Oesophagectomy for tumours and dysplasia of the oesophagus and gastro-oesophageal junction

Systematic review with meta-analysis: prevalence of prior and concurrent Barrett's oesophagus in oesophageal adenocarcinoma patients

BACKGROUND

The proportions of patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) diagnosed by Barrett's oesophagus surveillance or with pre-existing Barrett's oesophagus are unclear.

AIM

To estimate the prevalence of prior and concurrent Barrett's oesophagus diagnosis among patients with OAC or oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinomas (OGJAC).

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase to identify studies published 1966-1/8/2020 that examined the prevalence of prior (≥6 months) or concurrent Barrett's diagnosis (at cancer diagnosis) among OAC and OGJAC patients. Random effects models estimated overall and stratified pooled prevalence rates.

RESULTS

A total of 69 studies, including 33 002 OAC patients (53 studies) and 2712 patients with OGJAC (28 studies) were included. The pooled prevalence of prior Barrett's oesophagus diagnosis in OAC was 11.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.4%-15.6%). The prevalence of prior Barrett's oesophagus diagnosis was higher in single-centre resection studies (16.0%, 95% CI 8.7%-24.9%) than population-based cancer registry studies (8.4%, 95% CI 5.5%-11.9%). The prevalence of concurrent Barrett's oesophagus in OAC was 56.6% (95% CI 48.5%-64.6%). Studies with 100% early stage OAC had higher prevalence of concurrent Barrett's oesophagus (91.3%, 95% CI 82.4%-97.6%) than studies with <50% early OAC (39.7%, 95% CI 33.7%-45.9%). In OGJAC, the prevalence of prior and concurrent Barrett's oesophagus was 23.2% (95% CI 7.5%-44.0%) and 26.3% (95% CI 17.8%-35.7%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients with OAC have Barrett's oesophagus. Our meta-analysis found ~12% of OAC patients had prior Barrett's diagnosis, but concurrent Barrett's oesophagus was found in ~57% at the time of OAC diagnosis. This represents a considerable missed opportunity for Barrett's oesophagus screening.

Indian consensus on gastroesophageal reflux disease in adults: A position statement of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology

The Indian Society of Gastroenterology developed this evidence-based practice guideline for management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in adults. A modified Delphi process was used to develop this consensus containing 58 statements, which were generated by electronic voting iteration as well as face-to-face meeting and review of the supporting literature primarily from India. These statements include 10 on epidemiology, 8 on clinical presentation, 10 on investigations, 23 on treatment (including medical, endoscopic, and surgical modalities), and 7 on complications of GERD. When the proportion of those who voted either to accept completely or with minor reservation was 80% or higher, the statement was regarded as accepted. The prevalence of GERD in India ranges from 7.6% to 30%, being  < 10% in most population studies, and higher in cohort studies. The dietary factors associated with GERD include use of spices and non-vegetarian food. Helicobacter pylori is thought to have a negative relation with GERD; H. pylori negative patients have higher grade of symptoms of GERD and esophagitis. Less than 10% of GERD patients in India have erosive esophagitis. In patients with occasional or mild symptoms, antacids and histamine H₂ receptor blockers (H2RAs) may be used, and proton pump inhibitors (PPI) should be used in patients with frequent or severe symptoms. Prokinetics have limited proven role in management of GERD.

Closing the audit cycle: improving short-term outcomes of oesophagectomy in a provincial hospital

A previously published study regarding the outcomes of oesophagectomy at a provincial hospital identified issues with perioperative care (Al-Herz et al 2012). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of changes in management at the institution concerned. This was a cohort study which compared the outcomes of 30 patients undergoing oesophagectomy before the unit audit and 30 patients after it. Demographics, operative details, recovery parameters, and oncological data were collected retrospectively. There was a significant reduction in the use of intravenous fluid, both intraoperatively (6.6 vs 3.3L, P < 0.0001) and during the first 24 hours (9.2 vs 5.5L, P < 0.0001). Patients were extubated three days earlier (P < 0.001) after the audit, and the percentage of patients requiring tracheostomy was smaller (26.7% vs 0%, P = 0.003). The length of total hospital stay was shorter (15 vs 13 days, P = 0.035). We conclude that the publication of a unit audit changed perioperative practice and resulted in a significant improvement in the short term outcomes after oesophagectomy.

The hybrid intrathoracic oesophago-gastric anastomosis in oesophageal cancer-morbidity and mortality : the hybrid intrathoracic oesophagogastric anastomosis

BACKGROUND

The technique of the side-to-side, hybrid stapled/hand-sewn, intrathoracic, oesophago-gastric anastomosis was first described in 1996 (Bird et al. Aust N.Z J Surg 66:77-763, 1996). However despite some clinical and theoretical advantages, it has never been as popular as either hand-sewn or circular-stapled anastomosis. The aim of this study was to review the experience of a single surgeon (RC) who has used this type of anastomosis since 1993 as the routine means of reconstruction following oesophagectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was performed. The study included 195 consecutive oesophageal resections performed by a single surgeon (RC) from 1993 to 2011.

RESULTS

Of 195 patients undergoing oesophagectomy, 180 patients had an intrathoracic anastomosis for oesophageal cancer. Of the 180 patients, 177 had an anastomosis formed using the hybrid technique. The clinical anastomotic leak rate in this group was found to the 2.7 % with an in hospital mortality of 0.5 %. The total number of patients requiring post-operative dilatation was 17/180 or approximately 9 % of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The hybrid oesophageal anastomosis is associated with a low mortality and anastomotic leak rate and a modest incidence of stricturing.

Reporting of short-term clinical outcomes after esophagectomy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

This review summarizes reporting of complications of esophageal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND

Accurate assessment of morbidity and mortality after surgery for cancer is essential to compare centers, allow data synthesis, and inform clinical decision-making. A lack of defined standards may distort clinically relevant treatment effects.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches identified articles published between 2005 and 2009 reporting morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy for cancer. Data were analyzed for frequency of complication reporting and to check whether outcomes were defined and classified for severity and whether a validated system for grading complications was used. Information about reporting outcomes adjusting for baseline risk factors was collated, and a descriptive summary of the results of included outcomes was undertaken.

RESULTS

Of 3458 abstracts, 224 full papers were reviewed and 122 were included (17 randomized trials and 105 observational studies), reporting outcomes of 57,299 esophagectomies. No single complication was reported in all papers, and 60 (60.6%) did not define any of the measured complications. Anastomotic leak was the most commonly reported morbidity, assessed in 80 (80.1%) articles, defined in 28 (28.3%), but 22 different descriptions were used. Five papers (5.1%) categorized morbidity with a validated grading system. One hundred fifteen papers reported postoperative mortality rates, 25 defining the term using 10 different definitions. In-hospital mortality was the most commonly used term for postoperative death, with 6 different interpretations of this phrase. Eighteen papers adjusted outcomes for baseline risk factors and 60 presented baseline measures of comorbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcome reporting after esophageal cancer surgery is heterogeneous and inconsistent, and it lacks methodological rigor. A consensus approach to reporting clinical outcomes should be considered, and at the minimum it is recommended that a "core outcome set" is defined and used in all studies reporting outcomes of esophageal cancer surgery. This will allow meaningful cross study comparisons and analyses to evaluate surgery.

Healthcare resource use and medical costs for the management of oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

This study examined the interaction between natural history, current practice patterns in diagnosis, monitoring and treatment of oesophageal cancer, and associated health resource utilization and costs.

METHODS

A cost analysis of a prospective population-based cohort of 1100 patients with a primary diagnosis of oesophageal cancer was performed using chart review from the Australian Cancer Study Clinical Follow-Up Study. The analysis enabled estimation of healthcare resources and associated costs in 2009 euros by stage of disease and treatment pathway.

RESULTS

Most patients (88·5 per cent) presented with stage II, III or IV cancer; 61·1 per cent (672 of 1100) were treated surgically. Overall mean costs were €37,195 (median €29,114) for patients undergoing surgery and €17,281 (median €13,066) for those treated without surgery. Surgery contributed 66·4 per cent of the total costs (mean €24,697 per patient) in the surgical group. In the non-surgical group, use of chemotherapy was more prevalent (81·9 per cent of patients) and contributed 61·1 per cent of the total costs. Other important cost determinants were gastro-oesophageal junction tumours, treatment location and tumour stage. Mean costs of those monitored for Barrett's oesophagus (7·3 per cent of patients) were lower, although about one-third still presented with advanced-stage cancer.

CONCLUSION

Overall costs for managing oesophageal cancer were high and dominated by surgery costs in patients treated surgically and by chemotherapy costs in patients treated without surgery. Radiotherapy, treatment location and cancer subtype were also important. Monitoring for Barrett's oesophagus and earlier-stage detection were associated with lower management costs, but the potential net benefit from surveillance strategies needs further investigation.

Is endoscopic surveillance for non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus cost-effective? Review of economic evaluations

BACKGROUND AND AIM

  Several health economic evaluations have explored the cost-effectiveness of endoscopic surveillance for patients with non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus, with conflicting results. By comparing results across studies and highlighting key methodological and data limitations a platform for future, more rigorous analyses, can be developed.

METHODS

  A systematic literature review was undertaken of studies evaluating cost-effectiveness of surveillance for non-dysplastic Barrett's esophagus. Articles were included if they assessed both cost and health outcomes for surveillance versus no surveillance. A descriptive review was undertaken and the quality of the studies appraised against best-practice recommendations for economic evaluations and modeling studies.

RESULTS

  Seven publications met the inclusion criteria. All used decision-analytic Markov models. Half of the evaluations found surveillance was not cost-effective. At best, surveillance produced improved outcomes at a cost of US$16 640 per quality-adjusted life-year, and at worst it did more harm than good and at a greater cost. The quality of the evaluations and generalizability to the Asia-Pacific region was diminished as a result of inadequate or inconsistent evidence supporting parameter estimates, such as quality of life, endoscopic sensitivity and specificity and cancer recurrence rates.

CONCLUSIONS

  Unless newly emerging technologies improve the quality-adjusted survival benefit conferred by endoscopic surveillance, this strategy is unlikely to be cost-effective. Obsolete assumptions and incomplete analyses reduce the quality of published evaluations. For these reasons new evaluations are required that encompass the growing evidence base for new technologies, such as new endoscopic therapies for high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal cancer.

Surgical outcomes associated with oesophagectomy in New South Wales: an investigation of hospital volume

INTRODUCTION

Resection remains the standard treatment for curable oesophageal cancer. By linking the NSW Central Cancer Registry (CCR) and the NSW Admitted Patient Data Collection (APDC) databases, mortality, post-resection complication and survival associated with oesophagectomy were investigated.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed with oesophageal cancer from 2000 to 2005 as recorded in the CCR (n = 2,082) were linked with records in the APDC, giving a total of 17,205 episodes of care. Over 15% (n = 321) of all patients underwent an oesophagectomy.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The overall 30-day mortality rate following resection was 3.7%, ranging from 2.6% in high volume hospitals to 6.4% in low volume hospitals. Three-year absolute survival for localised-regional disease following oesophagectomy was 64% (95%CI 54-73%) in high-volume hospitals, 58% (95%CI 46-68%) in mid-volume and 45% (95%CI 23-65%) in low-volume hospitals. The post-resection complication rate was 19% (95%CI 13-26%) for high-volume hospital, 24% (95%CI 13-40%) in low-volume and 31% (95%CI 22-41%) in mid-volume hospitals.

CONCLUSION

Oesophagectomy in NSW is performed with satisfactory results. However, there is a suggestion that higher- rather than lower-volume hospitals have better post-resection outcomes.