwent MIE were collected retrospectively from January 2021 to December 2021. The perioperative level of albumin was detected and the baseline of altering levels for albumin was established. The incidence of postoperative complications and survival rate were analyzed between groups.

RESULTS

After exclusion, 137 patients were enrolled and assigned to more decreased albumin (MA) and less decreased albumin (LA) groups. The levels of albumin descended significantly after MIE (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the clinicopathologic characteristics or surgical outcomes between groups. The incidence of postoperative AL was 10.2% in MA group and 1.4% in LA group (p = 0.033). Three patients died due to AL in MA group, while no mortality was observed in LA group (p = 0.120). The rate of other postoperative complications was similar between groups. Progression-free survival (PFS) in LA group was a little higher than that in MA group, but it was no significant difference (p = 0.853). Similarly, no difference was observed in overall survival (OS) between groups (p = 0.277).

CONCLUSIONS

Severely deficient serum albumin after MIE was an indicator of AL in esophageal cancer patients treated with NCT.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese clinical trial registry: ChiCTR2200066694, registered December14th,2022. https://www.chictr.org.cn/edit.aspx?pid=185067&htm=4 .

Epidemiology of Postoperative Complications After Esophagectomy: Implications for Management

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in operative techniques and postoperative care, esophagectomy remains a morbid operation. Leveraging complication epidemiology and the correlation of these complications may improve rescue and refine early recovery pathways.

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed all esophagectomies performed at a tertiary academic center from 2014 to 2021 and quantified the timing of the most common complications. Daily incidence values for index complications were calculated, and a covariance matrix was created to examine the correlation of the complications with each other. Study investigators performed a Cox proportional hazards analysis to clarify the association between early diagnosis of postoperative atrial fibrillation and pneumonia with subsequent anastomotic leak.

RESULTS

The study analyzed 621 esophagectomies, with 580 (93.4%) cervical anastomoses and 474 (76%) patients experiencing complications. A total of 159 (25.6%) patients had postoperative atrial fibrillation, and 155 (25.0%) had an anastomotic leak. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) postoperative day of these complications was day 2 (IQR, days 2-3) and day 8 (IQR, days 7-11), respectively. Our covariance matrix found significant associations in the variance of the most common postoperative complications, including pneumonia, atrial fibrillation, anastomotic leak, and readmissions. Early postoperative atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio, 8.1; 95% CI, 5.65-11.65) and postoperative pneumonia (hazard ratio, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.98-7.38) were associated with anastomotic leak.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintaining a high index of suspicion for early postoperative complications is crucial for rescuing patients after esophagectomy. Early postoperative pneumonia and atrial fibrillation may be sentinel complications for an anastomotic leak, and their occurrence may be used to prompt further clinical investigation. Early recovery protocols should consider the development of early complications into postoperative feeding and imaging algorithms.

Performance of a consensus-based algorithm for diagnosing anastomotic leak after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common and severe complication after esophagectomy. This study aimed to assess the performance of a consensus-based algorithm for diagnosing AL after minimally invasive esophagectomy. This study used data of the ICAN trial, a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing cervical and intrathoracic anastomosis, in which a predefined diagnostic algorithm was used to guide diagnosing AL. The algorithm identified patients suspected of AL based on clinical signs, blood C-reactive protein (cut-off value 200 mg/L), and/or drain amylase (cut-off value 200 IU/L). Suspicion of AL prompted evaluation with contrast swallow computed tomography and/or endoscopy to confirm AL. Primary outcome measure was algorithm performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV), respectively. AL was defined according to the definition of the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group. 245 patients were included, and 125 (51%) patients were suspected of AL. The algorithm had a sensitivity of 62% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 46-75), a specificity of 97% (95% CI: 89-100), and a PPV and NPV of 94% (95% CI: 79-99) and 77% (95% CI: 66-86), respectively, on initial assessment. Repeated assessment in 19 patients with persisting suspicion of AL despite negative or inconclusive initial assessment had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 77-100). The algorithm showed poor performance because the low sensitivity indicates the inability of the algorithm to confirm AL on initial assessment. Repeated assessment using the algorithm was needed to confirm remaining leaks.

Impact of the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Treatment Pathways and Outcomes of Esophagogastric Cancer: A Pre- Versus Post-Pandemic Comparison of International Prospective Cohort Data

Introduction:

This study aimed to characterize the outcomes of esophagogastric (OG) cancer patients and compare perioperative outcomes with pre-pandemic data.

Methods:

Three international prospective cohort studies were included in this analysis. First, COVIDSurg-Cancer (n = 1999) included patients with an OG cancer planned for surgery from the start of the pandemic up to 14th April 2020 with follow-up until 31st August 2020. Treatment pathways and outcomes were compared against patients undergoing treatment for OG cancers before the pandemic, Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA, n = 2246) and GlobalSurg 3 (n = 1256) study. The surgical composite outcome was defined as in patients achieving margin negative resection, resectability and no postoperative mortality.

Results:

This study included 1999 patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, of which 32.4% had a change from standard pre-pandemic management. Patients with delay to surgery had significantly higher rates of no surgery (24.7%vs 7.5%, P  < .001) and less likely to have achieve a composite outcome (57.8%vs 73.4%, P  < .001) than those without any delay in surgery. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (3.5% vs 3.4%; OR: 0.98, CI95%: 0.69-1.37) or anastomotic leak rate (10.9% vs 10.2%%; OR: 1.11, CI95%: 0.90-1.37) but higher reoperation rates (13.6% vs 10.4%; OR: 1.59, CI95%: 1.30-1.92) in patients between pre-pandemic and pandemic cohorts.

Conclusion:

The pandemic appears to have led to widespread changes in management pathways affecting one-third of patients. Developing elective surgical pathways resilient to periods of system “stress” are key to minimizing future harm from treatment delay for OG cancer patients.

Treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: large, collaborative, observational TENTACLE cohort study

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.

Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: Unravelling differences in failure to rescue

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.

Preemptive endoluminal vacuum therapy with the VACStent—A pilot study to reduce anastomotic leakage after Ivor Lewis hybrid esophagectomy

Introduction

Endoscopic treatment by vacuum therapy (EVT) or covered stents has emerged as an improved treatment option for upper gastrointestinal wall defects and is regarded as an improved treatment option for anastomotic leakage (AL) after esophagectomy. However, endoluminal EVT devices may lead to obstruction of the GI tract; and a high rate of migration and missing functional drainage has been shown for covered stents. The recently developed VACStent, a combination of a fully covered stent within a polyurethane sponge cylinder may overcome these issues allowing EVT while stent passage is still open. Initial clinical applications have demonstrated efficacy, practicability and safety in the treatment of esophageal leaks (AL).

Methods

In this pilot study, 9 patients with high-risk anastomosis after neoadjuvant therapy undergoing hybrid esophagectomy received the VACStent in a preemptive setting for the assessment of the reduction of the AL rate, postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Results

Technical success of the application of the VACStent® was achieved in all interventions. One patient experienced anastomotic leakage 10 days after esophagectomy and was successfully treated with two consecutive VACStents and a VAC Sponge. In summary, mortality in-hospital was 0% and anastomotic healing was uneventful without septic episodes. No severe device-related adverse events (SADE) nor significant local bleeding or erosion could be observed. Oral intake of liquids or food was documented in all patients. The device handling was regarded uncomplicated.

Discussion

The preemptive application of the VACStent offers a promising new option for improved clinical treatment avoiding of critical situations in hybrid esophagectomy, which should be validated in a large clinical study.

Indocyanine green fluorescence in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis: a prospective study

Indocyanine green fluorescence angiography (ICG-FA) allows for real-time intraoperative assessment of the perfusion of the gastric conduit during esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of the implementation of ICG-FA during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with an intrathoracic anastomosis. In this prospective cohort study, a standardized protocol for ICG-FA was implemented in a high-volume center in December 2018. All consecutive patients who underwent RAMIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis were included. The primary outcome was whether the initial chosen site for the anastomosis on the gastric conduit was changed based on ICG-FA findings. In addition, ICG-FA was quantified based on the procedural videos. Out of the 63 included patients, the planned location of the anastomosis was changed in 9 (14%) patients, based on ICG-FA. The median time to maximum intensity at the base of the gastric conduit was shorter (25 s; range 13-49) compared to tip (34 s; range 12-83). In patients with anastomotic leakage, the median time to reach the FImax at the tip was 56 s (range 30-83) compared to 34 s (range 12-66) in patients without anastomotic leakage (p = 0.320). The use of ICG-FA resulted in an adaptation of the anastomotic site in nine (14%) patients during RAMIE with intrathoracic anastomosis. The quantification of ICG-FA showed that the gastric conduit reaches it maximum intensity in a base-to-tip direction. Perfusion of the entire gastric conduit was worse for patients with anastomotic leakage, although not statistically different.

Treatment of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: insights of an international case vignette survey and expert discussions

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a severe complication after esophagectomy. Clinical presentation of AL is diverse and there is large practice variation regarding treatment of AL. This study aimed to explore different AL treatment strategies and their underlying rationale. This mixed-methods study consisted of an international survey among upper gastro-intestinal (GI) surgeons and focus groups with expert upper GI surgeons. The survey included 10 case vignettes and data sources were integrated after separate analysis. The survey was completed by 188 respondents (completion rate 69%) and 6 focus groups were conducted with 20 international experts. Prevention of mortality was the most important goal of primary treatment. Goals of secondary treatment were to promote tissue healing, return to oral feeding and safe hospital discharge. There was substantial variation in the preferred treatment principles (e.g. drainage or defect closure) and modalities (e.g. stent or endoVAC) within different presentations of AL. Patients with local symptoms were treated by supportive means only or by non-surgical drainage and/or defect closure. Drainage was routinely performed in patients with intrathoracic collections and often combined with defect closure. Patients with conduit necrosis were predominantly treated by resection and reconstruction of the anastomosis or by esophageal diversion. This mixed-methods study shows that overall treatment strategies for AL are determined by vitality of the conduit and presence of intrathoracic collections. There is large variation in preferred treatment principles and modalities. Future research may investigate optimal treatment for specific AL presentations and aim to develop consensus-based treatment guidelines for AL after esophagectomy.

Definitive chemoradiotherapy versus neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by radical surgery for locally advanced oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The literature lacks robust evidence comparing definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery (nCRS) for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This study aimed to compare long-term survival of these approaches in patients with ESCC.

METHODS

A systematic review performed according to PRISMA guidelines included studies identified from PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases up to July 2021 comparing outcomes between dCRT and nCRS for ESCC. The main outcome measure was overall survival (OS), secondary outcome was disease-free survival (DFS). A meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects modelling to determine pooled adjusted multivariable hazard ratios (HRs).

RESULTS

Ten studies including 14 092 patients were included, of which 30 per cent received nCRS. Three studies were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and the remainder were retrospective cohort studies. dCRT and nCRS regimens were reported in six studies and surgical quality control was reported in two studies. Outcomes for OS and DFS were reported in eight and three studies respectively. Following meta-analysis, nCRS demonstrated significantly longer OS (HR 0.68, 95 per cent c.i. 0.54 to 0.87, P < 0.001) and DFS (HR 0.50, 95 per cent c.i. 0.36 to 0.70, P < 0.001) compared with dCRT.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy correlated with improved survival compared with definitive chemoradiation in the treatment of ESCC; however, there is a lack of literature on RCTs.

Predicting mortality in patients with anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: development of a prediction model using data from the TENTACLE-Esophagus study

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after esophagectomy, and over 10% of patients with AL suffer mortality. Different prognostic factors in patients with AL are known, but a tool to predict mortality after AL is lacking. This study aimed to develop a prediction model for postoperative mortality in patients with AL after esophagectomy. TENTACLE-Esophagus is an international retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. The primary outcome was 90-day postoperative mortality. Previously identified prognostic factors for mortality were selected as predictors: patient-related (e.g. comorbidity, performance status) and leak-related predictors (e.g. leucocyte count, overall gastric conduit condition). The prediction model was developed using multivariable logistic regression and validated internally using bootstrapping. Among the 1509 patients with AL, 90-day mortality was 11.7%. Sixteen predictors were included in the prediction model. The model showed good performance after internal validation: the c-index was 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.75-0.83). Predictions for mortality by the internally validated model aligned well with observed 90-day mortality rates. The prediction model was incorporated in an online tool for individual use and can be found at: https://www.tentaclestudy.com/prediction-model. The developed prediction model combines patient-related and leak-related factors to accurately predict postoperative mortality in patients with AL after esophagectomy. The model is useful for clinicians during counselling of patients and their families and may aid identification of high-risk patients at diagnosis of AL. In the future, the tool may guide clinical decision-making; however, external validation of the tool is warranted.

The influence of anastomotic techniques on postoperative anastomotic complications: Results of the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit

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.

Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak in patients after oesophagectomy: the SEAL score

Background

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after oesophagectomy. It is unknown how to determine the severity of AL objectively at diagnosis. Determining leak severity may guide treatment decisions and improve future research. This study aimed to identify leak-related prognostic factors for mortality, and to develop a Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score.

Methods

This international, retrospective cohort study in 71 centres worldwide included patients with AL after oesophagectomy between 2011 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Leak-related prognostic factors were identified after adjusting for confounders and were included in multivariable logistic regression to develop the SEAL score. Four classes of leak severity (mild, moderate, severe, and critical) were defined based on the risk of 90-day mortality, and the score was validated internally.

Results

Some 1509 patients with AL were included and the 90-day mortality rate was 11.7 per cent. Twelve leak-related prognostic factors were included in the SEAL score. The score showed good calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 0.81). Higher classes of leak severity graded by the SEAL score were associated with a significant increase in duration of ICU stay, healing time, Comprehensive Complication Index score, and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group classification.

Conclusion

The SEAL score grades leak severity into four classes by combining 12 leak-related predictors and can be used to the assess severity of AL after oesophagectomy.

Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak in patients after oesophagectomy: the SEAL score

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after oesophagectomy. It is unknown how to determine the severity of AL objectively at diagnosis. Determining leak severity may guide treatment decisions and improve future research. This study aimed to identify leak-related prognostic factors for mortality, and to develop a Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score.

METHODS

This international, retrospective cohort study in 71 centres worldwide included patients with AL after oesophagectomy between 2011 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Leak-related prognostic factors were identified after adjusting for confounders and were included in multivariable logistic regression to develop the SEAL score. Four classes of leak severity (mild, moderate, severe, and critical) were defined based on the risk of 90-day mortality, and the score was validated internally.

RESULTS

Some 1509 patients with AL were included and the 90-day mortality rate was 11.7 per cent. Twelve leak-related prognostic factors were included in the SEAL score. The score showed good calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 0.81). Higher classes of leak severity graded by the SEAL score were associated with a significant increase in duration of ICU stay, healing time, Comprehensive Complication Index score, and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group classification.

CONCLUSION

The SEAL score grades leak severity into four classes by combining 12 leak-related predictors and can be used to the assess severity of AL after oesophagectomy.

Is Prophylactic Cervical Drainage Effective in Patients Undergoing McKeown Esophagectomy Reconstructed Through the Retrosternal Route with Two-Field Lymphadenectomy?

BACKGROUND

McKeown esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy is the treatment of choice for oncologic esophagectomy. A cervical drain is placed in cases after modern two-field lymph node dissection (M2FD) to provide information on anastomotic leakage. However, the necessity of prophylactic cervical drainage during surgery remains unknown. This study aimed to clarify the clinical significance of cervical drainage in patients who underwent McKeown esophagectomy with M2FD.

METHODS

A total of 293 patients underwent McKeown surgery with two-field lymphadenectomy at our institute between January 2013 and December 2019. We compared the day of drain removal, amount of drainage volume, and the appearance of drainage fluid between patients with and without anastomotic leakage.

RESULTS

McKeown esophagectomy reconstructed through the retrosternal route is 203 patients (69.3%) of all. Nineteen patients (6.5%) experienced anastomotic leakage. The amount of cervical drain discharge was comparable between patients with and without anastomotic leakage. In addition, no purulent or salivary discharge was observed in patients with anastomotic leakage. There was no difference in the median day of drain removal between the groups. The initial clinical findings for the diagnosis of anastomotic leakage were surgical site infection in 10 (52.6%), fever in 5 (26.3%), prolonged inflammation in a blood test in 3 (15.8%), and bloody discharge from the chest tube in 1 (5.3%). There was no mortality due to any cause.

CONCLUSION

A prophylactic cervical drain may not be mandatory in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing McKeown esophagectomy reconstructed through the retrosternal route with two-field lymphadenectomy.

Completely minimally invasive versus hybrid Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy for oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junctional cancer: a UK multi-centre comparative study

BACKGROUND

Limited robust evidence exists comparing outcomes following completely minimally invasive oesophagectomy (CMIO) to hybrid oesophagectomy (HO) in the treatment of resectable oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junctional (GOJ) cancer. This multi-centre study aims to assess postoperative morbidity between HO and CMIO according to the full Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) complication platform.

METHODS

All consecutive patients undergoing an Ivor-Lewis HO or Ivor-Lewis CMIO for cancer between 2016 and 2018 in three UK tertiary centres were included. The primary study outcome was 30-day overall complications, evaluated by the ECCG complication subgroups. Secondary outcomes included survival outcomes and perioperative parameters between the two approaches.

RESULTS

Of the 382 patients included, 228 (59.7%) patients had HOs and 154 (40.3%) patients had CMIOs with no inter-group baseline differences. Patients undergoing CMIO experienced less 30-day postoperative complications compared to those under undergoing HO (43.5% vs 57.0%, p = 0.010). ECCG defined pulmonary and infective complications were less frequent in the CMIO group. Anastomotic leak rates and oncological outcomes were similar between the two groups. Independent predictors of 30-day postoperative complications include surgical approach with HO and high ASA grade on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Ivor-Lewis CMIO demonstrates superior short-term surgical outcomes when compared to Ivor-Lewis HO with no compromise in oncological feasibility. Anastomotic leak rates were equivalent between both groups. A robust randomised controlled trial is required to validate the findings of this study.

Postoperative outcomes in oesophagectomy with trainee involvement

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.