Enhanced recovery pathways lead to an improvement in postoperative outcomes following esophagectomy: systematic review and pooled analysis

Risk factors for readmission following esophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer

INTRODUCTION

Hospital readmission after surgery is a key quality indicator. This nationwide cohort study aimed to assess readmission rates following esophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer and identify associated risk factors.

METHODS

Data were extracted from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA) for patients with esophagogastric cancer who underwent esophagectomy or gastrectomy with curative intent between January 2011 and June 2016. Logistic regression analysis identified risk factors for 30-day readmission.

RESULTS

In total, 5566 patients were included. Readmission within 30 days occurred in 483 of 3488 (13.8%) patients after esophagectomy and 243 of 2078 patients (11.7%) after gastrectomy. Both minor (Clavien Dindo 1-2) and major (Clavien Dindo ≥3) postoperative complications were independent predictors of readmission after esophagectomy (OR 2.99; 95%CI 2.23-4.02; p < 0.001 and OR 5.20; 95%CI 3.82-7.09; p < 0.001). Specific complications included pulmonary (OR 1.49; 95%CI 1.20-1.85; p < 0.001), gastrointestinal (OR 2.43; 95%CI 1.94-3.05; p < 0.001), and infectious (OR 2.27; 95%CI 1.60-3.22; p < 0.001). Prolonged length of stay (pLOS) was associated with higher readmission rates in patients without complications following esophagectomy (OR 1.91 95% CI 1.19-3.07; p = 0.008), but lower rates in those with complications (OR 0.65 95% CI 0.51-0.83; p < 0.001). For gastrectomy, postoperative complications were also linked to readmission (OR 3.18; 95%CI 2.30-4.40; p < 0.001), particularly gastrointestinal (OR 2.16; 95%CI 1.40-3.32; p < 0.001), and infectious (OR 3.80; 95%CI 2.53-5.71; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Readmission after esophagogastric resection is common, particularly among patients with both minor and major postoperative complications. Prolonged stay after esophagectomy impacts readmission risk differently based on the presence of complications.

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.

The Current State of Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE): Outcomes from the Upper GI International Robotic Association (UGIRA) Esophageal Registry

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is increasingly adopted in centers worldwide, with ongoing refinements to enhance results. This study aims to assess the current state of RAMIE worldwide and to identify potential areas for improvement.

METHODS

This descriptive study analyzed prospective data from esophageal cancer patients who underwent transthoracic RAMIE in Upper GI International Robotic Association (UGIRA) centers. Main endpoints included textbook outcome rate, surgical techniques, and perioperative outcomes. Analyses were performed separately for intrathoracic (Ivor-Lewis) and cervical anastomosis (McKeown), divided into three time cohorts (2016-2018, 2019-2020, 2021-2023). A sensitivity analysis was conducted with cases after the learning curve (> 70 cases).

RESULTS

Across 28 UGIRA centers, 2012 Ivor-Lewis and 1180 McKeown procedures were performed. Over the time cohorts, textbook outcome rates were 39%, 48%, and 49% for Ivor-Lewis, and 49%, 63%, and 61% for McKeown procedures, respectively. Fully robotic procedures accounted for 66%, 51%, and 60% of Ivor-Lewis procedures, and 53%, 81%, and 66% of McKeown procedures. Lymph node yield showed 27, 30, and 30 nodes in Ivor-Lewis procedures, and 26, 26, and 34 nodes in McKeown procedures. Furthermore, high mediastinal lymphadenectomy was performed in 65%, 43%, and 37%, and 70%, 48%, and 64% of Ivor-Lewis and McKeown procedures, respectively. Anastomotic leakage rates were 22%, 22%, and 16% in Ivor-Lewis cases, and 14%, 12%, and 11% in McKeown cases. Hospital stay was 13, 14, and 13 days for Ivor-Lewis procedures, and 12, 9, and 11 days for McKeown procedures. In Ivor-Lewis and McKeown, respectively, the sensitivity analysis revealed textbook outcome rates of 43%, 54%, and 51%, and 47%, 64%, and 64%; anastomotic leakage rates of 28%, 18%, and 15%, and 13%, 11%, and 10%; and hospital stay of 11, 12, and 12 days, and 10, 9, and 9 days.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates favorable outcomes over time in achieving textbook outcome after RAMIE. Areas for improvement include a reduction of anastomotic leakage and shortening of hospital stay.

Clinical predictors of postoperative complications in the context of enhanced recovery (ERAS) in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer

The overall frequency of postoperative complications in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer diverges between studies. We evaluated the frequency and assessed the relationship between complications and demographic and clinical features. For this observational study, data were extracted from the ERAS Registry managed by the University of Verona, Italy. Patients were evaluated and compared for postoperative complications according to the consensus-based classification and the Clavien-Dindo scale. The study population was 877 patients: 346 (39.5%) with esophageal and 531 (60.5%) with gastric cancer; 492 (56.2%) reported one or more postoperative complications, 213 (61.6%) of those with esophageal and 279 (52.5%) of those with gastric cancer. When stratified by consensus-based classification, patients with esophageal cancer reported general postoperative complications more frequently (p < 0.001) than those with gastric cancer, but there was no difference in postoperative surgical complications between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression models revealed an association between postoperative complications and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.36), operation time (adjusted OR, 1.08; 95% CI 1.00-1.15), and days to solid diet intake (adjusted OR, 1.39; 95% CI 1.20-1.59). Complications in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer are frequent, even in those treated according to ERAS principles, and are often associated with comorbidities, longer operative time, and longer time to solid diet intake.

Surgical Techniques and Related Perioperative Outcomes After Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy (RAMIG): Results From the Prospective Multicenter International Ugira Gastric Registry

OBJECTIVE

To gain insight into the global practice of robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) and evaluate perioperative outcomes using an international registry.

BACKGROUND

The techniques and perioperative outcomes of RAMIG for gastric cancer vary substantially in the literature.

METHODS

Prospectively registered RAMIG cases for gastric cancer (≥10 per center) were extracted from 25 centers in Europe, Asia, and South-America. Techniques for resection, reconstruction, anastomosis, and lymphadenectomy were analyzed and related to perioperative surgical and oncological outcomes. Complications were uniformly defined by the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group.

RESULTS

Between 2020 and 2023, 759 patients underwent total (n=272), distal (n=465), or proximal (n=22) gastrectomy (RAMIG). After total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y-reconstruction, anastomotic leakage rates were 8% with hand-sewn (n=9/111) and 6% with linear stapled anastomoses (n=6/100). After distal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y (67%) or Billroth-II-reconstruction (31%), anastomotic leakage rates were 3% with linear stapled (n=11/433) and 0% with hand-sewn anastomoses (n=0/26). Extent of lymphadenectomy consisted of D1+ (28%), D2 (59%), or D2+ (12%). Median nodal harvest yielded 31 nodes (interquartile range: 21-47) after total and 34 nodes (interquartile range: 24-47) after distal gastrectomy. R0 resection rates were 93% after total and 96% distal gastrectomy. The hospital stay was 9 days after total and distal gastrectomy, and was median 3 days shorter without perianastomotic drains versus routine drain placement. Postoperative 30-day mortality was 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

This large multicenter study provided a worldwide overview of current RAMIG techniques and their respective perioperative outcomes. These outcomes demonstrated high surgical quality, set a quality standard for RAMIG, and can be considered an international reference for surgical standardization.

Postoperative Global Period Cost Reduction Using 3 Successive Risk-Stratified Pancreatectomy Clinical Pathways

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that iterative revisions of our original 2016 risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathways would be associated with decreased 90-day perioperative costs.

STUDY DESIGN

From a single-institution retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with 3 iterations: "version 1" (V1) (October 2016 to January 2019), V2 (February 2019 to October 2020), and V3 (November 2020 to February 2022), institutional data were aggregated using revenue codes and adjusted to constant 2022-dollar value. Grand total perioperative costs (primary endpoint) were the sum of pancreatectomy, inpatient care, readmission, and 90-day global outpatient care. Proprietary hospital-based costs were converted to ratios using the mean cost of all hospital operations as the denominator.

RESULTS

Of 814 patients, pathway V1 included 363, V2 229, and V3 222 patients. Accordion Grade 3+ complications decreased with each iteration (V1: 28.4%, V2: 22.7%, and V3: 15.3%). Median length of stay decreased (V1: 6 days, interquartile range [IQR] 5 to 8; V2: 5 [IQR 4 to 6]; and V3: 5 [IQR 4 to 6]) without an increase in readmissions. Ninety-day global perioperative costs decreased by 32% (V1 cost ratio 12.6, V2 10.9, and V3 8.6). Reduction of the index hospitalization cost was associated with the greatest savings (-31%: 9.4, 8.3, and 6.5). Outpatient care costs decreased consistently (1.58, 1.41, and 1.04). When combining readmission and all outpatient costs, total "postdischarge" costs decreased (3.17, 2.59, and 2.13). Component costs of the index hospitalization that were associated with the greatest savings were room or board costs (-55%: 1.74, 1.14, and 0.79) and pharmacy costs (-61%: 2.20, 1.61, and 0.87; all p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Three iterative risk-stratified pancreatectomy clinical pathway refinements were associated with a 32% global period cost savings, driven by reduced index hospitalization costs. This successful learning health system model could be externally validated at other institutions performing abdominal cancer surgery.

Short-term outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery protocol in robotic-assisted McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a single-center retrospective cohort study

Background

This study aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in perioperative robotic-assisted McKeown esophagectomy (RAME) among esophageal cancer patients.

Methods

For this retrospective study, all patients who had undergone RAME with esophageal cancer using ERAS protocol and conventional management strategy at the surgery center of our hospital from February 2019 to March 2022 were performed for analysis.

Results

A total of 211 patients were included. Compared to the conventional group, the ERAS group has shorter median operative time [207 (147.5-267.5) vs. 244 (183-305), P<0.001], time to first flatus (P<0.001), time to out-of-bed activity (P=0.045), and time to liquid diet (P<0.001). In addition, the ERAS group has lower postoperative pain scores (3.62 ± 0.87 vs. 4.54 ± 0.91), shorter duration of analgesia pump [2 (1-3) vs. 3 (2.5-5.5)], shorter postoperative hospital stay [(9 (6-47) vs. 11 (6-79)], shorter postoperative hospital stay within neoadjuvant treated patients [8 (7-43) vs. 13 (8-67], shorter postoperative ICU stay [1 (0-7) vs. 2 (0-15)], and less reoperation rate (7.6% vs. 16.8%). Furthermore, the overall complication rate was significantly lower in the ERAS group (26.1%) than in the conventional group (50.4%). Notably, the ERAS group had lower thoracic fluid drainage volume than the conventional group on postoperative 2-7 days (P<0.05).

Conclusions

The application of ERAS protocol in esophageal cancer patients treated with RAME showed advantages of quick postoperative recovery in contrast to the conventional management strategy.

Quality Performance Indicators for the Surgical Management of Oesophageal Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

The objective of this systematic review was to identify pre-existing quality performance indicators (QPIs) for the surgical management of oesophageal cancer (OC). These QPIs can be used to objectively measure and compare the performance of individual units and capture key elements of patient care to improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus and Embase was conducted. Articles reporting on the quality of healthcare in relation to oesophageal neoplasm or cancer and the surgical treatment of OC available until the 1st of March 2022 were included.

RESULTS

The final list of articles included retrospective reviews (n = 13), prospective reviews (n = 8), expert guidelines (n = 1) and consensus (n = 1). The final list of QPIs was categorized as process, outcome or structural measures. Process measures included multidisciplinary involvement, availability of multimodality diagnostic and treatment pathways and surgical metrics. Outcome measures included reoperation and readmission rates, the achievement of RO resection and length of hospital stay. Structural measures include multidisciplinary meetings.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review summarizes QPIs for the surgical treatment of OC. The data will serve as an introduction to establishing a quality initiative project for OC resections.

The impact of refusing esophagectomy for treatment of locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma

Objective

Patients with esophageal cancer may be reluctant to proceed with surgery due to high complication rates. This study aims to compare outcomes between eligible surgical candidates who proceeded with surgery versus those who refused surgery.

Methods

Characteristics and survival of patients with locally advanced (cT3N0M0, cT1-3N+M0) mid-/distal esophageal adenocarcinoma in the National Cancer Database (2006-2019) who either proceeded with or refused surgery after chemoradiotherapy were evaluated with logistic regression, Kaplan-Meier curves, and Cox proportional hazards methods.

Results

Of the 13,594 patients included in the analysis, 595 (4.4%) patients refused esophagectomy. Patients who refused surgery were older, had less distance to travel to their treatment facility, were more likely to have cN0 disease, and were more likely to be treated at a community rather than academic or integrated network program, but did not have significantly different comorbid disease distributions. On multivariable analysis, refusing surgery was independently associated with older age, uninsured, lower income, less distance to a hospital, and treatment in a community program versus an academic/research or integrated network program. Esophagectomy was associated with better survival (5-year survival 40.1% [39.2-41] vs 23.6% [19.9-27.9], P < .001) and was also independently associated with better survival in the Cox model (hazard rate, 0.78 [95% confidence interval, 0.7-0.87], P < .001).

Conclusions

The results of this study can inform selected patients with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma that their survival will be significantly diminished if surgery is not pursued. Many factors associated with refusing surgery are non-clinical and suggest that access to or support for care could influence patient decisions.

ERAS guidelines for esophagectomy: adherence patterns among Canadian thoracic surgeons

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines have been incorporated across surgical specialties supported by the publication of evidence-based guidelines. The purpose of this research was to explore adherence to such guidelines among Canadian thoracic surgeons with respect to esophagectomy. A standardized questionnaire was developed comprising 43 validated ERAS recommendations. Additional questions such as the number of annual esophagectomies per institution, the clinical practice environment of the survey responder, preferred operative approach, and responder demographics were included. The survey was circulated to all Canadian Association of Thoracic Surgery (CATS) members and remained open for a four month period. Of the 136 CATS members, 74 (54.4%) completed the survey. Among responders, 29 (40.3%) did have a standard ERAS protocol at their institution. The majority of the responders practiced at an academic center (50, 88.3%). A self-reported adherence rate greater than 80% was observed in six out of 12 of the pre-operative ERAS recommendations, two out of eight of the intraoperative, and seven out of 23 of the post-operative ERAS recommendations. Among the five recommendations associated with high levels of evidence, two had been incorporated into practice by the majority of responders. Out of the 29 strong recommendations, 24 were incorporated into practice by the majority of responders. Canadian thoracic surgeons' express practices that are largely consistent with strongly recommended ERAS guidelines in patients undergoing esophagectomy. ERAS guidelines continue to be instrumental in the improvement of perioperative care; however, high adherence is ultimately necessary for optimal patient outcomes.

State of the art of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols in esophagogastric cancer surgery: the Western experience

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs provide a framework to standardize care processes and improve outcomes. The results of this multimodal and multidisciplinary approach based on actions focused on reducing physiological surgical stress in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods are beneficial in reducing morbidity and hospital stay, without increasing readmissions across different surgical settings. The implementation of ERAS in resection procedures of esophageal and gastric cancer has been challenging due to the complexity of these surgical techniques and the high risk of complications. Despite the limited evidence of ERAS in esophagectomy operations, systematic reviews and meta-analysis have confirmed a reduction of pulmonary complications and hospital stay without increasing readmissions. In gastrectomy operations, the implementation of ERAS reduces the use of nasogastric tubes and intraabdominal drains, facilitates early diet, and reduces the length of hospital stay, without increasing complications. There is, however, wide heterogeneity and absence of standardization in the number and definition of the ERAS components. The development of ERAS consensus guidelines including procedure-specific components may reduce this variability. Regardless growing evidence of the effectiveness of ERAS, the adherence rate is still low. The commitment of the multidisciplinary team and leadership is critical in the application and refinement of ERAS protocols in parallel with periodic audits. Pre- and post-habilitation methods are emerging concepts to be incorporated in ERAS protocols.

Open left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy a viable option in the era of minimally invasive esophagectomy

Minimally invasive surgical technique has become standard at many institutions in esophageal cancer surgery. In some situations, however other surgical approaches are required. Left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy (LTE) facilitates complete resection of esophageal cancer particularly for bulky distal esophageal tumors, but there are concerns that this approach is associated with significant morbidity. Prospectively entered esophagectomy databases from three high-volume centers were reviewed for patients undergoing LTE or MIE 2009-2019. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, operative outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and pathologic surrogates of oncologic efficacy (R0 resection rate, and number of resected lymph nodes) were compared. In total 915 patients were included in the study, LTE was applied in 684 (74.8%) patients, and MIE in 231 (25.2%) patients. LTE patients had more locally advanced tumor stage and received more neoadjuvant treatment. Patients treated with MIE had more comorbidities. The results showed no difference in overall postoperative complications (LTE = 61.7%, MIE = 65.7%, P = 0.289), severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥IIIa (LTE = 25.9%, MIE 26.8%, P = 0.806)), pneumonia (LTE = 29.0%, MIE = 24.7%, P = 0.211), anastomotic leak (LTE = 7.8%, MIE = 11.3%, P = 0.101), or in-hospital mortality (LTE = 2.6%, MIE = 3.5%, P = 0.511). Median number of resected lymph nodes was 24 for LTE and 25 for MIE (P = 0.491). LTE was used for more advanced tumors in patients that were more likely to have received neoadjuvant treatment compared with MIE, however postoperative morbidity, mortality, and oncologic outcomes were equivalent to that of MIE in this cohort. In conclusion open resection with left thoracoabdominal approach is a valid option in selected patients when performed at high-volume esophagectomy centers.

Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland (AUGIS)/Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI) consensus statement on intraoperative and postoperative interventions to reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary complications are the most common morbidity after oesophagectomy, contributing to mortality and prolonged postoperative recovery, and have a negative impact on health-related quality of life. A variety of single or bundled interventions in the perioperative setting have been developed to reduce the incidence of pulmonary complications. Significant variation in practice exists across the UK. The aim of this modified Delphi consensus was to deliver clear evidence-based consensus recommendations regarding intraoperative and postoperative care that may reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy.

METHODS

With input from a multidisciplinary group of 23 experts in the perioperative management of patients undergoing surgery for oesophageal cancer, a modified Delphi method was employed. Following an initial systematic review of relevant literature, a range of anaesthetic, surgical, and postoperative care interventions were identified. These were then discussed during a two-part virtual conference. Recommendation statements were drafted, refined, and agreed by all attendees. The level of evidence supporting each statement was considered.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 12 statements on topics including operative approach, pyloric drainage strategies, intraoperative fluid and ventilation strategies, perioperative analgesia, postoperative feeding plans, and physiotherapy interventions. Seven additional questions concerning the perioperative management of patients undergoing oesophagectomy were highlighted to guide future research.

CONCLUSION

Clear consensus recommendations regarding intraoperative and postoperative interventions that may reduce pulmonary complications after oesophagectomy are presented.

Malnutrition management in oncology: An expert view on controversial issues and future perspectives

Cancer and anticancer treatments can lead to several negative side effects, including malnutrition. Despite the recognized need for adequate nutritional support in cancer patients, in daily clinical practice, nutrition is still not considered one of the first aspects to be considered. Malnutrition negatively affects the clinical outcomes, treatment response, and overall survival of cancer patients. In this study, three of the most controversial issues related to malnutrition, which emerged during an Italian Consensus Conference, were addressed specifically for patients with head and neck as well as gastrointestinal cancer. The timing of nutritional evaluation and intervention, extension of the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS^®) protocols, and cost-effectiveness of nutritional interventions have been considered. This study aimed to illustrate the state-of-the art of each issue and hypothesize future perspectives and actions to be taken, trying to suggest a new nutritional management model for cancer patients in Italy that overcomes the critical issues encountered. Of note, the timely diagnosis of nutritional issue appears to be essential to ensure the correct management of malnourished cancer patients as well as those who are at high risk of malnutrition. Standardized protocols, screening tests, and the inclusion of nutritional parameters in patient medical records would help to achieve good clinical outcomes. Finally, appropriate nutritional support is also associated with cost savings, and it seems necessary to promote its clinical and economic value to obtain improvements in both outcomes and management costs.

Preoperative Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio Predicts Complications After Esophageal Resection That can be Used as Inclusion Criteria for Enhanced Recovery After Surgery

Background

The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been reported as an indicator for poor prognosis in many cancers including esophageal cancer. However, the relationship between the NLR and postoperative complications after esophageal cancer resection remains unclear. At present, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) lacks inclusion criteria. The aim of this study is to determine whether the preoperative NLR (_preNLR) can predict complications after esophageal cancer resection, which could represent the criteria for ERAS.

Methods

This was a retrospective study on 171 patients who underwent esophagectomy at Hospital between November 2020 and November 2021(68 patients from Changhai Hospital, 65 patients from Shanghai General Hospital and 38 patients from Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to demonstrate that the _preNLR could predict complications after esophagectomy.

Results

A _preNLR cutoff value of 2.30 was identified as having the greatest ability to predict complications with a sensitivity of 76% and specificity of 65%. Moreover, the Chi-squared test results showed that the _preNLR was significantly associated with complications (x²= 13.641, p < 0.001), and multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that body mass index (BMI), p stage and _preNLR were independent variables associated with the development of postoperative complications (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The _preNLR can predict complications after esophagectomy, and these predicted complications can represent the criteria for recruiting patients for ERAS.

Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy Leads to Significant Reduction in Postoperative Acute Pain: A Retrospective Clinical Trial

Background

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) shows promising results regarding postoperative complications in patients with esophageal cancer. To date, no data are available regarding postoperative analgesic consumption. The aim of this work is to evaluate analgesic consumption after esophagectomy.

Methods

A total of 274 Ivor Lewis esophageal resections performed sequentially from January 2012 to December 2020 were evaluated. RAMIE cases (n = 51) were compared with the hybrid technique (laparoscopic abdominal phase followed by open thoracotomy, n = 59) and open abdominothoracic esophagectomy (OTE) (n = 164). Data were collected retrospectively. The primary endpoint was the overall postoperative morphine consumption, which represents a reliable indirect measurement of pain. Pain levels recorded on the first, third, and fifth postoperative days were assessed as secondary endpoints.

Results

A total of 274 patients were included. The postoperative opioid consumption rate for patients who underwent RAMIE (quartiles: 0.14, 0.23, 0.36 mg morphine milligram equivalents (MME)/kg body weight (bw)/day) was significantly lower than in the open group (0.19, 0.33, 0.58 mg MME/kg bw/day, p = 0.016). The overall postoperative opioid consumption for patients who underwent RAMIE was significantly lower (2.45, 3.63, 7.20 mg MME/kg bw/day; morphine milligram equivalents per kilogram body weight) compared with the open (4.85, 8.59, 14.63 MME/kg bw/day, p < 0.0001) and hybrid (4.13, 6.84, 11.36 MME/kg bw/day, p = 0.008) groups. Patients who underwent RAMIE reported lower pain scores compared with the open group on the fifth postoperative day, both at rest (p = 0.004) and while performing activities (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

This study shows that patients who underwent RAMIE experienced similar postoperative pain while requiring significantly lower amounts of opioids compared with patients who underwent open and hybrid surgery. Further studies are required to verify the results.

Population-Based Cohort Study from a Prospective National Registry: Better Long-Term Survival in Esophageal Cancer After Minimally Invasive Compared with Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Recent research indicates long-term survival benefits of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) compared with open esophagectomy (OE) for patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers, but there is a need for more population-based studies.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective population-based nationwide cohort study including all patients in Sweden diagnosed with esophageal or junctional cancer who underwent a transthoracic esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis. Data were collected from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer in 2006-2019. Patients were grouped into OE and MIE including hybrid MIE (HMIE) and totally MIE (TMIE). Overall survival and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared using Cox regression and logistic regression models, respectively. All models were adjusted for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, clinical T and N stage, neoadjuvant therapy, year of surgery, and hospital volume.

RESULTS

Among 1404 patients, 998 (71.1%) underwent OE and 406 (28.9%) underwent MIE. Compared with OE, overall survival was better following MIE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.94), TMIE (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.94), and possibly also after HMIE (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.02). MIE was associated with shorter operation time, less intraoperative bleeding, higher number of resected lymph nodes, and shorter hospital stay compared with OE. MIE was also associated with fewer overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.47-1.03) as well as non-surgical complications (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.40-1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

MIE seems to offer better survival and similar or improved short-term postoperative outcomes in esophageal and GEJ cancers compared with OE in this unselected population-based cohort.

Impact of Early Jejunostomy Tube Feeding on Clinical Outcome and Parameters of Body Composition in Esophageal Cancer Patients Receiving Multimodal Therapy

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition commonly affects patients with esophageal cancer and has the potential to negatively influence treatment outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of early (preoperative) jejunostomy tube feeding (JTF) in nutritionally 'high risk' patients receiving multimodal therapy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Patients were selected to undergo early JTF during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in accordance with European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS^®) Society guidelines. Clinical outcomes were compared with patients who received routine JTF from the time of esophagectomy. Body composition was determined from computed tomography (CT) images acquired at diagnosis, after nCRT, and ≥ 3 months after surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 81 patients received early JTF and 91 patients received routine JTF. Patients who received early JTF had lower body mass index (BMI; 26.1 ± 4.6 vs. 28.4 ± 4.9; p = 0.002), greater weight loss, and worse performance status at diagnosis. Groups were otherwise well-matched for baseline characteristics. Rate of re-intubation (8.8% vs. 1.1%; p = 0.027), pulmonary embolism (5.0% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.046), and 90-day mortality (10.0% vs. 1.1%; p = 0.010) were worse in the early JTF group; however, overall survival was equivalent for both the early and routine JTF groups (p = 0.053). Wide variation in the degree of preoperative muscle loss and total adipose tissue loss was observed across the entire study cohort. Relative preoperative muscle and adipose tissue loss in patients with early and routine JTF was equivalent.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients determined to be at 'high risk' of malnutrition, early JTF may prevent excess morbidity after esophagectomy with an associated relative preservation of parameters of body composition.

Analysis of Rates, Causes, and Risk Factors for 90-Day Readmission After Surgery for Large Hiatal Hernia: A Two-Center Study

Background: Hospital readmissions have become a more examined indicator of surgical care delivery and quality. There is scarcity of data in the literature on the rate, risk factors, and most common reasons of readmission following major hiatal hernia surgery. The primary endpoint was 90-day readmission after surgery for large hiatal hernia. Secondary endpoint was to examine which characteristics related with a higher risk of readmission. Methods: A retrospective review of two distinct institutional databases was performed for patients who had surgery for a large hiatal hernia between January 2012 and December 2019. Demographic, perioperative, and outpatient data were collected from the medical record. Results: A total of 71 patients met the inclusion criteria, most of them suffering from a type III hernia (66.2%). Mean operative time was 146 (±56.5) minutes and median length of stay (LOS) was 6 days (interquartile range = 3). The overall morbidity was 21.1% and the in-hospital mortality was 1.4%. The 30- and 90-day readmission rates were 7% and 8.5%, respectively. The mean time to readmission was 14.3 (±15.6) days. The reasons for 90-day hospital readmission were dysphagia (50%), pneumonia (16.7%), congestive heart failure (16.7%), and bowel obstruction (16.7%). Grade of esophagitis ≥2, presence of Barrett's esophagus, and LOS longer than 8 days were significant risk factors for unplanned readmission within 90 days. Conclusion: We observed that about 6 out of 71 patients who had surgery readmitted within 90 days (8.5%). Readmissions were most often linked to esophagitis ≥2, presence of Barrett's esophagus, and LOS longer than 8 days. These findings point to the necessity for focused treatments before, during, and after hospitalization to decrease morbidity and extra costs in this high-risk population.

Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery vs. Thoracotomy for the Treatment in Patients With Esophageal Leiomyoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Surgical treatment is usually suitable for patients with esophageal leiomyoma. Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) offers a minimally invasive approach to thoracotomy. However, there is no clear conclusion on whether VATS can achieve an equal or even better surgical effect when compared with the traditional open approach in the treatment of esophageal leiomyoma. We performed this meta-analysis to explore and compare the outcomes of VATS vs. thoracotomy for patients with esophageal leiomyoma.

Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Medline, and Web of Science databases were searched for full-text literature citations. The quality of the articles was evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and the data were analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Fixed or random effect models were applied according to heterogeneity.

Results: A total of 8 studies with 290 patients, of whom 141 patients were in the VATS group and 149 in the thoracotomy group, were involved in the analysis. Compared with thoracotomy, VATS was associated with shorter operative time, less blood loss in operation, and shorter postoperative hospital stay. There is no significant difference in postoperative pleural drainage day and postoperative complications between the two groups.

Conclusions: VATS has more advantages over thoracotomy, indicating that VATS is better than thoracotomy in terms of postoperative recovery. We look forward to more large-sample, high-quality studies published in the future.

Guide to Enhanced Recovery for Cancer Patients Undergoing Surgery: ERAS and Oesophagectomy

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are widely used in oesophageal cancer surgery. Multiple studies have demonstrated that ERAS protocols are associated with a shorter length of stay and a reduction in the incidence of post-operative complications after oesophagectomy. However, there is substantial heterogeneity in the content of ERAS protocols and the delivery of these pathways can be challenging. This paper discusses the key recommendations for ERAS protocols in oesophageal cancer surgery and the barriers and facilitating factors for their successful implementation.

Impact of the introduction of an enhanced recovery pathway in esophageal cancer surgery: a cohort study and propensity score matching analysis

Enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) have the potential to improve clinical outcomes. Aim of this study was to determine the impact of ERP on perioperative results as compared with traditional care (TC) after esophagectomy. In this study, two cohorts were compared. Cohort 1 represented 296 patients to whom TC was provided. Cohort 2 consisted of 200 unselected ERP patients. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications. Secondary endpoints were the length of stay and 30-day readmission rates. To confirm the possible impact of ERP, a propensity matched analysis (1:1) was conducted. A significant decrease in complications was found in ERP patients, especially for pneumonia and respiratory failure requiring reintubation (39% in TC and 14% in ERP; P<0.0001 and 17% vs. 12%; P<0.0001, respectively) and postoperative blood transfusion (26.7%-11%; P<0.0001). Furthermore, median length of stay was also significantly shorter: 13 days (interquartile range [IQR] 10-23) in TC compared with 10 days (IQR 8-14) in ERP patients (P<0.0001). The 30-day readmission rate (5.4% in TC and 9% in ERP; P=0.121) and in-hospital mortality rate (4.4% in TC and 2.5% in ERP; P=0.270) were not significantly affected. A propensity score matching confirmed a significant impact on pneumonia (P=0.0001), anastomotic leak (P=0.047), several infectious complications (P=0.01-0.034), blood transfusion (P=0.001), Comprehensive Complications Index (P=0.01), and length of stay (P=0.0001). We conclude that ERP for esophagectomy is associated with significantly fewer postoperative complications and blood transfusions, which results in a significant decrease of length of stay without affecting readmission and mortality rates.

Effectiveness and safety of a newly introduced multidisciplinary perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery protocol for thoracic esophageal cancer surgery

OBJECTIVE

Data are sparse regarding the multidisciplinary perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery protocol (E-P) for thoracic esophageal cancer surgery that was newly used at another institution. Therefore, this study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the protocol.

METHODS

We enrolled 101 patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy for E-P at the Shizuoka Cancer Center Hospital (SCC). The outcomes obtained at the SCC were compared with the outcomes of 140 patients treated with E-P at the Saitama Medical University International Medical Center (SMU). At the SMU, we compared the results before and after the introduction of E-P.

RESULTS

The rates of morbidity, pulmonary complications, and postoperative pneumonia were 44%, 31%, and 6.9% at the SCC and 44%, 27%, and 6.5% at the SMU (P = 0.91, 0.55, and 0.88, respectively). The mean time to walk was 1.1 and 1.5 days at the SCC and SMU, respectively (P < 0.001). The median length of hospital stay was longer at the SMU than at the SCC (24.0 versus 20.8 days; P = 0.004). In the comparative study before and after the introduction of E-P, the rate of postoperative pneumonia was 16% in the conventional management group and 6.5% in the E-P group (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative pneumonia was reduced before and after introduction of E-P. As similar short-term postoperative outcomes were promising (except for the time to walk and postoperative hospital stay), the same E-P that was safely performed at the SMU can be implemented as a standard practice.

"Tubeless" esophagectomy: Less is more

The esophageal cancer surgery is a complex procedure with elevated rates of both morbidity and mortality, which is why, in order to achieve adequate results, it should be performed in high volume centers, where complete multidisciplinary support is available and recent clinical guidelines are applied. We describe the initial experience and the technique of "tubeless" esophagectomy where esophageal resection and mediastinal lymphadenectomy are performed and no drains nor tubes of any kind are placed, with the aim to decrease the level of surgical aggression, enhance the postoperative comfort and accelerate the patient́s recovery.

Textbook outcome for esophageal cancer surgery: an international consensus-based update of a quality measure

Textbook outcome for esophageal cancer surgery is a composite quality measure including 10 short-term surgical outcomes reflecting an uneventful perioperative course. Achieved textbook outcome is associated with improved long-term survival. This study aimed to update the original textbook outcome based on international consensus. Forty-five international expert esophageal cancer surgeons received a personal invitation to evaluate the 10 items in the original textbook outcome for esophageal cancer surgery and to rate 18 additional items divided over seven subcategories for their importance in the updated textbook outcome. Items were included in the updated textbook outcome if ≥80% of the respondents agreed on inclusion. In case multiple items within one subcategory reached ≥80% agreement, only the most inclusive item with the highest agreement rate was included. With a response rate of 80%, 36 expert esophageal cancer surgeons, from 34 hospitals, 16 countries, and 4 continents responded to this international survey. Based on the inclusion criteria, the updated quality indicator 'textbook outcome for esophageal cancer surgery' should consist of: tumor-negative resection margins, ≥20 lymph nodes retrieved and examined, no intraoperative complication, no complications Clavien-Dindo ≥III, no ICU/MCU readmission, no readmission related to the surgical procedure, no anastomotic leakage, no hospital stay ≥14 days, and no in-hospital mortality. This study resulted in an international consensus-based update of a quality measure, textbook outcome for esophageal cancer surgery. This updated textbook outcome should be implemented in quality assurance programs for centers performing esophageal cancer surgery, and could standardize quality measures used internationally.

[Enhanced recovery after surgery-Does the ERAS concept keep its promises]

INTRODUCTION

Perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) concepts or fast-track are supposed to accelerate recovery after surgery, reduce postoperative complications and shorten the hospital stay when compared to traditional perioperative treatment.

METHODS

Electronic search of the PubMed database to identify systematic reviews with meta-analysis (SR) comparing ERAS and traditional treatment.

RESULTS

The presented SR investigated 70 randomized controlled studies (RCT) with 12,986 patients and 93 non-RCT (24,335 patients) concerning abdominal, thoracic and vascular as well as orthopedic surgery. The complication rates were decreased under ERAS following colorectal esophageal, liver and pulmonary resections as well as after implantation of hip endoprostheses. Pulmonary complications were reduced after ERAS esophageal, gastric and pulmonary resections. The first bowel movements occurred earlier after ERAS colorectal resections and delayed gastric emptying was less often observed after ERAS pancreatic resection. Following ERAS fast-track esophageal resection, anastomotic leakage was diagnosed less often as well as surgical complications after ERAS pulmonary resection. The ERAS in all studies concerning orthopedic surgery and trials investigating implantation of a hip endoprosthesis or knee endoprosthesis reduced the risk for postoperative blood transfusions. Regardless of the type of surgery, ERAS shortened hospital stay without increasing readmissions.

CONCLUSION

Numerous clinical trials have confirmed that ERAS reduces postoperative morbidity, shortens hospital stay and accelerates recovery without increasing readmission rates following most surgical operations.

"Tubeless" esophagectomy: Less is more

The esophageal cancer surgery is a complex procedure with elevated rates of both morbidity and mortality, which is why, in order to achieve adequate results, it should be performed in high volume centers, where complete multidisciplinary support is available and recent clinical guidelines are applied. We describe the initial experience and the technique of "tubeless" esophagectomy where esophageal resection and mediastinal lymphadenectomy are performed and no drains nor tubes of any kind are placed, with the aim to decrease the level of surgical aggression, enhance the postoperative comfort and accelerate the patient́s recovery.

Pulmonary Complications in Esophagectomy Based on Intraoperative Fluid Rate: A Single-Center Study

OBJECTIVES

Esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The authors assessed the relationship between intraoperative fluid (IOF) administration and postoperative pulmonary outcomes in patients undergoing a transthoracic, transhiatal, or tri-incisional esophagectomy.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study (level 3 evidence).

SETTING

Tertiary care referral center.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients who underwent esophagectomy from 2007 to 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

The IOF rate (mL/kg/h) was the predictor variable analyzed both as a continuous and binary categorical variable based on median IOF rate for this cohort (11.90 mL/kg/h).

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes included rates of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) within ten days after esophagectomy. Secondary outcomes included rates of reintubation, pneumonia, cardiac or renal morbidity, intensive care unit admission, length of stay, procedure-related complications, and mortality. Multivariate regression analysis determined associations between IOF rate and postoperative outcomes. Analysis was adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, procedure type, year, and thoracic epidural use.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1,040 patients comprised this cohort. Tri-incisional esophagectomy was associated with a higher hospital mortality rate (7.8%) compared with transthoracic esophagectomy (2.6%, p = 0.03) or transhiatal esophagectomy (0.7%, p = 0.01). Regression analysis revealed a higher IOF rate was associated with greater ARDS within ten days (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.03, p = 0.01). For secondary outcomes, a higher IOF rate was associated with greater hospital mortality (adjusted OR = 1.05, p = 0.002), although no significant association with 30-day hospital mortality was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased IOF administration during esophagectomy may be associated with worse postoperative pulmonary complications, specifically ARDS. Future well-powered studies are warranted, including randomized, controlled trials comparing liberal versus restrictive fluid administration in this surgical population.

A Protocol is not Enough: Enhanced Recovery Program-Based Care and Clinician Adherence Associated with Shorter Stay After Colorectal Surgery

Background

Randomised trials have shown an Enhanced Recovery Program (ERP) can shorten stay after colorectal surgery. Previous research has focused on patient compliance neglecting the role of care providers. National data on implementation and adherence to standardised care are lacking. We examined care organisation and delivery including the ERP, and correlated this with clinical outcomes.

Methods

A cross-sectional questionnaire was administered to surgeons and nurses in August–October 2015. All English National Health Service Trusts providing elective colorectal surgery were invited. Responses frequencies and variation were examined. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to identify underlying features of care. Standardised factor scores were correlated with elective clinical outcomes of length of stay, mortality and readmission rates from 2013–15.

Results

218/600 (36.3%) postal responses were received from 84/90 (93.3%) Trusts that agreed to participate. Combined with email responses, 301 surveys were analysed. 281/301 (93.4%) agreed or strongly agreed that they had a standardised, ERP-based care protocol. However, 182/301 (60.5%) indicated all consultants managed post-operative oral intake similarly. After factor analysis, higher hospital average ERP-based care standardisation and clinician adherence score were significantly correlated with reduced length of stay, as well as higher ratings of teamwork and support for complication management.

Conclusions

Standardised, ERP-based care was near universal, but clinician adherence varied markedly. Units reporting higher levels of clinician adherence achieved the lowest length of stay. Having a protocol is not enough. Careful implementation and adherence by all of the team is vital to achieve the best results.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00268-020-05810-w) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Precautions for avoiding pulmonary morbidity after esophagectomy

Pulmonary morbidity is the most common complication after esophagectomy. Importantly, it is the main cause of surgery-related mortality and possibly adversely affects the long-term outcome after surgery in patients with esophageal cancer. There is considerable accumulated evidence on multidisciplinary approaches to reduce post-operative pulmonary morbidity. A comprehensive review of the precautionary measures that have so far been shown to be effective in previous literature is of utmost importance. We herein update and summarize the perioperative and surgical approaches to diminish pulmonary morbidity. Pre-operative smoking cessation, respiratory rehabilitation, maintaining oral hygiene, perioperative nutritional intervention, enforcement of less invasive surgery, perioperative administration of steroid, and total management by a multidisciplinary team could be the key factors contributing to reduction in pulmonary morbidity.

Enhanced Recovery After Pediatric Scoliosis Surgery: Key Components and Current Practice

With the goal of safety and efficiency in health care delivery, enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) continue to gain traction throughout various surgical disciplines, including in pediatric scoliosis surgery. The growing body of literature reporting decreased length of stay and cost with no change in readmissions or complications has brought these protocols to the forefront. The key components of ERPs include preoperative patient counseling, perioperative pain management, and early patient mobilization. In this review, the authors aim to describe the foundational history and major components of ERPs following pediatric spine deformity surgery. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(5):e338-e344.].

Management of Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

Management of locally advanced esophageal cancer is evolving. Trimodality therapy with chemoradiation followed by surgical resection has become the standard of care. However, the value of planned surgery after response to therapy is in question. In this article, we discuss the current practice principles and evidence for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer. Topics will include various neoadjuvant therapies, trimodality versus bimodality therapy, and outcomes for salvage esophagectomies. In addition, emerging novel therapies, such as HER2 inhibitors and immunotherapy, are available for unresectable or metastatic disease, enabling a greater armamentarium of tumor biology-specific treatments.

Enhanced recovery after surgery on multiple clinical outcomes: Umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Previously, many meta-analyses have reported the impact of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs on many surgical specialties.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically assess the effects of ERAS pathways on multiple clinical outcomes in surgery.

DESIGN

An umbrella review of meta-analyses.

DATE SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library.

RESULTS

The umbrella review identified 23 meta-analyses of interventional study and observational study. Consistent and robust evidence shown that the ERAS programs can significantly reduce the length of hospital stay (MD: -2.349 days; 95%CI: -2.740 to -1.958) and costs (MD: -$639.064; 95%CI:: -933.850 to -344.278) in all the surgery patients included in the review compared with traditional perioperative care. The ERAS programs would not increase mortality in all surgeries and can even reduce 30-days mortality rate (OR: 0.40; 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.67) in orthopedic surgery. Meanwhile, it also would not increase morbidity except laparoscopic gastric cancer surgery (RR: 1.49; 95%CI: 1.04 to 2.13). Moreover, readmission rate was increased in open gastric cancer surgery (RR: 1.92; 95%CI: 1.00 to 3.67).

CONCLUSION

The ERAS programs are considered to be safe and efficient in surgery patients. However, precaution is necessary for gastric cancer surgery.

Enhanced recovery pathways vs standard care pathways in esophageal cancer surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols vs standard care pathways after esophagectomy for malignancy have gained wide popularity among surgeons. However, the current literature is still lacking level-I evidence to show a clear superiority of one approach. The present study is a detailed systematic review and meta-analysis of the published trials. A systematic review of literature databases was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized, prospective, comparative studies between January 1990 and September 2019, comparing ERAS pathway group with standard care for esophageal resection for esophageal cancer. Mean difference (MD) for continuous variables and odds ratio (OR) or risk difference (RD) for dichotomous variables with 95% confidence interval (CI) were used. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated. Eight studies with a total of 1133 patients were included. Hospital stay [Standard mean difference (Std. MD) = - 1.92, 95% CI - 2.78, - 1.06, P < 0.0001], overall morbidity (OR 0.68, CI 0.49, 0.96, P = 0.03), pulmonary complications (OR 0.45, CI 0.31, 0.65, P < 0.0001), anastomotic leak rate (OR 0.37, CI 0.18, 0.74, P = 0.005), time to first flatus and defecation (Std. MD = -5.01, CI - 9.53, - 0.49, P = 0.03), (Std. MD = - 1.36, CI - 1.78, - 0.94, P < 0.00001) and total hospital cost (Std. MD = - 1.62, CI - 2.24, - 1.01, P < 0.00001) favored the ERAS group. Patients who undergo ERAS have a clear benefit over the standard care protocol. However, existing protocols in different centers are followed by great variability, while the evaluated parameters suffer from significant heterogeneity. A well-formulated, standardized protocol should be standard-of-care at all centers.

Diltiazem Prophylaxis for the Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients Undergoing Thoracoabdominal Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

Atrial fibrillation (AF) represents the most frequent arrhythmic disorder after thoracoabdominal esophageal resection and is associated with a significant increase in perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, 167 patients who underwent thoracoabdominal esophagectomy at a large university hospital were assessed. We compared patients who received a 14-day postoperative course of diltiazem with a control group of patients who did not undergo diltiazem prophylaxis. Diltiazem therapy started immediately upon admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) with a loading dose of 0.25 mg/kg bodyweight (i.v.) followed by continuous infusion (0.1 mg/kg bodyweight/h) for 40–48 h. Oral administration (Dilzem^® 180 mg uno retard, once a day) was started on postoperative day 3.

Results

A total of 117 patients were assessed. Twelve (10.3%) of all patients developed postoperative new-onset atrial fibrillation in the first 30 days after surgical intervention. Prevalence of new-onset AF showed no significant differences between the diltiazem group and control group (p = 0.74). The prevalence of bradycardia (14.7% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.03) and dose of norepinephrine required (0.09 vs. 0.04 µg/kg bodyweight/min; p = 0.04) were higher in the diltiazem group. There were no significant differences between the groups for the median postoperative duration of hospital/ICU stay or mortality.

Conclusions

A prophylactic 14-day postoperative course of diltiazem was not associated with a reduction in new-onset AF or 30-day mortality following thoracoabdominal esophagectomy. Prophylactic diltiazem therapy was associated with drug-related adverse effects such as bradycardia and increased requirement of norepinephrine.

German Clinical Trial Registration Number: DKRS00016631.

Paravertebral catheter versus EPidural analgesia in Minimally invasive Esophageal resectioN: a randomized controlled multicenter trial (PEPMEN trial)

BACKGROUND

Thoracic epidural analgesia is the standard postoperative pain management strategy in esophageal cancer surgery. However, paravertebral block analgesia may achieve comparable pain control while inducing less side effects, which may be beneficial for postoperative recovery. This study primarily aims to compare the postoperative quality of recovery between paravertebral catheter versus thoracic epidural analgesia in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy.

METHODS

This study represents a randomized controlled superiority trial. A total of 192 patients will be randomized in 4 Dutch high-volume centers for esophageal cancer surgery. Patients are eligible for inclusion if they are at least 18 years old, able to provide written informed consent and complete questionnaires in Dutch, scheduled to undergo minimally invasive esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy and an intrathoracic anastomosis, and have no contra-indications to either epidural or paravertebral analgesia. The primary outcome is the quality of postoperative recovery, as measured by the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire on the morning of postoperative day 3. Secondary outcomes include the QoR-40 questionnaire score Area Under the Curve on postoperative days 1-3, the integrated pain and systemic opioid score and patient satisfaction and pain experience according to the International Pain Outcomes (IPO) questionnaire, and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, the groups will be compared regarding the need for additional rescue medication on postoperative days 0-3, technical failure of the pain treatment, duration of anesthesia, duration of surgery, total postoperative fluid administration day 0-3, postoperative vasopressor and inotrope use, length of urinary catheter use, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, chronic pain at six months after surgery, and other adverse effects.

DISCUSSION

In this study, it is hypothesized that paravertebral analgesia achieves comparable pain control while causing less side-effects such as hypotension when compared to epidural analgesia, leading to shorter postoperative length of stay on a monitored ward and superior quality of recovery. If this hypothesis is confirmed, the results of this study can be used to update the relevant guidelines on postoperative pain management for patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registry, NL8037. Registered 19 September 2019.

Proposed pathway for patients undergoing enhanced recovery after spinal surgery: protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The best evidence-enhanced recovery care pathway is yet to be defined for patients undergoing spinal surgery. Minimally invasive surgery, multimodal analgesia, early mobilization, and early postoperative nutrition have been considered as critical components of enhanced recovery in spinal surgery (ERSS). The objective of this study will be to synthesize the evidence underpinning individual components of a proposed multidisciplinary enhanced recovery pathway for patients undergoing spinal surgery.

METHODS

This is the study protocol for a systematic review of complex interventions. Our team identified 22 individual care components of a proposed pathway based on clinical practice guidelines and published reviews. We will include systematic reviews and meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, and observational studies in adults or pediatric patients evaluating any one of the pre-determined care components. Our primary outcomes will be all-cause mortality, morbidity outcomes (e.g., pulmonary, cardiac, renal, surgical complications), patient-reported outcomes and experiences (e.g., pain, quality of care experience), and health services outcomes (e.g., length of stay and costs). We will search the following databases (1990 onwards) MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and CENTRAL). Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. Potential conflicts will be resolved through discussion. The risk of bias for individual studies will be appraised using appropriate tools. A narrative synthesis will be provided with the information presented in the text and tables to summarize and explain the characteristics and findings of the included studies. Due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity, we do not anticipate to conduct meta-analyses. Confidence in cumulative evidence for each component of care will be classified according to the GRADE system.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review will identify, evaluate, and integrate the evidence underpinning individual components of a pathway for patients undergoing spinal surgery. The formation of an evidence-based pathway will allow for the standardization of clinical care delivery within the context of enhanced recovery in spinal surgery.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019135289.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Pathway in Esophagectomy: Is a Reasonable Prediction of Hospital Stay Possible?

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether perioperative variables or deviation from enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) items could be associated with delayed discharge after esophagectomy, and to convert them into a scoring system to predict it.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

ERAS perioperative pathways have been recently applied to esophageal resections. However, low adherence to ERAS items and high rates of protocol deviations are often reported.

METHODS

All patients who underwent esophagectomy between April 2012 and March 2017 were managed with a standardized perioperative pathway according to ERAS principles. The target length of stay was set at eighth postoperative day (POD). All significant variables at bivariate analysis were entered into a logistic regression to produce a predictive score. An initial validation of the score accuracy was carried out on a separate patient sample.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty-six patients were included in the study. Multivariate regression analysis showed that American Society of Anesthesiology score ≥ 3, surgery duration > 255 min, "nonhybrid" esophagectomy, and failure to mobilize patients within 24 h from surgery were associated with delayed discharge. The logistic regression model was statistically significant (P < 0.001) and correctly classified 81.9% of cases. The sensitivity was 96.6%, and the specificity was 17.6%. The prediction score applied to 23 patients correctly identified 100% of those discharged after eighth POD.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study seem to be clinically meaningful and in line with those from other studies. The initial validation revealed good predictive properties.

Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Thoracolaparoscopic Esophagectomy Versus Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The standard curative treatment for patients with esophageal cancer is perioperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by open transthoracic esophagectomy (OTE). Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy (RAMIE) may reduce complications.

METHODS

A single-center randomized controlled trial was conducted, assigning 112 patients with resectable intrathoracic esophageal cancer to either RAMIE or OTE. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of overall surgery-related postoperative complications (modified Clavien-Dindo classification grade 2-5).

RESULTS

Overall surgery-related postoperative complications occurred less frequently after RAMIE (59%) compared to OTE (80%) [risk ratio with RAMIE (RR) 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.57-0.96; P = 0.02]. RAMIE resulted in less median blood loss (400 vs 568 mL, P <0.001), a lower percentage of pulmonary complications (RR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.85; P = 0.005) and cardiac complications (RR 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.83; P = 0.006) and lower mean postoperative pain (visual analog scale, 1.86 vs 2.62; P < 0.001) compared to OTE. Functional recovery at postoperative day 14 was better in the RAMIE group [RR 1.48 (95% CI, 1.03-2.13; P = 0.038)] with better quality of life score at discharge [mean difference quality of life score 13.4 (2.0-24.7, p = 0.02)] and 6 weeks postdischarge [mean difference 11.1 quality of life score (1.0-21.1; P = 0.03)]. Short- and long-term oncological outcomes were comparable at a medium follow-up of 40 months.

CONCLUSIONS

RAMIE resulted in a lower percentage of overall surgery-related and cardiopulmonary complications with lower postoperative pain, better short-term quality of life, and a better short-term postoperative functional recovery compared to OTE. Oncological outcomes were comparable and in concordance with the highest standards nowadays.

Current status of esophageal cancer treatment

Esophageal cancer (EC) remains one of the most common and aggressive diseases worldwide. This review discusses some debates in the modern management of the disease. Endoscopic procedures for early cancer (T1a−b) are now embedded in routine care and the challenge will be to more accurately select patients for endoscopic resection with or without adjuvant therapy. Perioperative multimodal therapies are associated with improved survival compared to surgery alone for locally advanced esophageal cancer. However, there is no global consensus on the optimal regimen. Furthermore, histological subtype (adenocarcinomavs. squamous cell cancer) plays a role in the choice for treatment. New studies are underway to resolve some issues. The extent of the lymphadenectomy during esophagectomy remains controversial especially after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. The ideal operation balances between limiting surgical trauma and optimizing survival. Minimally invasive esophagectomy and enhanced recovery pathways are associated with decreased morbidity and faster recovery albeit there is no consensus yet what approach should be used. Finally, immune checkpoint inhibitors present promising preliminary results in the novel treatment of advanced or metastatic EC but their widespread application in clinical practice is still awaited.

Effect of intraoperative fluid administration on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing McKeown esophagogastrectomy

Objective

Fluid therapy is one of the key components of perioperative management. However, evidence of intraoperative fluid (IOF) administration affecting clinical outcomes following McKeown esophagogastrectomy remains limited. This study investigated the impact of IOF on clinical outcomes after McKeown esophagogastrectomy.

Methods

Patients who underwent McKeown esophagogastrectomy between July 2013 and July 2016 were identified. Preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative variables for each eligible patient were retrospectively collected from our electronic medical records and anesthetic records. IOF rates were determined and their relationships to postoperative clinical outcomes were compared.

Results

A total of 546 patients were enrolled in the analysis. The median IOF rate was 8.87 mL/kg/h. We divided the patients into two groups: a low fluid volume group (LFVG <8.87 mL/kg/h, n=273) and a high fluid volume group (HFVG ≥8.87 mL/kg/h, n=273). No statistically significant differences in postoperative clinical outcomes were found between LFVG and HFVG either before or after propensity score matching.

Conclusions

No effect of IOF administration on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing McKeown esophagogastrectomy was identified. Further high-quality studies examining the influence of IOF administration on clinical outcomes following McKeown esophagogastrectomy are still needed.

Esophageal Position Affects Short-Term Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Anatomical esophageal position may affect the short-term outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). A previous single-institutional retrospective study suggested that the presence of a left-sided esophagus (LSE) made MIE more difficult and increased the incidence of postoperative complications.

METHODS

The current study was a multicenter retrospective study of 303 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent MIE at six esophageal cancer high-volume centers in Kyushu, Japan, between April 2011 and August 2016. The patients were divided into the LSE (66 patients) and non-LSE groups (237 patients) based on the esophageal position on computed tomography images obtained with the patients in the supine position.

RESULTS

Univariate analysis showed that patients with LSE were significantly older than those with non-LSE (69 ± 8 vs. 65 ± 9 years; P = 0.002), had a significantly greater incidence of cardiovascular comorbidity (65.2% vs. 47.7%; P = 0.013), and a significantly longer operating time (612 ± 112 vs. 579 ± 102 min; P = 0.025). Logistic regression analysis verified that LSE was an independent risk factor for the incidence of pneumonia (odds ratio 3.3, 95% confidence interval 1.254-8.695; P = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of a LSE can increase the procedural difficulty of MIE and the incidence of morbidity after MIE. Thus, careful attention must be paid to anatomical esophageal position before performing MIE.

Comparison of Outcomes with Semi-mechanical and Circular Stapled Intrathoracic Esophagogastric Anastomosis following Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Several techniques have been described for esophagogastric anastomosis following esophagectomy. This study compared the outcomes of circular stapled anastomoses with semi-mechanical technique using a linear stapler.

METHODS

Perioperative data were extracted from a contemporaneously collected database of all consecutive esophagectomies for cancer with intrathoracic anastomoses performed in the Trent Oesophago-Gastric Unit between January 2015 and April 2018. Anastomotic techniques: circular stapled versus semi-mechanical, were evaluated and outcomes were compared. The primary outcome was anastomotic leak rate. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic stricture, overall complication rates, length of stay (LOS) and 30 day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-nine consecutive esophagectomies with intrathoracic anastomosis were performed during the study period. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score, Charlson comorbidity index and neoadjuvant therapies received. Circular stapled anastomoses were performed in 85 patients, while 74 patients received a semi-mechanical anastomosis. Clavien-Dindo complications II or more were higher in the circular stapled group (p = 0.02). There were 16 (10%) anastomotic leaks overall, three (4%) in semi-mechanical group versus 13 (15%) in the circular stapled group (p < 0.019). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of LOS, 30-day mortality or the need for endoscopic dilatation of the anastomosis at 3 months follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The move from a circular stapled to a semi-mechanical intrathoracic anastomosis has been associated with a reduced postoperative anastomotic leak rate following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

A successful clinical pathway protocol for minimally invasive esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity, which can substantially influence the hospital length of stay for patients. Anastomotic leak is the most devastating complication. Minimizing major postoperative complications can facilitate adherence to a clinical pathway protocol and can decrease hospital length of stay.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 130 patients who underwent an elective laparoscopic and thoracoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma between August 2014 and June 2018. A total of 112 patients (86%) underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation. All of the 130 patients underwent a laparoscopic gastric devascularization procedure a median of 15 days prior to the esophagectomy. The target discharge date was postoperative day number 8.

RESULTS

Thirty patients (23.08%) had postoperative complications. Atrial fibrillation (20 patients) [15.38%] was the most frequent complication. Four patients (3.1%) developed an anastomotic leak. There was one postoperative death (0.77%) in the cohort of patients. The median length of stay was 8 days. The mean length of stay for patients without complications was 8 days ± 1.2 days and 12.4 days ± 7.1 days for patients with one or more complications (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

The development of postoperative complications after minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy significantly increases hospital length of stay. Performing the operation with a specialized tandem surgical team and including preoperative ischemic preconditioning of the stomach minimizes overall and anastomotic complications and facilitates on time hospital discharge as defined by a perioperative clinical pathway protocol.

Outcomes of nutritional jejunostomy in the curative treatment of esophageal cancer

Substantial weight loss and eating problems are common before and after esophagectomy for cancer. The use of jejunostomy might prevent postoperative weight loss, but studies evaluating other outcomes are scarce. This study aims to assess the influence of jejunostomy on postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQOL), complications, reoperation, hospital stay, and survival. This prospective and population-based cohort study included all patients operated on for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer in Sweden in 2001-2005 with follow-up until 31st December 2016. Data regarding patient and tumor characteristics and treatment were prospectively collected. Multivariable logistic regression provided odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), whereas Cox regression provided hazard ratios with 95% CI. All risk estimates were adjusted for age, sex, tumor histology, stage, comorbidity, surgical approach, neoadjuvant therapy, and body mass index and weight loss at baseline. Among 397 patients, 181 (46%) received a jejunostomy during surgery. The use of jejunostomy did not influence the HRQOL at 6 months or 3 years after treatment. Jejunostomy users had no statistically significantly increased risk of postoperative complications (OR 1.27; 95% CI 0.86-1.87) or reoperation (OR 1.70; 95% CI 0.88-3.28). Intensive unit care and length of hospital stay was the same independent of the use of jejunostomy. The all-cause mortality was not increased in the jejunostomy group (HR 0.89, 95% CI: 0.74-1.07). This study indicates that jejunostomy does not influence postoperative HRQOL, complications, or survival after esophageal cancer surgery, it can be considered a safe method for early enteral nutrition after esophageal cancer surgery but benefits for the patients need further investigations.

Clinical Importance of Sputum in the Respiratory Tract as a Predictive Marker of Postoperative Morbidity After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Respiratory morbidity is common after esophagectomy and can be a major cause of surgery-related mortality. Thus, it is important to identify novel predictors that can preoperatively estimate the incidence of postoperative respiratory morbidity. Asymptomatic sputum in the respiratory tract is sometimes observed on preoperative computed tomography (CT). This study aimed to determine the clinical importance of sputum in the respiratory tract as a predictor of postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study included 609 consecutive patients who underwent three-incisional esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between April 2005 and November 2018.

RESULTS

Among the patients, 76 (12.5%) had sputum in the respiratory tract on preoperative CT. This finding was significantly associated with older age, more extreme smoking habit, worse performance status, lower forced expiratory volume 1%, and more frequent pulmonary comorbidities. Additionally, the incidence of postoperative pneumonia was higher in these patients than in those without sputum (16 vs 8%, p = 0.028). Sputum in the main bronchus was associated with higher frequencies of morbidity of Clavien-Dindo classification (CDc) ≥ II (p = 0.019), severe morbidity of CDc ≥ IIIb (p = 0.058), pneumonia (p = 0.10), and pulmonary morbidity (p = 0.19) compared with the finding of sputum in the trachea alone. On multivariate analysis, sputum in the respiratory tract was an independent risk factor (hazard ratio, 2.07; 95% confidence interval, 1.019-4.207; p = 0.044) for postoperative pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

Sputum in the respiratory tract is a novel predictor of postesophagectomy pneumonia. Patients with sputum in the more distal respiratory tract might have high risk of postoperative morbidities.