Long-term nutrition in patients candidate to neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments

To improve outcomes, to decrease the rate of local recurrence and development of distant metastases neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies are employed in cancer patients in forms of radiation, chemo-, endocrine-, targeted-, and immunotherapy or their combination. Nutrition therapy plays important role in all phases of the cancer journey. From neoadjuvant therapy to prehabilitation, early postoperative nutrition, and long-term nutrition care during the adjuvant phase and survivorship determines the survival and quality of life of cancer patients. During the neoadjuvant phase patients may be in poor nutritional condition which can be aggravated by the applied oncological treatment. Beside this apparent threat this period also gives an excellent opportunity to maintain or even improve the nutritional status of the patients by nutrition therapy. After surgery the burdening effects of the operation may jeopardize the execution of adjuvant therapy. After early postoperative feeding a long-term nutrition strategy should be developed for cancer patients in order to avoid nutritional deterioration during the usually lengthy postoperative therapy. In this narrative review we discuss how preoperative nutritional status and medical nutrition therapy influence the results of surgery and after the operation what is the available evidence about nutritional status and outcome and the potentials to influence them by nutrition therapy.

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.

Impact of Percutaneous Endoscopic Gastrostomy Tube Feeding on Nutritional Status in Patients Undergoing Chemoradiotherapy for Oesophageal Cancer

Introduction

Oesophageal cancer causes dysphagia and weight loss. Malnutrition further worsens with multimodal treatment.

Aim

The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) placement in the nutritional status of patients with oesophageal cancer requiring chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

Methods

A comparative study with a prospective arm and a historical cohort was conducted. Oesophageal cancer patients undergoing CRT with dysphagia grade >2 and/or weight loss >10% were submitted to PEG-tube placement (pull method) before CRT. Stoma seeding was evaluated through a swab obtained after placement and, in surgical patients, the resected stoma. A matched historical cohort without PEG placement was used as control (trial ACTRN12616000697482).

Results

Twenty-nine patients (intervention group, IG) were compared to 30 patients (control group, CG). Main outcomes did not differ in the IG and CG: weight loss during CRT 8.1 ± 5.5 kg versus 9.1 ± 4.2 kg (p = 0.503); 6-month mortality after CRT or surgery 17.2% versus 26.7% (p = 0.383); perioperative complication rate 54.5% versus 55.6% (p = 1.000); unplanned hospital admissions 34.5% versus 40.0% (p = 0.661). In the CG, during CRT, 14 (46.7%) patients presented with dysphagia grade 3-4, of whom 12 required nasogastric tube feeding (n = 10), surgical gastrostomy (n = 1), and oesophageal dilation (n = 1). In the IG, 89.7% used the PEG tube during CRT, sometimes exclusively in 51.7%. Adverse events were mainly minor (n = 12, 41.4%), mostly late peristomal infections, 1 major complication (exploratory laparotomy due to suspected colonic interposition, not confirmed). There was no cytological or histological evidence of stomal tumour seeding.

Conclusion

Weight loss, hospital admissions, surgical complications, and mortality were identical in oesophageal cancer patients referred for CRT, regardless of prophylactic PEG. However, half of the patients required exclusive enteral nutritional support, making PEG-tube placement an alternative to consider.

Best Practices in Esophageal, Gastroduodenal, and Colonic Stenting

Endoscopic stenting is an area of endoscopy that has witnessed noteworthy advancements over the last decade, resulting in evolving clinical practices among gastroenterologists around the world. Indications for endoscopic stenting have progressively expanded, becoming a frequent part of the management algorithm for various benign and malignant conditions of the gastrointestinal tract, from esophagus to rectum. In addition to expanded indications, continuous technological enhancements and development of novel endoscopic stents have resulted in an increased success of these approaches and, in some cases, allowed new applications. This review aimed to summarize best practices in esophageal, gastroduodenal, and colonic stenting.

Effects of preoperative nutrition on postoperative outcomes in esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Postoperative enteral nutrition has been widely implemented in esophageal cancer, but the efficacy and safety of preoperative nutrition, particularly immune-enhancing nutrition (IEN), remain controversial. This meta-analysis aims to provide a quantitative synthesis of whether preoperative nutrition improves postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients with resectable esophageal cancer. A systematic search was conducted in Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and databases of clinical trials dated up to December 2019. Randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing postoperative outcomes between esophageal cancer patients with and without preoperative nutritional support were included. Random-effects model was applied in the meta-analysis of primary outcomes (overall complication rate, in-hospital mortality) and secondary outcomes (infectious complication rate, anastomotic leak rate, length of postoperative hospital stay). Complications of feeding tube access and perioperative weight loss were evaluated by qualitative synthesis. Subgroup analyses were performed by stratifying immunonutrition and standard nutrition before surgery. Subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials alone was also done. A total of 15 studies enrolling 1864 participants were included. The overall meta-analysis found that preoperative nutrition could reduce infectious complications (odds ratio [OR] = 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.26, 0.98]; I2 = 48%) and length of hospital stay (mean difference = -2.10 day, 95% CI [-3.72, -0.47]; I2 = 78%) after esophagectomy, whereas no significant difference was revealed in the incidence of overall complications (OR = 0.76, 95% CI [0.52, 1.11]; I2 = 32%), in-hospital mortality (OR = 1.03, 95% CI [0.41, 2.61]; I2 = 12%), and anastomotic leak (OR = 1.05, 95% CI [0.69, 1.58]; I2 = 0%). Subgroup of preoperative immunonutrition showed more prominent benefits. The complication rate of feeding tube access was low (1.6-16%). In conclusion, preoperative nutrition is safe in esophageal cancer, but benefits are observed in infectious complication rate and length of stay on a limited scale. IEN holds more advantages over standard nutrition. Randomized trials in the context of nutritional support during neoadjuvant therapy are in demand.

Assessment of Nutritional Status and Nutrition Impact Symptoms in Patients Undergoing Resection for Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer: Results from the Multi-Centre NOURISH Point Prevalence Study

BACKGROUND

Identification and treatment of malnutrition are essential in upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer. However, there is limited understanding of the nutritional status of UGI cancer patients at the time of curative surgery. This prospective point prevalence study involving 27 Australian tertiary hospitals investigated nutritional status at the time of curative UGI cancer resection, as well as presence of preoperative nutrition impact symptoms, and associations with length of stay (LOS) and surgical complications.

METHODS

Subjective global assessment, hand grip strength (HGS) and weight were performed within 7 days of admission. Data on preoperative weight changes, nutrition impact symptoms, and dietary intake were collected using a purpose-built data collection tool. Surgical LOS and complications were also recorded. Multivariate regression models were developed for nutritional status, unintentional weight loss, LOS and complications.

RESULTS

This study included 200 patients undergoing oesophageal, gastric and pancreatic surgery. Malnutrition prevalence was 42% (95% confidence interval (CI) 35%, 49%), 49% lost ≥5% weight in 6 months, and 47% of those who completed HGS assessment had low muscle strength with no differences between surgical procedures (p = 0.864, p = 0.943, p = 0.075, respectively). The overall prevalence of reporting at least one preoperative nutrition impact symptom was 55%, with poor appetite (37%) and early satiety (23%) the most frequently reported. Age (odds ratio (OR) 4.1, 95% CI 1.5, 11.5, p = 0.008), unintentional weight loss of ≥5% in 6 months (OR 28.7, 95% CI 10.5, 78.6, p < 0.001), vomiting (OR 17.1, 95% CI 1.4, 207.8, 0.025), reduced food intake lasting 2-4 weeks (OR 7.4, 95% CI 1.3, 43.5, p = 0.026) and ≥1 month (OR 7.7, 95% CI 2.7, 22.0, p < 0.001) were independently associated with preoperative malnutrition. Factors independently associated with unintentional weight loss were poor appetite (OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.6, 8.4, p = 0.002) and degree of solid food reduction of <75% (OR 3.3, 95% CI 1.2, 9.2, p = 0.02) and <50% (OR 4.9, 95% CI 1.5, 15.6, p = 0.008) of usual intake. Malnutrition (regression coefficient 3.6, 95% CI 0.1, 7.2, p = 0.048) and unintentional weight loss (regression coefficient 4.1, 95% CI 0.5, 7.6, p = 0.026) were independently associated with LOS, but no associations were found for complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing recognition of the importance of preoperative nutritional intervention, a high proportion of patients present with malnutrition or clinically significant weight loss, which are associated with increased LOS. Factors associated with malnutrition and weight loss should be incorporated into routine preoperative screening. Further investigation is required of current practice for dietetics interventions received prior to UGI surgery and if this mitigates the impact on clinical outcomes.

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.

Nutritional benefit of laparoscopic jejunostomy during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for obstructing esophageal cancer

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) confers a survival benefit in esophageal carcinoma, but it is difficult to perform in patients who cannot receive enteral feeding due to an esophageal obstruction. In the current study, the nutritional benefit of laparoscopic jejunostomy (Lap-J) was evaluated in patients with NAC for obstructing esophageal cancer. A total of 91 patients with esophageal cancer who received NAC between 2009 and 2017 were included in the present study. Lap-J was performed prior to NAC in 15 patients (16.5%) with an obstructing tumor. Patients with NAC without Lap-J were used as the control group (n=76). Nutritional parameters and surgical outcomes of the two groups were compared retrospectively. In the patients with Lap-J, 14 of the 15 patients (93.3%) did not experience any procedure-associated complications. No mortalities were associated with Lap-J. Significant decreases in total serum protein, albumin, hemoglobin concentrations and prognostic nutritional index (PNI) occurred following NAC in the control but not in the Lap-J group. Serum albumin and the improved modified Glasgow prognostic score increased significantly after NAC in the Lap-J group but not in the control group. In conclusion, perioperative nutritional support with Lap-J was safe and effective in patients with NAC for obstructing esophageal cancer.

Palliative interventions for patients with incurable locally advanced or metastatic thoracic esophageal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes of palliative interventions for patients with incurable locally advanced or metastatic esophageal carcinoma.

METHODS

A total of 131 patients with thoracic esophageal carcinoma who underwent palliative interventions were enrolled. Insertion of a self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), tube enterostomy for enteral nutrition (EN), and palliative esophagectomy (PE) were performed in 38, 65, and 28 patients, respectively. The clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes of each group were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Patients in the EN group frequently received chemoradiotherapy (P < 0.01). SEMS insertion, but not PE or EN, improved the mean dysphagia score after the intervention (P < 0.01). For the SEMS, EN, and PE groups, the occurrence of intervention-related complications was 31.6, 10.8, and 96.4%, respectively, the median survival time was 88, 208, and 226 days (P < 0.01), and the mean ratio of duration of home care to survival time was 28.9, 38.5, and 39.6% (P = 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS insertion effectively relieved obstructive symptoms, but had no survival benefit. Tube enterostomy showed a low complication rate and has the potential to improve survival in combination with additional treatment, with no palliation of obstructive symptoms.

Safety and efficacy of oesophageal stenting with simultaneous percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy as a supplementary feeding route in unresectable proximal oesophageal cancer

Introduction

Proximally located oesophageal cancer poses an especially difficult problem in terms of restoration of patency and the stenting procedure. Supplementary percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) may be useful in these patients.

Aim

To assess the safety of the stenting procedure in the proximal oesophagus in patients with unresectable upper oesophageal cancer, performed simultaneously with PEG insertion.

Material and methods

Patients with obstructing upper oesophageal tumours were scheduled for an oesophageal stenting procedure and simultaneous PEG insertion. Degree of dysphagia, body weight loss, daily energy requirement, body mass index and performance status before and after the stenting procedure as well as complications were assessed.

Results

Forty-five patients aged 19-88 years were included in the study. Six of them had a fistula to the trachea and underwent stenting of the oesophagus or both the oesophagus and the airway. The technical success rate was 100%. Following the procedure all patients were able to swallow fluids and semi-liquids, and PEG was used as the primary feeding route. Body mass index increased from 20.4 to 21.1 (p = 0.0001), body weight gain improved from -10.1 to +2.0 kg and metabolic requirements improved (p = 0.0001). Also, the Karnofsky score improved significantly (56.7 vs. 65.1, p = 0.0001). Mean survival time was 133 days (range: 36-378).

Conclusions

Stenting of the proximal oesophagus with simultaneous PEG is a safe procedure, allowing the patients to resume oral intake of liquids whilst improving nutritional status and general performance, with an acceptable rate of complications.

Enteral nutrition and quality of life in patients undergoing chemoradiotherapy for esophageal carcinoma: a comparison of nasogastric tube, esophageal stent, and ostomy tube feeding

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This study prospectively recruited esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients who received esophageal stent, nasogastric tube (NGT), or jejunostomy/gastrostomy feeding to compare the changes in nutritional status and quality of life during chemoradiation therapy (CRT).

METHODS

In total, 81 patients were analyzed (stent, 7; surgical ostomy, 26; NGT, 19; oral intake, 29). An NGT was inserted when, despite medication, dysphagia or pain worsened with oral feeding during CRT. Serial body weight and daily narcotic demand were recorded. Changes in serum albumin level and quality of life were also assessed. In subgroup analysis comparing NGT and prophylactic surgical ostomy feeding, 5 patients with total occlusion in the ostomy group were excluded.

RESULTS

Patients in all groups had similar decreases in mean body weight with an overall change of -6.41% ± 5.21% at the end of CRT. The stent group had significantly worse pain, decreased albumin (-1.03 ± .9 mg/dL), and decreased quality of life across CRT compared with the other groups. In subgroup analysis the stent group had significantly higher weight loss, whereas the NGT group had higher narcotic demand and slightly worse quality of life. Two patients (7.7%) had ileus days after jejunostomy creation. Five patients (23.8%) among those received prophylactic ostomy creation and scarcely used it.

CONCLUSIONS

These preliminary results raise concerns that use of esophageal stents may be less suitable in patients undergoing CRT. Tube feeding by means of transnasal or percutaneous routes appear to be comparably effective during CRT, but both have advantages and disadvantages. We suggest a careful endoscopic evaluation to select the population more appropriate for NGT feeding on an as-needed basis during CRT.

Early enteral nutrition and total parenteral nutrition on the nutritional status and blood glucose in patients with gastric cancer complicated with diabetes mellitus after radical gastrectomy

Effects of early enteral nutrition (EEN) or total parenteral nutrition (TPN) support on nutritional status and blood glucose in patients with gastric cancer complicated with diabetes mellitus after radical gastrectomy were investigated. One hundred and twenty-nine patients with gastric cancer complicated with diabetes mellitus type 2 admitted to the First People's Hospital of Jinan (Jinan, China), from June 2012 to June 2016 were selected into the study. According to different nutrition support pathways, these patients were randomly divided into the EEN group and the TPN group. The improvement of nutritional indexes, postoperative complications, gastrointestinal function recovery and perioperative blood glucose fluctuation were compared between the two groups. On the 4th day after operation, the improvement levels of total bilirubin (TBL), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), total protein (TP), prealbumin (PAB), hemoglobin (HGB) and weight (Wt) in the EEN group were significantly higher than those in the conventional group (P<0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups on the 8th day after operation (P>0.05). No patients had complications in the EEN group, while a total of 29 patients in the TPN group suffered adverse reactions, indicating that the incidence rate of complications in the EEN group was significantly lower than that in the TPN group (P<0.05). The postoperative evacuation time was earlier, hospitalization time was shorter and cost of postoperative hospitalization was less in the EEN group than those in the TPN group, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). The blood glucose fluctuation values at fasting and 2 h after a meal in the TPN group were higher than those in the EEN group within 8 days after operation, and the differences were statistically significant (χ²=13.219, P=0.002; χ²=20.527, P<0.001). EEN support provides nutrition for patients with gastric cancer complicated with diabetes mellitus after radical gastrectomy, which is worthy of clinical promotion as it maintains good nutritional status, produces few postoperative complications and keeps the blood glucose level stable, by which the postoperative evacuation time is early, the hospitalization time is short and the cost is low.

Nutritional optimization during neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgical resection of esophageal cancer-a narrative review

This narrative review aims to evaluate the evidence for the different nutritional approaches employed during neoadjuvant therapy in patients with locoregional esophageal cancer. Patients with esophageal cancer are often malnourished and difficult to optimize nutritionally. While evidence suggests that neoadjuvant therapy can offer a survival advantage, associated toxicity can exacerbate poor nutritional status. There is currently no accepted standard of care regarding optimal nutritional approach. A systematic literature search was undertaken. Studies describing the utilization of an additional nutritional intervention in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant therapy prior to esophagectomy were included. Primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality after esophagectomy. Secondary outcome measures were loss of weight during neoadjuvant therapy, completion rate of intended neoadjuvant therapy, complications from nutritional intervention, 30-day postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy and quality of life during neoadjuvant treatment. Given the heterogeneity of retrieved articles results was presented as a narrative review. Twenty-five studies were included of which 16 evaluated esophageal stenting, four feeding jejunostomy, three gastrostomy, one nasogastric feeding, and one comparative study of esophageal stenting to feeding jejunostomy. 30-day postoperative mortality was only reported in two of the 26 included studies limiting comparison between nutritional strategies. All studies of esophageal stents reported improvements in dysphagia with reported weight change ranging from -5.4 to +6 kg and one study reported 30-day postoperative mortality after esophagectomy (10%). In patients undergoing esophageal stenting for their neoadjuvant treatment overall migration rate was 29.9%. Studies of laparoscopically inserted jejunostomy were all retrospective reviews that demonstrated an increase in weight ranging from 0.4 to 11.8 kg and similarly no study reported 30-day postoperative mortality. Only one comparative study was included that compared esophageal stents to jejunostomy. This study reported no significant difference between the two groups in respect to complication rates (stents 22% vs. jejunostomy 4%, P = 0.11) or increase in weight (stents 4.4 kg vs. jejunostomy 4.2 kg, P = 0.59). Quality of life was also poorly reported. This review demonstrates the uncertainty on the optimal nutritional approach for patients with resectable esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant treatment prior to esophagectomy. A prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study is needed to determine current practice and inform a prospective clinical trial.

Self-Expanding Metal Stents Improve Swallowing and Maintain Nutrition During Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer can have significant dysphagia. Nutritional support during neoadjuvant therapy is often delivered via nasoenteric or percutaneous feeding tubes. These approaches do not allow for per-oral feeding.

AIMS

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of fully covered self-expanding metal esophageal stents for nutritional support during neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

This was a pilot, prospective study at a single tertiary center. From March 2012 to May 2013, consecutive patients with esophageal cancer eligible for neoadjuvant therapy were enrolled. Metal stents were placed prior to starting neoadjuvant therapy. Data were collected at baseline and predetermined intervals until an endpoint (surgery or disease progression). Outcomes included dysphagia grade, satisfaction of swallowing score, nutritional status (weight, serum albumin), impact on surgery, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Fourteen stents were placed in 12 patients (59.1 ± 9.5 years, 11 men, 1 woman). Dysphagia grade (pre 3.4 ± 0.5 vs post 0.2 ± 0.4, p < 0.0001) and swallowing scores (20.2 ± 5.9 vs 6.3 ± 4.7, p < 0.0001) significantly improved after stent placement. Improvements were sustained throughout neoadjuvant therapy. Body weight and serum albumin levels remained stable. Adverse events included severe chest pain (2), food impaction (1), and delayed stent migration (2). Five patients underwent surgical resection. No significant chemoradiation or operative adverse events occurred due to the presence of a stent.

CONCLUSIONS

During neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer, self-expanding metal stents are safe and effective in relieving dysphagia and maintaining nutrition. They allow patients to eat orally, thereby improving patient satisfaction. The presence of an in situ stent did not interfere with surgery.

A bridging stent to surgery in patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer has a dramatic negative impact on patient survival: A retrospective cohort study through data acquired from a prospectively maintained national database

This study aimed to assess the impact of esophageal stenting on postoperative complications and survival in patients with obstructing esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. All patients treated without neoadjuvant therapy that had an R0-resection performed for esophageal and GEJ cancer between January 2003 and December 2010 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Data on stenting, postoperative mortality, morbidity, recurrence-free survival, complications, and length of hospital stay were collected. Kaplan-Meier plots for survival and recurrence-free survival curves were constructed for R0 resected patients. Data were compared between the stent and no-stent group by nonparametric tests. Two hundred seventy three consecutive R0 resected patients with esophageal or GEJ cancer were identified. Of these patients, 63 had a stent as a bridge to surgery. The male/female ratio was 2.64 (198/75) with a median age in the stent group (SG) of 65.1 versus 64.3 in the no stent group (NSG). Patients were comparable with respect to gender, age, smoking, TNM-classification, oncological treatment, hospital stay, tumor location, and histology. The median survival in the SG was 11.6 months compared with 21.3 months for patients treated without a bridging stent (P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day mortality between the two groups, but NSG patients exhibited a significantly better two-year survival (P = 0.017). The median recurrence-free survival was 9.1 months for the SG compared with 15.2 months for the NSG. The use of a stent as a bridging procedure to surgery in patients treated without neaoadjuvant therapy for an esophageal or GEJ cancer that later underwent R0 resection decreased the two year survival and the recurrence-free survival.

Factors Influencing Compliance to Radical Treatment of Middle Thoracic Esophageal Cancer: An Audit from a Regional Cancer Centre

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to identify the factors responsible for interruption of planned treatment in patients of carcinoma mid-thoracic esophagus and also discuss the strategies for improving treatment completion rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with nonmetastatic mid-thoracic esophageal cancer who received treatment by multimodality approach using chemotherapy, radiation, and/or surgery were retrospectively analyzed. Factors influencing compliance with planned treatment completion were evaluated, and their significance was determined using multivariate Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients were reviewed. Median follow-up period was 11 months. Of 15 patients planned with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery (Group 1), only 6 (40%) could complete the treatment. Similarly, only 19 out of 36 patients (52.8%) completed the planned definitive chemoradiation (Group 2). Furthermore, of forty patients planned with definitive radiotherapy (Group 3), 29 patients only (72.5%) completed this schedule. The rate of completion of therapy was worst in Group 1. The most common reason for noncompletion of planned treatment was nutritional inadequacy and excessive weight loss in all groups. In addition, chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression (P = 0.05) was the factor leading to treatment interruption in Group 2 and radiation-induced acute mucositis (P = 0.02) and lost to follow-up (P = 0.02) were the factors in Group 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Rate of treatment completion significantly impacts survival rates. Nutritional inadequacy was the most common factor for noncompletion of planned treatment. A well-trained management team consisting of oncologist, dietitian, and psychotherapist can help overcome these factors and thereby improve the treatment completion rates.

Robotic esophagectomy

Robotic esophagectomy is an increasingly used modality. Patients who are candidates for traditional, open esophagectomy are typically also candidates for robotic esophagectomy. Knowledge of and training on the robotic platform is critical for success. Patient and port positioning is described. Either a hand-sewn or stapled intrathoracic anastomosis may be performed. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) appears to be associated with decreased respiratory complications versus open esophagectomy. Robotic esophagectomy may be performed with excellent perioperative outcomes, though long-term oncologic data regarding the operation are not yet available.

Palliative Endoscopic Therapy of Esophageal Cancer

Background

This is a review of endoscopic therapy in the setting of palliative management of patients suffering from esophageal cancer (EC). Unfortunately, many cases of EC present in a stage of disease in which curative therapy is not possible. The maintenance of quality of life includes the ability to swallow and of oral feeding, pain control, and the prevention of bleeding.

Methods

A review of the current literature was performed.

Results

Many endoscopic methods are available for the management of dysphagia, of which dilation, endoluminal tumor destruction, stenting, and brachytherapy are the most common.

Conclusion

Surgical palliation should be avoided as much as possible since the alternatives show at least the same efficacy and have fewer complications.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease-related Symptom Assessment in Subjects with Malignant Dysphagia Receiving Esophageal Stents

Concerns remain over the ability to stent across of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) for esophageal adenocarcinoma and the effects of gastroesophageal (GE) reflux. Thus, the aim of this study was to demonstrate minimal quality-of-life (QOL) side effects in patients undergoing esophageal stenting across the LES. An Institutional Review Board–approved prospective clinical trial evaluated the results of the Gastrointestinal Symptom questionnaire that includes a validated GE reflux disease (GERD) assessment (GERD-HRQL) and a dysphagia assessment. Consecutive patients were enrolled in this clinical trial, with 81 per cent male, 19 per cent female, median age of 62 years, with adenocarcinoma of the GE junction as their diagnosis. The median dysphagia score was 3 (only liquids can be tolerated) prestent and was improved to a median score of 0 (ability to eat all foods) poststent ( P = 0.01). The median GERD score was 0 (none) prestent and did not change with a median score of 0 (none) poststent ( P = 0.2). All GERD-related questions were unchanged prestent and poststent in all categories, specifically: frequency of GERD, time of day of reflux, pain behind breastbone, and pain medications. There was also no difference in regurgitation frequency (median prestent 1 vs poststent 0, P = 0.08), texture (prestent 2 [semisolid] vs poststent 1 [liquid]). There was only a statistical change in the ability to belch (prestent 0 [no ability] to poststent 1 [ability]), P = 0.02) and the ability to vomit. Esophageal stenting across the GE junction for dysphagia relief in esophageal malignancies does not adversely effect a patient's QOL in regard to reflux-related symptoms.

Safety and efficacy of esophageal stents preceding or during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer who require neoadjuvant therapy have significant dysphagia and may severely impair nutritional status. We conducted a meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of self-expandable metal stents prior to neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Current Contents Connect, Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Web of Science. Original data was abstracted from each study and used to calculate a pooled odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

RESULTS

Only nine studies comprising of 180 patients were included for analysis. The overall procedural success rate was 95% (95% CI, 0.895-0.977). There was a substantial decrease in the dysphagia scores standard difference in means (SDM) -0.81 [standard error (SE) 0.15, 95% CI, -1.1 to -0.51], similar increase in weight SDM 0.591 (SE 0.434, 95% CI, -0.261 to 1.442) and serum albumin SDM 0.35 (SE 0.271, 95% CI, -0.181 to 0.881). The incidence of major adverse events included stent migration 32% (95% CI, 0.258-0.395) and chest discomfort 51.4% (95% CI, 0.206-0.812).

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of stents in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer significantly improves dysphagia and allows for oral nutrition during neoadjuvant therapy. Stents appear to be effective for palliating dysphagia. Stent migration was a common occurrence; however, migration may be a sign of tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy.

Impact of nutritional parameter variations during definitive chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Undernutrition is frequently observed in patients with a locally advanced oesophageal carcinoma. However, variations of nutritional parameters during chemoradiotherapy have not been thoroughly investigated.

AIM

To evaluate the characteristics and the impact of nutritional variations during treatment.

METHODS

Weight loss, body mass index (BMI), serum albumin level and daily food intake at baseline and during treatment (T1=week 1; T2=week 5 or 8; T3=week 11) were retrospectively analyzed in 101 patients with oesophageal carcinoma.

RESULTS

Significant variations occurred during chemoradiotherapy with a decrease in serum albumin level (p<0.001), body mass index (p<0.001) and weight (p<0.001). Response rate to treatment was significantly lower in patients with undernutrition at T1 (p=0.05), from T1 to T2 (p=0.01) and from T1 to T3 (p=0.04). Median overall survival was 25 months in patients with persistent undernutrition from T1 to T2 vs 42 months in wellnourished patients from T1 to T2 and those malnourished only at T1 or T2 (p=0.05). In responders, patients presenting with a lower weight or a lower food intake from T1 to T3 had worse survival (33 vs 59 months, p<0.001 and 29 vs 61 months, p=0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Significant variations of nutritional parameters occurred during chemoradiotherapy with a worse impact on response and survival.

Evaluation of quality of life following placement of self-expanding plastic stents as a bridge to surgery in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To determine whether self-expanding plastic stent (SEPS) placement significantly improves quality of life and maintains optimal nutrition while allowing full-dose neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with esophageal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective, dual-institution, single-arm, phase II (http://ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00727376) evaluation of esophageal cancer patients undergoing NAT prior to resection. All patients had a self-expanding polymer stent placed prior to NAT. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anorexia, and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General surveys were administered prior to stenting, within 1 week post-stent placement, and at the completion of neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were enrolled; 3 (5.8%) had stent migrations requiring replacement. There were no instances of esophageal erosion or perforation. All patients received some form of neoadjuvant therapy. Thirty-six (69%) received chemoradiation; 34 (93%) of these patients received the planned dose of chemotherapy, and 27 (75%) received the full planned dose of radiotherapy. There were 16 (31%) patients receiving chemotherapy alone; 12 (74%) of patients in the chemotherapy-alone group completed the planned dose of therapy.

CONCLUSION

Placement of SEPS appears to provide significant improvement in quality of life related to dysphagia and eating restriction in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant therapy. Consideration of SEPS instead of percutaneous feeding tube should be initiated as a first line in dysphagia palliation and NAT nutritional support.

The use of biodegradable stents in malignant oesophageal strictures for the treatment of dysphagia before neoadjuvant treatment or radical radiotherapy: a feasibility study

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical results of the use of biodegradable oesophageal stents in malignant strictures.

METHODS

Eleven patients were included in this prospective analysis in which a woven polydioxanone biodegradable oesophageal stent was used. The inclusion criterion was that the patient underwent neoadjuvant treatment or radical radiotherapy after the stent insertion. Primary end points were dysphagia score at discharge, stent patency, and complication rate. Secondary end points were overall survival and surgical outcome of surgery.

RESULTS

There was a 100% procedure technical success rate. Early complications occurred in three patients resulting in failure to restore oral nutrition. In the remaining eight patients, dysphagia was significantly improved at discharge. Mean stent patency rate in this group was 71.5 days. Stent dysfunction occurred in five of eight patients (62.5%); in two of five patients this was due to local inflammatory reaction, and in three of five patients it was due to tumour growth after a mean time of 97.8 days, and a new metallic stent was consequently placed in four of five patients. One patient was successfully treated with esophagectomy. At the end of follow-up (mean time 102.1 days), three of eight stents were patent. The overall patient survival rate was 81.8%.

CONCLUSION

Although short-term dysphagia scores improved, biodegradable stents do not appear to offer a clear beneficial effect in most cases of malignant strictures, particularly due to a local inflammatory reaction that may be induced. Technical improvement of the device and delineation of the patient group that would benefit from its use is necessary if further studies are to be conducted in the future.

Gastric ulceration following oesophageal stent migration complicating surgical management of oesophageal cancer

Oesophageal, fully covered self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) allow palliation of dysphagia so as to support nutrition during neoadjuvant therapy. We present a 68-year old man with an oesophageal adenocarcinoma (T3N1M0) who had a fully covered oesophageal SEMS placed prior to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Repeat endoscopy 8 weeks later (for stent removal) showed that the stent had migrated and impacted upon the greater curvature of the stomach with a resultant ulcer. Surgery was delayed and, 10 weeks following the cessation of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, this patient underwent a right thoracoabdominal oesophagogastrectomy. Operative findings included an erosion of the stent-induced gastric ulcer into the body of the pancreas and showed that the ulcerated tumour had become adherent to the thoracic aorta. This report demonstrates that the complications of stent migration can significantly impact upon surgical resection at multiple levels and provides a case for the routine removal of stents used in the neoadjuvant setting.

Stent placement for esophageal strictures: an update

The use of stents for esophageal strictures has evolved rapidly over the past 10 years, from rigid plastic tubes to flexible self-expanding metal (SEMS), plastic (SEPS) and biodegradable stents. For the palliative treatment of malignant dysphagia both SEMS and SEPS effectively provide a rapid relief of dysphagia. SEMS are preferred over SEPS, as randomized controlled trials have shown more technical difficulties and late migration with plastic stents. Despite specific characteristics of recently developed stents, recurrent dysphagia due to food impaction, tumoral and nontumoral tissue overgrowth, or stent migration, remain a major challenge. The efficacy of stents with an antireflux valve for patients with distal esophageal cancer varies between different stent designs. Concurrent treatment with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy seems to be safe and effective. In the future, it can be expected that removable stents will be used as a bridge to surgery to maintain luminal patency during neoadjuvant treatment. For benign strictures, new stent designs, such as fully covered SEMS and biodegradable stents, may potentially reduce complications during stent removal.

Clinical outcomes, quality of life, advantages and disadvantages of metal stent placement in the upper gastrointestinal tract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will discuss the immediate- and long-term success, complications and overall benefits of self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) in malignant or benign obstruction of the oesophagus, stomach and duodenum. Over recent years, indications such as benign disease have expanded, as has SEMS diversity with self-expandable plastic stents (SEPSs) or fully covered and biodegradable stents, for example.

RECENT FINDINGS

SEMSs have been increasingly used in malignant upper gastrointestinal obstruction with many reports confirming efficacy, despite a significant complication rate. Fully covered stents are increasingly used for a variety of benign oesophageal disease, but their place in gastric outlet obstruction is still unclear. Covered and uncovered stents have different functional characteristics and stent type must be selected on an individual basis. Biodegradable stents show promise and the outcome of experience in larger patient cohorts is eagerly awaited.

SUMMARY

This area is an evolving field, in which the clinician requires up-to-date knowledge of therapeutic options to make individualized treatment choices in difficult clinical circumstances. Technical and clinical success for oesophageal or gastroduodenal SEMSs are then above 90%. Minor complications are common, but serious complications seldom occur. Biodegradable stents may be useful, especially when stenting is needed for a short period of time.

Safety and efficacy of self-expanding removable metal esophageal stents during neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable esophageal cancer

Patients with esophageal cancer may present with dysphagia and weight loss. Resectable lesions require consideration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, which improves survival but have side effects, which compound already poor intake. Prevention of malnutrition has historically required interventions such as surgical jejunostomy or percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, which carry associated morbidity. With established roles in palliation, self-expanding removable metal stents (SERMS) may provide an alternative intervention in resectable disease. We sought to evaluate outcomes from our unit's introduction of SERMS in dysphagic patients prior to esophagectomy. All dysphagic patients presenting with esophageal cancer and considered for curative surgery between April 2006 and November 2008 were offered preoperative treatment of dysphagia with SERMS during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Baseline and preoperative outcomes assessed included dysphagia score and nutritional markers. Sixteen patients underwent esophageal stenting during neoadjuvant therapy of whom 7/16 (44%) were female with mean age 63 (53-76). In 12/16 (75%), tumors were located in the lower one third of the esophagus. There was a significant fall in mean dysphagia score from 2.5 (range 1-4) to 1.1 (range 0-3) immediately preoperatively. There was no significant change in serum albumin, weight, or body mass index. Stent-related morbidity occurred in 4/16 (25%) patients and stomach migration occurred in 7/16 (43.8%). All were resolved endoscopically and there was no stent-related mortality. Of 10/16 (62.5%) patients ultimately progressing to esophagectomy, 30-day mortality was 6.3%. Anastomotic leak occurred in one patient (10%) and R1 resection rate was 20%. SERMS are a safe and effective intervention in dysphagic patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer. Complications are minor and readily treatable with endoscopy. Objective parameters suggest nutritional status is maintained and symptoms are improved. SERMS do not appear to compromise resection.

Enteral stents

The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Technology Committee provides reviews of existing, new, or emerging endoscopic technologies that have an impact on the practice of GI endoscopy. Evidence-based methodology is used, with a MEDLINE literature search to identify pertinent clinical studies on the topic and a MAUDE (U.S. Food and Drug Administration Center for Devices and Radiological Health) database search to identify the reported complications of a given technology. Both are supplemented by accessing the "related articles" feature of PubMed and by scrutinizing pertinent references cited by the identified studies. Controlled clinical trials are emphasized, but in many cases, data from randomized, controlled trials are lacking. In such cases, large case series, preliminary clinical studies, and expert opinions are used. Technical data are gathered from traditional and Web-based publications, proprietary publications, and informal communications with pertinent vendors. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are drafted by 1 or 2 members of the ASGE Technology Committee, reviewed and edited by the committee as a whole, and approved by the Governing Board of the ASGE. When financial guidance is indicated, the most recent coding data and list prices at the time of publication are provided. For this review, the MEDLINE database was searched through August 2010 for articles related to enteral, esophageal, duodenal, and colonic stents. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are scientific reviews provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Technology Status Evaluation Reports are not rules and should not be construed as establishing a legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment or payment for such treatment.

Esophageal stenting in the setting of malignancy

Esophageal cancer is often diagnosed at an advanced stage, with many patients found to have locoregional or metastatic disease at time of diagnosis. Because of this, cure may be unlikely, leading treatment efforts to focus more on symptom palliation and improving patient quality of life. The majority of patients with advanced disease suffer from some degree of dysphagia. Palliative efforts are therefore directed at relieving dysphagia, allowing patients to manage their oropharyngeal secretions, reduce aspiration risk, and maintain caloric intake orally. A variety of endoscopic treatment modalities have been utilized with these objectives in mind, with options determined by the location and size of the tumor, as well as the patient's expected prognosis. In this article, we review the use of endoscopically-placed stents for palliation in patients with advanced esophageal cancer. We discuss the history of stent use in such cases, as well as more recent developments in stent technology. We give an overview of some of the more commonly used stents in practice, discuss the technique of insertion, and survey the short- and long-term outcomes of stent placement.

Expandable stents for malignant esophageal disease

Esophageal cancer is diagnosed in about 400,000 patients each year worldwide, and its incidence is increasing faster than that of any other malignancy. This makes it the ninth most common malignancy and sixth on the list of cancer mortality causes. Most patients with esophageal cancer present at a stage that is too advanced for curative therapy, and many die within a few months. Treatment of dysphagia is the main goal of palliative care in more than 50% of incurable cases. Although many different palliative options for malignant dysphagia are available, expandable stent placement is the most commonly performed treatment modality.

Role of esophageal stents in the nutrition support of patients with esophageal malignancy

Endoluminal stents are commonly used for palliative treatment of dysphagia in patients with advanced esophageal malignancies. The most frequently used esophageal stents are self-expanding metal stents. Removable self-expanding plastic stents have recently been used in the management of esophageal cancer patients treated with curative intent. Esophageal stents effectively alleviate dysphagia in most patients, and stent placement is associated with a low rate of complications. This article reviews the use of self-expanding esophageal stents in patients with esophageal cancer. Nutrition considerations following stent placement are addressed.