Clinical evaluation of the feasibility of minimally invasive surgery in esophageal cancer

Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (NST 1502): a multicenter prospective cohort study

Background

Whether minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is superior to open esophagectomy (OE) in the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is still uncertain. Therefore, this multicenter prospective study aimed to compare MIE with OE in postoperative parameters and long-term survival.

Methods

All hospitalized patients with cT1b-3N0-1M0 thoracic ESCC treated by MIE or OE were enrolled from 19 selected centers from April 1, 2015 to December 31, 2018. The propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimize the selection bias. The basic clinicopathological characteristics and 3-year overall survival (OS) as well as disease-free survival (DFS) of two groups were compared by R version 3.6.2.

Results

MIE were performed in 1,387 patients and OE in 335 patients. 335 cases in each group were finally matched by PSM, and no significant differences in the essential demographic characteristics were observed between the MIE and OE groups after PSM. Compared with OE, MIE had significantly less intraoperative bleeding, less total drainage volume, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and harvested significantly more lymph nodes (LNs) (all P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the major postoperative complications and death rates between MIE and OE. The 3-year OS and DFS were 77.0% and 68.1% in the MIE group versus 69.3% and 60.9% in the OE group (OS: P = 0.03; DFS: P = 0.09), and the rates were 75.1% and 66.5% in the MIE group versus 66.9% and 58.6% in the OE group for stage cII patients (OS: P = 0.04, DFS: P = 0.09), respectively.

Conclusions

Compared with OE, MIE is a safe and effective treatment approach with similar mortality and morbidity. It has the advantages in harvesting more LNs, improving postoperative recovery and survival of stage cII ESCC patients.

Status of diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer and non-coding RNA correlation research: a narrative review

OBJECTIVE

To describe and discuss the progression of the non-coding RNA as biomarkers in early esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer without obvious symptoms during early stages is one of the most common cancers, the current clinical treatments offer possibilities of a cure, but the survival rates and the prognoses remain poor, it is a serious threat to human life and health. Most patients are usually diagnosed during terminal stages due to low sensitivity of esophageal cancer's early detection techniques. With the development of molecular biology, an increasing number of non-coding RNAs are found to be associated with the occurrence, development, and prognosis of esophageal cancer. Some of these have begun to be used in clinics and laboratories for diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis, with the goal of reducing mortality.

METHODS

The information for this paper was collected from a variety of sources, including a search of the keynote's references, a search for texts in college libraries, and discussions with experts in the field of esophageal cancer clinical treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-coding RNA does play a regulatory role in the development of esophageal cancer, which can predict the occurrence or prognosis of tumors, and become a new class of tumor markers and therapeutic targets in clinical applications. In this review, we survey the recent developments in the incidence, diagnosis, and treatment of esophageal cancer, especially with new research progresses on non-coding RNA biomarkers in detail, and discuss its potential clinical applications.

Does thoracoscopic esophagectomy really reduce post-operative pneumonia in all cases?

It has been said that "thoracoscopy suppresses the occurrence of pneumonia in comparison to thoracotomy", but does it reflect real clinical practice? To resolve this clinical question, we compared the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies from limited institutes (CLIs) in which a large number of high-volume centers were the main participants to those of retrospective cohort studies based on nationwide databases (CNDs) in which both high-volume centers and low-volume hospitals participated. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the short-term outcomes of thoracoscopic to open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in the three above-mentioned research formats. In total, 43 studies with 21,057 patients, which included 1 RCT with 115 patients, 38 CLIs with 6,126 patients and 4 CNDs with 14,816 patients, were selected. Pneumonia was one of the most important complications. Although significant superiority in thoracoscopic esophagectomy was observed in RCTs (p = 0.005) and CLIs (p = 0.003), no such difference was seen in findings using nationwide databases (p = 0.69). In conclusion, unlike RCTs and CLIs, CNDs did not show the superiority of thoracoscopic surgery in terms of post-operative pneumonia. RCTs and CLIs were predominantly performed by high-volume hospitals, while CNDs were often performed by low-volume hospitals. In actual clinical practice including various types of hospitals, the superiority of thoracoscopic over open esophagectomy regarding the incidence of pneumonia may, therefore, decrease.

Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Esophagectomy

Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer can be performed in multiple positions, such as the lateral decubitus position or prone position, using various techniques. Each approach has its own advantages and disadvantages, and surgeons can select an appropriate approach based on their preferences. Except for the reduction of pulmonary complications, the benefits of thoracoscopic esophagectomy, including oncologic outcomes, have not been proven scientifically. This review describes the approaches and procedures of thoracoscopic esophagectomy and presents scientific evidence for this procedure.

Minimally invasive techniques for transthoracic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Oesophagectomy is a demanding operation that can be performed by different approaches including open surgery or a combination of minimal access techniques. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of open, minimally invasive and robotic oesophagectomy techniques for oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting open oesophagectomy, laparoscopically assisted oesophagectomy (LAO), thoracoscopically assisted oesophagectomy (TAO), totally minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO) or robotic MIO (RAMIO) for oesophagectomy. A network meta-analysis of intraoperative (operating time, blood loss), postoperative (overall complications, anastomotic leaks, chyle leak, duration of hospital stay) and oncological (R0 resection, lymphadenectomy) outcomes, and survival was performed.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight studies involving 32 315 patients were included in the network meta-analysis (open 17 824, 55·2 per cent; LAO 1576, 4·9 per cent; TAO 2421 7·5 per cent; MIO 9558, 29·6 per cent; RAMIO 917, 2·8 per cent). Compared with open oesophagectomy, both MIO and RAMIO were associated with less blood loss, significantly lower rates of pulmonary complications, shorter duration of stay and higher lymph node yield. There were no significant differences between surgical techniques in surgical-site infections, chyle leak, and 30- and 90-day mortality. MIO and RAMIO had better 1- and 5-year survival rates respectively compared with open surgery.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive and robotic techniques for oesophagectomy are associated with reduced perioperative morbidity and duration of hospital stay, with no compromise of oncological outcomes but no improvement in perioperative mortality.

Current status of postoperative infections after digestive surgery in Japan: The Japan Postoperative Infectious Complications Survey in 2015

AIM

To survey postoperative infections (PI) after digestive surgery.

METHODS

This survey, conducted by the Japan Society of Surgical Infection, included patients undergoing digestive surgery at 28 centers between September 2015 and March 2016. Data collected included patient background characteristics, type of surgery, contamination status, and type of PI, including surgical site infection (SSI), remote infection (RI), and antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) bacterial infections and colonization.

RESULTS

Postoperative infections occurred in 10.7% of 6582 patients who underwent digestive surgery (6.8% for endoscopic surgery and 18.7% for open surgery). SSI and RI, including respiratory tract infection, urinary tract infection, antibiotic-associated diarrhea, drain infection, and catheter-related bloodstream infection, occurred in 8.9% and 3.7% of patients, respectively. Among all PI, 13.2% were overlapping infections. The most common overlapping infections were incisional and organ/space SSI, which occurred in 4.2% of patients. AMR bacterial infections occurred in 1.2% of patients after digestive surgery and comprised 11.5% of all PI. Rate of AMR bacterial colonization after digestive surgery was only 0.3%.

CONCLUSION

Periodic surveillance of PI, including AMR bacteria, is necessary for a detailed evaluation of nosocomial infections.

Recent advances in thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Technical advances and developments in endoscopic equipment and thoracoscopic surgery have increased the popularity of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). However, there is currently no established scientific evidence supporting the use of MIE as an alternative to open esophagectomy (OE). To date, a number of single-institution studies and several meta-analyses have demonstrated acceptable short-term outcomes of thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, and we recently reported one of the largest propensity score-matched comparison studies between MIE and OE for esophageal cancer, based on a nationwide Japanese database. We found that, in general, MIE had a longer operative time and less blood loss than OE. Moreover, compared to OE, MIE was associated with a lower rate of pulmonary complications such as pneumonia, and both methods had similar mortality rates. Although MIE may reduce the occurrence of postoperative respiratory complications, MIE and OE seem to have comparable short-term outcomes. However, the oncological benefit to patients undergoing MIE remains to be scientifically proven, as no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to verify each method's impact on the long-term survival of cancer patients. An ongoing randomized phase III study (JCOG1409) is expected to determine the impact of each method with regard to short- and long-term outcomes.

Interplay between the NF‑κB and hedgehog signaling pathways predicts prognosis in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

Tumor recurrence and metastasis in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) are primary causes of patient mortality. The nuclear factor (NF)‑κB signaling pathway and hedgehog signaling pathway were previously reported to contribute to cell growth and metastasis in ESCC. The present study therefore investigated the roles of the NF‑κB and hedgehog pathways in ESCC tumors following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT). By immunohistochemistry staining, it was observed that NF‑κB and glioma‑associated oncogene homolog 1 (Gli1), key components of the NF‑κB and hedgehog pathways, respectively, were decreased following NCRT, which was further confirmed by western blotting and reverse transcription‑quantitative polymerase chain reaction analysis. In addition, survival analysis suggested that high expression levels of either NF‑κB or Gli1 were associated with poor overall survival (OS) of patients. In the esophageal cell line TE‑8, NF‑κB and Gli1 formed a positive feedback loop, and inhibition of either NF‑κB or Gli1 may inhibit cell migration, invasion and proliferation. The results of the present study demonstrated that activation of the NF‑κB and hedgehog signaling pathways limited the OS of patients with ESCC following NCRT, and may therefore be suitable targets for ESCC treatment.

Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy in the Prone Position Versus the Lateral Position (Hand-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery): A Retrospective Cohort Study of 127 Consecutive Esophageal Cancer Patients

PURPOSE

To assess the validity of esophagectomy with the patient in the prone position (PP), the short-term surgical results of PP and hand-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (HATS) were compared.

METHODS

This study enrolled 127 patients who underwent esophagectomy with HATS (n=91) or PP (n=36) between October 1999 and September 2014. The patients' background characteristics, operative findings, and postoperative complications were examined.

RESULTS

The patients' background characteristics were not significantly different. During surgery, total and thoracic blood loss were significantly lower in PP than in HATS (P<0.0001, <0.0001). Other operative findings were not significantly different between the 2 groups. Postoperatively, recurrent nerve palsy was significantly less frequent in PP than in HATS (P=0.049). In the comparison between the recurrent nerve palsy-positive and palsy-negative groups, sex (male) and preoperative respiratory comorbidity (negative) were significantly correlated with recurrent nerve palsy.

CONCLUSIONS

In thoracoscopic esophagectomy, the PP was associated with lower surgical stress than HATS, with equal operative performance oncologically. The PP could prevent recurrent nerve palsy because of the magnified view effect.