Transthoracic Versus Transhiatal Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Nationwide Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analysis

Minimally Invasive Transhiatal Esophagectomy Using Antegrade Inversion Technique in Esophageal Cancer: 10-Year Experience from a Tertiary Care Center

Background: Esophageal cancer surgery aims for curative intent but carries high complication rates. Transthoracic esophagectomy is the dominant approach, however, transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) offers selective advantages in certain clinical scenarios. Minimally invasive THE (MI-THE) is an evolving technique with limited data. Methods: This retrospective study reviewed 38 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent MI-THE using "Antegrade Inversion Technique" between 2013 and 2023 at a tertiary care center. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed. Data were presented as mean with standard deviation, median with interquartile range, and percentages. Results: Most patients (86.8%) had early-stage cancer. Median operative time was 375 minutes, hospital stay was 8 days, and intensive care unit stay was 3 days. All patients achieved a negative resection margin. Pleural effusion (57.9%) was the most common complication, followed by pneumothorax (31.6%) and surgical site infection (15.8%). Anastomotic leak rate was 13.2%. There was no mortality. Conclusions: MI-THE appears safe and feasible with encouraging perioperative outcomes, particularly for early-stage disease and high-risk patients. While potentially offering advantages over open THE, further research is needed to definitively establish its role compared to traditional approaches.

Minimally Invasive transCervical oEsophagectomy (MICE) for oesophageal cancer: prospective cohort study (IDEAL stage 2A)

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy is a surgical technique that offers radical oesophagectomy without the need for transthoracic access. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy procedure and to report the refinement of this technique in a Western cohort.

METHODS

A single-centre prospective cohort study was designed as an IDEAL stage 2A study. Patients with oesophageal cancer (cT1b-4a N0-3 M0) who were scheduled for oesophagectomy with curative intent were eligible for inclusion in the study. The main outcome parameter was the postoperative pulmonary complication rate and the secondary outcomes were the anastomotic leakage, recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, and R0 resection rates, as well as the lymph node yield.

RESULTS

In total, 75 patients underwent minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy between January 2021 and November 2023. Several modifications to the surgical technique were registered, evaluated, and implemented in the context of IDEAL stage 2A. A total of 12 patients (16%) had postoperative pulmonary complications, including pneumonia (4 patients) and pleural effusion with drainage or aspiration (8 patients). Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was observed in 33 of 75 patients (44%), with recovery in 30 of 33 patients (91%). A total of 5 of 75 patients (7%) had anastomotic leakage. The median number of resected lymph nodes was 29 (interquartile range 22-37) and the R0 resection rate was 96% (72 patients).

CONCLUSION

Introducing minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer in a Dutch institution is associated with a low rate of postoperative pulmonary complications and a high rate of temporary recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy.

Siewert II esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma: Still searching for the right treatment transabdominal or transthoracic surgical approaches?

INTRODUCTION

To date, the discussion is still ongoing whether the Siewert II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) should be resected either by thoracoabdominal esophagectomy or gastrectomy with resection of the distal esophagus by transhiatal extension. The aim of our study was to compare the oncological and perioperative outcomes of the transthoracic approach (TTA) and the transabdominal approach (TAA).

METHODS

Searches of electronic databases identifying studies from Cochrane, PubMed and Google Scholar were performed. Randomised and non-randomised studies comparing TTA and TAA approaches for surgical treatment of AEG Siewert type II were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa and Jada scales were used to evaluate methodological quality. The risk of bias was assessed using the Rob v2 and Robins-I tools. Meta-analyses were conducted for the outcomes.

RESULTS

We included 17 trials (2 randomised controlled trials and 15 cohorts) involving 15297 patients. Longer three-year overall survival, five-year overall survival and R0 resection rates were observed in the TTA group. However, TTA had greater morbidity and pulmonary complications.

CONCLUSION

Transthoracic approach appears to be preferable for selected Siewert II tumours. This may lead to higher survival rates and better R0 resection rate. Well-designed studies are needed to confirm the results of this systematic review.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of mediastinoscopy-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy (MATHE)

BACKGROUND

Transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) avoids thoracotomy but sacrifices mediastinal lymphadenectomy. Mediastinoscopy-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy (MATHE) allows for visualisation and en-bloc dissection of mediastinal lymph nodes while retaining the benefits of THE. However, given its novel inception, there is a paucity of literature. This study aimed to conduct the first meta-analysis to explore the efficacy of MATHE and clarify its role in the future of esophagectomy.

METHODS

Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library) were searched from inception to May 1, 2023. Studies were included if they reported outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer who underwent MATHE. Meta-analyses of proportions and pooled means were performed for the outcomes of intraoperative blood loss, lymph node (LN) harvest, mean hospital length of stay (LOS), mean operative time, R0 resection, conversion rates, 30-day mortality rate, 5-year OS, and surgical complications (anastomotic leak, cardiovascular [CVS] and pulmonary complications, chyle leak and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy [RLN]). Sensitivity analyses were performed for outcomes with substantial statistical heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The search yielded 223 articles; 28 studies and 1128 patients were included in our analysis. Meta-analyses of proportions yielded proportion rates: 30-day mortality (0 %, 95 %CI 0-0), 5-year OS (60.5 %, 95 %CI 47.6-72.7), R0 resection (100 %, 95 %CI 99.3-100), conversion rate (0.1 %, 95 %CI 0-1.2). Among surgical complications, RLN palsy (14.6 %, 95 %CI 9.5-20.4) were most observed, followed by pulmonary complications (11.3 %, 95 %CI 7-16.2), anastomotic leak (9.7 %, 95 %CI 6.8-12.8), CVS complications (2.3 %, 95 %CI 0.9-4.1) and chyle leak (0.02 %, 95 %CI 0-0.8). Meta-analysis of pooled means yielded means: LN harvest (18.6, 95 %CI 14.3-22.9), intraoperative blood loss (247.1 ml, 95 %CI 173.6-320.6), hospital LOS (18.1 days, 95 %CI 14.4-21.8), and operative time (301.5 min, 95 %CI 238.4-364.6). There was moderate-to-high statistical heterogeneity. Findings were robust to sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

MATHE is associated with encouraging post-operative mortality and complication rates, while allowing for radical mediastinal lymphadenectomy with reasonable lymph node harvest.

The Multidisciplinary Approach and Surgical Management of GE Junction Adenocarcinoma

Gastroesophageal (GE) junction adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy of growing incidence and is associated with public health issues such as obesity and GERD. Management has evolved over the last two decades to incorporate a multidisciplinary approach, including endoscopic intervention, neoadjuvant chemotherapy/chemoradiation, and minimally invasive or more limited surgical approaches. Surgical approaches include esophagectomy, total gastrectomy, and, more recently, proximal gastrectomy. This review analyzes the evidence for and applicability of these varied approaches in management, as well as areas of continued controversy and investigation.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

Systematic review of quality of life after esophagectomy and total gastrectomy in patients with gastro-esophageal junction cancer

The optimal management of cancer of the gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) is an area of contention. GEJ tumors are typically resected via total gastrectomy or esophagectomy. Despite many studies aiming to determine the superiority of either procedure based on surgical or oncological outcomes, the evidence is equivocal. Data focusing specifically on quality of life (QoL), however, is limited. This systematic review was performed to determine if there is any difference in patient's QoL after total gastrectomy or esophagectomy. A systematic search of PubMed, Medline and Cochrane libraries was conducted for literature published between 1986 and 2023. Studies that used the internationally validated questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC-QLQ-OG25, to compare QoL after esophagectomy to gastrectomy for the management of GEJ cancer were included. Five studies involving 575 patients undergoing either esophagectomy (n = 365) or total gastrectomy (n = 210) for GEJ tumors were included. QoL was predominantly assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Although individual studies demonstrated significant differences in certain domains, these differences were not consistently demonstrated in more than one study. There is no evidence to suggest any significant differences in QoL after total gastrectomy compared to esophagectomy for management of gastro-esophageal junction cancer.

Impact of the Surgical Approach for Neoadjuvantly Treated Gastroesophageal Junction Type II Tumors: A Multinational, High-volume Center Retrospective Cohort Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to explore oncologic outcomes of transhiatal gastrectomy (THG) or transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) for neoadjuvantly treated gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) Siewert type II adenocarcinomas, a multinational, high-volume center cohort analysis was undertaken.

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy (CTx) followed by surgery is the standard therapy for locally advanced GEJ. However, the optimal surgical approach for type II GEJ tumors remains unclear, as the decision is mainly based on individual experience and assessment of operative risk.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 5 prospectively maintained databases was conducted. Between 2012 and 2021, 800 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria for type II GEJ tumors and neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy or CTx. The primary endpoint was median overall survival (mOS). Propensity score matching was performed to minimize selection bias.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing THG (n=163, 20.4%) had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification and cT stage ( P <0.001) than patients undergoing TTE (n=637, 79.6%). Neoadjuvant therapy was different as the THG group were mainly undergoing CTx (87.1%, P <0.001). The TTE group showed higher tumor regression ( P =0.009), lower ypT/ypM categories (both P <0.001), higher nodal yield ( P =0.009) and higher R0 resection rate ( P =0.001). The mOS after TTE was longer (78.0 vs 40.0 months, P =0.013). After propensity score matching a higher R0 resection rate ( P =0.004) and mOS benefit after TTE remained ( P =0.04). Subgroup analyses of patients without distant metastasis ( P =0.037) and patients only after neoadjuvant chemotherapy ( P =0.021) confirmed the survival benefit of TTE. TTE was an independent predictor of longer survival.

CONCLUSION

Awaiting results of the randomized CARDIA trial, TTE should in high-volume centers be considered the preferred approach due to favorable oncologic outcomes.

Robotic Versus Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To give a comprehensive review of the literature comparing perioperative outcomes and long-term survival with robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) versus minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND

Curative minimally invasive surgical treatment for esophageal cancer includes RAMIE and conventional MIE. It remains controversial whether RAMIE is comparable to MIE.

METHODS

This review was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021260963). A systematic search of databases was conducted. Perioperative outcomes and long-term survival were analyzed and subgroup analysis was conducted. Cumulative meta-analysis was performed to track therapeutic effectiveness.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included and a total of 2932 patients (92.88% squamous cell carcinoma, 29.83% neoadjuvant therapy, and 38.93% stage III-IV), 1418 underwent RAMIE and 1514 underwent MIE, were analyzed. The number of total lymph nodes (LNs) [23.35 (95% CI: 21.41-25.29) vs 21.98 (95% CI: 20.31-23.65); mean difference (MD) = 1.18; 95% CI: 0.06-2.30; P =0.04], abdominal LNs [9.05 (95% CI: 8.16-9.94) vs 7.75 (95% CI: 6.62-8.88); MD = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.19-1.89; P =0.02] and LNs along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve [1.74 (95% CI: 1.04-2.43) vs 1.34 (95% CI: 0.32-2.35); MD = 0.22; 95% CI: 0.09-0.35; P <0.001] were significantly higher in the RAMIE group. RAMIE is associated with a lower incidence of pneumonia [9.61% (95% CI: 7.38%-11.84%) vs 14.74% (95% CI: 11.62%-18.15%); odds ratio = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.58-0.93; P =0.01]. Meanwhile, other perioperative outcomes, such as operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, 30/90-day mortality, and R0 resection, showed no significant difference between the two groups. Regarding long-term survival, the 3-year overall survival was similar in the two groups, whereas patients undergoing RAMIE had a higher rate of 3-year disease-free survival compared with the MIE group [77.98% (95% CI: 72.77%-82.43%) vs 70.65% (95% CI: 63.87%-77.00%); odds ratio = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.11-1.83; P =0.006]. A cumulative meta-analysis conducted for each outcome demonstrated relatively stable effects in the two groups. Analyses of each subgroup showed similar overall outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

RAMIE is a safe and feasible alternative to MIE in the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer with comparable perioperative outcomes and seems to indicate a possible superiority in LNs dissection in the abdominal cavity, and LNs dissected along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve and 3-year disease-free survival in particular in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Further randomized studies are needed to better evaluate the long-term benefits of RAMIE compared with MIE.

Left compared with right thoracic approach thoracotomy in esophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is regarded as one of the optimal treatments for resectable esophageal cancer. However, the impact of surgical approach on the long-term prognosis of esophageal cancer remains controversial. This study attempted to compare the long-term survival outcomes of patients receiving left and right thoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

A total of 985 patients underwent esophagectomy (including 453 left and 532 right thoracic approach) for esophageal cancer in Henan Cancer Hospital from January 2015 to December 2016 were enrolled. Their 5 year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were retrospectively collected. Cox regression was performed to compare OS and DFS in patients who underwent left and right thoracic esophagectomy. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was used to balance confounding factors.

RESULTS

The 5 year OS rates were 60.21% in the left and 51.60% in the right thoracic esophagectomy, respectively (P = 0.67). The 5 year DFS rates were 56.73% in the left and 47.93% and in the right thoracic esophagectomy, respectively (P = 0.36). Cox regression analysis showed there was no significant difference in long-term survival between patients with left and right surgical access (OS: HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.77-1.18; DFS: HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.74-1.12). In the cohort of patients obtained by PSM, Cox regression analysis yielded the similar results.

CONCLUSION

For patients with resectable esophageal cancer, the surgical treatment through left thoracic approach can achieve the same long-term survival outcomes as the right thoracic approach.

Oesophagectomy or Total Gastrectomy for the Management of Siewert II Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the ideal surgical management of patients with Siewert type II gastroesophageal junctional (GEJ) cancers. Due to its anatomical location, total gastrectomy and oesophagectomy are widely used methods of resection. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal surgical treatment of these patients.

METHOD

A systematic search of PubMed, Medline and Cochrane libraries was conducted for literature published between 2000 and 2022. Studies directly comparing oesophagectomy to gastrectomy for Siewert type II tumours were included. Outcome measures included rates of anastomotic leak, 30-day mortality, R0 resection and 5-year survival. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.

RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 18,585 patients undergoing either oesophagectomy (n = 8618) or total gastrectomy (n = 9967) for Siewert type II GEJ cancer were included. There were no significant differences between the rates of anastomotic leak (OR 0.91, CI 0.59-1.40, p = 0.66) and R0 resection (OR 1.51, CI 0.93-2.42, p = 0.09). Patients undergoing total gastrectomy had a lower 30-day mortality (OR 0.66, CI 0.45-0.95, p = 0.03) and a greater 5-year overall survival (OR 1.49, CI 1.34-1.67, p < 0.001) compared to patients undergoing oesophagectomy. These differences were not statistically significant after excluding two large studies, which accounted for the majority of the total population in the analysis.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that total gastrectomy results in lower 30-day mortality and improved overall survival in patients with Siewert type II GEJ cancer. However, interpretation of these results may be biased by the effect of two large studies.

Clinical implications of chyle leakage following esophagectomy

The clinical consequences of chyle leakage following esophagectomy are underexposed. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical implications of chyle leakage following esophagectomy. This retrospective study of prospectively collected data included patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy in 2017-2020. Routinely, the thoracic duct was resected en bloc as part of the mediastinal lymphadenectomy. Chyle leakage was defined as milky drain fluid for which specific treatment was initiated and/or a triglyceride level in drain fluid of ≥1.13 mmol/L, according to the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) classification. Primary endpoints were the clinical characteristics of chyle leakage (type, severity and treatment). Secondary endpoints were the impact of chyle leakage on duration of thoracic drainage and hospital stay. Chyle leakage was present in 43/314 patients (14%), of whom 24 (56%) were classified as severity A and 19 (44%) as severity B. All patients were successfully treated with either medium chain triglyceride diet (98%) or total parental nutrition (2%). There were no re-interventions for chyle leakage during initial admission, although one patient needed additional pleural drainage during readmission. Patients with chyle leakage had 3 days longer duration of thoracic drainage (bias corrected accelerated (BCa) 95%CI:0.46-0.76) and 3 days longer hospital stay (BCa 95%CI:0.07-0.36), independently of the presence of other complications. Chyle leakage is a relatively frequent complication following esophagectomy. Postoperative chyle leakage was associated with a significant longer duration of thoracic drainage and hospital admission. Nonsurgical treatment was successful in all patients with chyle leakage.

Trends in surgical techniques for the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer: the 2022 update

The aim of this study was to evaluate the current practice in surgical techniques for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer surgery worldwide and to compare the results to the previous surveys in 2007 and 2014. An online survey was sent out among surgical members of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Disease of the Esophagus, the International Gastric Cancer Association, the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland and Dutch gastroesophageal surgeons via the network of the investigators. In total, 260 surgeons completed the survey representing 52 countries and 6 continents; Europe 56%, Oceania 14%, Asia 14%, South-America 9%, North-America 7%. Of the responding surgeons, 39% worked in a hospital that performed >51 esophagectomies per year. Total minimally invasive esophagectomy was the preferred technique (53%) followed by hybrid esophagectomy (26%) of which 7% consisted of a minimally invasive thoracic phase and 19% of a minimally invasive abdominal phase. Total open esophagectomy was preferred by 21% of the respondents. Total minimally invasive esophagectomy was significantly more often performed in high-volume centers compared with non-high-volume centers (P = 0.002). Robotic assistance was used in 13% during the thoracic phase and 6% during the abdominal phase. Minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy has become the preferred approach for esophagectomy. Although 21% of the surgeons prefer an open approach, 26% of the surgeons perform a hybrid procedure which may reflect further transition towards the use of total minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Korean Practice Guidelines for Gastric Cancer 2022: An Evidence-based, Multidisciplinary Approach

Gastric cancer is one of the most common cancers in Korea and the world. Since 2004, this is the 4th gastric cancer guideline published in Korea which is the revised version of previous evidence-based approach in 2018. Current guideline is a collaborative work of the interdisciplinary working group including experts in the field of gastric surgery, gastroenterology, endoscopy, medical oncology, abdominal radiology, pathology, nuclear medicine, radiation oncology and guideline development methodology. Total of 33 key questions were updated or proposed after a collaborative review by the working group and 40 statements were developed according to the systematic review using the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and KoreaMed database. The level of evidence and the grading of recommendations were categorized according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation proposition. Evidence level, benefit, harm, and clinical applicability was considered as the significant factors for recommendation. The working group reviewed recommendations and discussed for consensus. In the earlier part, general consideration discusses screening, diagnosis and staging of endoscopy, pathology, radiology, and nuclear medicine. Flowchart is depicted with statements which is supported by meta-analysis and references. Since clinical trial and systematic review was not suitable for postoperative oncologic and nutritional follow-up, working group agreed to conduct a nationwide survey investigating the clinical practice of all tertiary or general hospitals in Korea. The purpose of this survey was to provide baseline information on follow up. Herein we present a multidisciplinary-evidence based gastric cancer guideline.

Minimally invasive surgery is associated with decreased postoperative complications after esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Although some studies have compared esophagectomy outcomes by technique or approach, there is opportunity to strengthen our knowledge surrounding these outcomes. We aimed to perform a comprehensive comparison of esophagectomy postoperative complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2007-2018). Esophagectomies were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes and grouped by operative technique (Ivor Lewis, transhiatal, McKeown) and surgical approach (minimally invasive vs open esophagectomy). Twelve postoperative complications were compared. Significant complications underwent risk adjustment using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Analysis was performed on 13,457 esophagectomies: 11,202 (83.2%) open and 2255 (16.8%) minimally invasive. There were 7611 (56.6%) Ivor Lewis, 3348 (24.9%) transhiatal, and 2498 (18.6%) McKeown procedures. There were significant differences among the surgical techniques in 6 of 12 risk-adjusted complications. When comparing the outcomes of minimally invasive techniques, there were only significant differences in 2 of 12 complications: overall morbidity (minimally invasive Ivor Lewis 30.5%, minimally invasive transhiatal 43.4%, minimally invasive McKeown 40.3%, P = .0009) and infections (minimally invasive Ivor Lewis 15.4%, minimally invasive transhiatal 26.0%, minimally invasive McKeown 25.3%, P = .0003). Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery were less likely to have overall morbidity (odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.75), respiratory complications (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.87), urinary tract infection (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.88), renal complications (odds ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.81), bleeding complications (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.43), and nonhome discharge (odds ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.64), and had shorter length of stay (9.7 vs 13.2 days, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy have lower rates of postoperative complications regardless of esophagectomy techniques. The minimally invasive approach was associated with reduced complication variance among 3 common esophagectomy techniques.

Long-Term Survival After Transhiatal Versus Transthoracic Esophagectomy: A Population-Based Nationwide Study in Finland

BACKGROUND

No population-based studies comparing long-term survival after transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) and transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) exist. This study aimed to compare the 5-year survival of esophageal cancer patients undergoing THE or TTE in a population-based nationwide setting.

METHODS

This study included all curatively intended THE and TTE for esophageal cancer in Finland during 1987-2016, with follow-up evaluation until 31 December 2019. Cox proportional hazard models provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of 5-year and 90-day mortality. The results were adjusted for age, sex, year of operation, comorbidities, histology, neoadjuvant treatment, and pathologic stage.

RESULTS

A total of 1338 patients underwent THE (n = 323) or TTE (n = 1015). The observed 5-year survival rate was 39.3% after THE and 45.0% after TTE (p = 0.072). In adjusted model 1, THE was not associated with greater 5-year mortality (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.82-1.20) than TTE. In adjusted model 2, including T stage instead of pathologic stage, the 5-year mortality hazard rates after THE (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72-1.05) and TTE were comparable. The 90-day mortality rate for THE was higher than for TTE (adjusted HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.45-1.14). In subgroup analyses, no differences between THE and TTE were observed in Siewert II gastroesophageal junction cancers, esophageal cancers, or pN0 tumors, nor in the comparison of THE and TTE with two-field lymphadenectomy. The sensitivity analysis, including patients with missing patient records, who underwent surgery during 1996-2016 mirrored the main analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

This Finnish population-based nationwide study suggests no difference in 5-year or 90-day mortality after THE and TTE for esophageal cancer.

Artificial intelligence for diagnosing microvessels of precancerous lesions and superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinomas: a multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Intrapapillary capillary loop (IPCL) is an important factor for predicting invasion depth of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The invasion depth is closely related to the selection of treatment strategy. However, diagnosis of IPCLs is complicated and subject to interobserver variability. This study aimed to develop an artificial intelligence (AI) system to predict IPCLs subtypes of precancerous lesions and superficial ESCC.

METHODS

Images of magnifying endoscopy with narrow band imaging from three hospitals were collected retrospectively. IPCLs subtypes were annotated on images by expert endoscopists according to Japanese Endoscopic Society classification. The performance of the AI system was evaluated using internal and external validation datasets (IVD and EVD) and compared with that of the 11 endoscopists.

RESULTS

A total of 7094 images from 685 patients were used to train and validate the AI system. The combined accuracy of the AI system for diagnosing IPCLs subtypes in IVD and EVD was 91.3% and 89.8%, respectively. The AI system achieved better performance than endoscopists in predicting IPCLs subtypes and invasion depth. The ability of junior endoscopists to diagnose IPCLs subtypes (combined accuracy: 84.7% vs 78.2%, P < 0.0001) and invasion depth (combined accuracy: 74.4% vs 67.9%, P < 0.0001) were significantly improved with AI system assistance. Although there was no significant differences, the performance of senior endoscopists was slightly elevated.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed AI system could improve the diagnostic ability of endoscopists to predict IPCLs classification of precancerous lesions and superficial ESCC.

The surgical anatomy of a (robot-assisted) minimally invasive transcervical esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Transcervical esophagectomy allows for esophagectomy through transcervical access and bypasses the thoracic cavity, thereby eliminating single lung ventilation. A challenging surgical approach demands thorough understanding of the encountered anatomy. This study aims to provide a comprehensive overview of surgical anatomy encountered during the (robot-assisted) minimally invasive transcervical esophagectomy (RACE and MICE).

METHODS

To assess the surgical anatomy of the lower neck and mediastinum, MR images were made of a body donor after, which it was sliced at 24-μm intervals with a cryomacrotome. Images were made every 3 slices resulting in 3.200 images of which a digital 3D multiplanar reconstruction was made. For macroscopic verification, microscopic slices were made and stained every 5 mm (Mallory-Cason). Schematic drawings were made of the 3D reconstruction to demonstrate the course of essential anatomical structures in the operation field and identify anatomical landmarks.

RESULTS

Surgical anatomy 'boxes' of three levels (superior thoracic aperture, upper mediastinum, subcarinal) were created. Four landmarks were identified: (i) the course of the thoracic duct in the mediastinum; (ii) the course of the left recurrent laryngeal nerve; (iii) the crossing of the azygos vein right and dorsal of the esophagus; and (iv) the position of the aortic arch, the pulmonary arteries, and veins.

CONCLUSIONS

The presented 3D reconstruction of unmanipulated human anatomy and schematic 3D 'boxes' provide a comprehensive overview of the surgical anatomy during the RACE or MICE. Our findings provide a useful tool to aid surgeons in learning the complex anatomy of the mediastinum and the exploration of new surgical approaches such as the RACE or MICE.

Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) constitutes a newly developed surgical technique for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer, aiming to further improve the high morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy. We performed a systematic review of the literature and compared the outcomes of RAMIE and open esophagectomy. RAMIE is a safe and feasible procedure, resulting in decreased cardiopulmonary morbidity, wound infections, blood loss, and hospital stays compared to open esophagectomy.

Abstract

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was introduced as a further development of the conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy, aiming to further improve the high morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the outcomes between RAMIE and open esophagectomy, which remains a popular approach for resectable esophageal cancer. Ten studies meeting our inclusion criteria were identified, including five retrospective cohort, four prospective cohort, and one randomized controlled trial. RAMIE was associated with significantly lower rates of overall pulmonary complications (odds ratio (OR): 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): [0.26, 0.56]), pneumonia (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: [0.26, 0.57]), atrial fibrillation (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: [0.29, 0.98]), and wound infections (OR: 0.20, 95% CI: [0.07, 0.57]) and resulted in less blood loss (weighted mean difference (WMD): −187.08 mL, 95% CI: [−283.81, −90.35]) and shorter hospital stays (WMD: −9.22 days, 95% CI: [−14.39, −4.06]) but longer operative times (WMD: 69.45 min, 95% CI: [34.39, 104.42]). No other statistically significant difference was observed regarding surgical and short-term oncological outcomes. Similar findings were observed when comparing totally robotic procedures only to OE. RAMIE is a safe and feasible procedure, resulting in decreased cardiopulmonary morbidity, wound infections, blood loss, and shorter hospital stays compared to open esophagectomy.

Short-term outcome for high-risk patients after esophagectomy

Transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) for esophageal cancer facilitates mediastinal dissection; however, it has a significant impact on cardiopulmonary status. High-risk patients may therefore be better candidates for transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) in order to prevent serious complications. This study addressed short-term outcome following TTE and THE in patients that are considered to have a higher risk of surgery-related morbidity. This population-based study included patients who underwent a curative esophagectomy between 2011 and 2018, registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit. The Charlson comorbidity index was used to assign patients to a low-risk (score ≤ 1) and high-risk group (score ≥ 2). Propensity score matching was applied to produce comparable groups between high-risk patients receiving TTE and THE. Primary endpoint was mortality (in-hospital/30-day mortality), secondary endpoints included morbidity and oncological outcomes. Additionally, a matched subgroup analysis was performed, including only cervical reconstructions. Of 5,438 patients, 945 and 431 high-risk patients underwent TTE and THE, respectively. After propensity score matching, mortality (6.3 vs 3.3%, P = 0.050), overall morbidity, Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complications, pulmonary complications, cardiac complications and re-interventions were significantly more observed after TTE compared to THE. A significantly higher mortality after TTE with a cervical reconstruction was found compared to THE (7.0 vs. 2.2%, P = 0.020). Patients with a high Charlson comorbidity index predispose for a complicated postoperative course after esophagectomy, this was more outspoken after TTE compared to THE. In daily practice, these outcomes should be balanced with the lower lymph node yield, but comparable positive node count and radicality after THE.

Perioperative Clinical Results of Transcervical and Transhiatal Esophagectomy versus Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy in Patients with Esophageal Carcinoma: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study

Background

This study assessed the efficacy of transcervical and transhiatal esophagectomy versus thoracoscopic esophagectomy in patients with esophageal carcinoma (EC).

Methods

A total of 80 patients with EC were enrolled in this study, including 40 cases in the observation group that received transcervical combine transhiatal esophagectomy and the rest 40 cases of the group that underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy. The preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative data were analyzed between the two surgeries, regarding perioperative bleeding, the total number of dissected mediastinal lymph nodes, operative time, number of lymph nodes in the left para-recurrent laryngeal nerve (para-RLN) or the right para-RLN, time in the intensive care unit (ICU), postoperative pain score, the length of postoperative stay (LOPS), PO₂/fraction of inspired oxygen (PO₂/FiO2), pulmonary infection, and lymphatic metastasis.

Results

The operations were successfully performed in all 80 patients. The results showed that patients who underwent transcervical and transhiatal esophagectomy had shorter operations than those with transthoracic esophagectomy (200 minutes vs 235 minutes, Kruskal–Wallis test [Z] = –3.700, P < 0.001). The number of dissected mediastinal lymph nodes in the left para-RLN in the observation group was higher than in the control group (25.0% vs 2.5%, Z = 2.568, P = 0.010). The postoperative pain score day 1 (0.0% vs 17.5%, Z = –4.292, P < 0.001), postoperative pain score day 3 (12.5% vs 37.5%, Z = –3.363, P < 0.001) and 48-h PO₂/FiO2 (290 minutes vs 255 minutes, Z = 3.747, P < 0.001) were significant between the two groups. The LOPS of patients with EC in the observation group was shorter than the control group (7 vs 8, Z = –2.119, P = 0.034). The number of patients receiving transcervical and transhiatal esophagectomy that developed postoperative pulmonary infections was less than the controls (chi-square [χ²] = 4.114, P = 0.043). Moreover, the transcervical and transhiatal esophagectomy was an independent protect factor for postoperative pulmonary infection (odds ratio [OR] =7.801, P = 0.037).

Conclusion

The transcervical and transhiatal esophagectomy is a good operation for treating patients with EC, which may offer an opportunity to treat cases who cannot have thoracotomy.

NEOADJUVANT CHEMORADIOTHERAPY FOLLOWED BY TRANSHITAL ESOPHAGECTOMY IN LOCALLY ADVANCED ESOPHAGEAL SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA: IMPACT OF PATHOLOGICAL COMPLETE RESPONSE

BACKGROUND

Multimodal therapy with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, followed by esophagectomy has offered better survival results, compared to isolated esophagectomy, in advanced esophageal cancer. In addition, patients who have a complete pathological response to neoadjuvant treatment presented greater overall survival and longer disease-free survival compared to those with incomplete response.

AIM

To compare the results of overall survival and disease-free survival among patients with complete and incomplete response, submitted to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, with two therapeutic regimens, followed by transhiatal esophagectomy.

METHODS

Retrospective study, approved by the Research Ethics Committee, analyzing the medical records of 56 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus, divided into two groups, submitted to radiotherapy (5040 cGY) and chemotherapy (5-Fluorouracil + Cisplatin versus Paclitaxel + Carboplatin) neoadjuvants and subsequently to surgical treatment, in the period from 2005 to 2012, patients.

RESULTS

The groups did not differ significantly in terms of gender, race, age, postoperative complications, disease-free survival and overall survival. The 5-year survival rate of patients with incomplete and complete response was 18.92% and 42.10%, respectively (p> 0.05). However, patients who received Paclitaxel + Carboplatin, had better complete pathological responses to neoadjuvant, compared to 5-Fluorouracil + Cisplatin (47.37% versus 21.62% - p = 0.0473, p <0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no statistical difference in overall survival and disease-free survival for patients who had a complete pathological response to neoadjuvant. Patients submitted to the therapeutic regimen with Paclitaxel and Carboplastin, showed a significant difference with better complete pathological response and disease progression. New parameters are indicated to clarify the real value in survival, from the complete pathological response to neoadjuvant, in esophageal cancer.

Surgical Therapy of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma-Current Standards and Future Perspectives

Transthoracic esophagectomy is currently the predominant curative treatment option for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma. The majority of carcinomas present as locally advanced tumors requiring multimodal strategies with either neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy alone. Minimally invasive, including robotic, techniques are increasingly applied with a broad spectrum of technical variations existing for the oncological resection as well as gastric reconstruction. At the present, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is the preferred technique of reconstruction (Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). With standardized surgical procedures, a complete resection of the primary tumor can be achieved in almost 95% of patients. Even in expert centers, postoperative morbidity remains high, with an overall complication rate of 50-60%, whereas 30- and 90-day mortality are reported to be <2% and <6%, respectively. Due to the complexity of transthoracic esophagetomy and its associated morbidity, esophageal surgery is recommended to be performed in specialized centers with an appropriate caseload yet to be defined. In order to reduce postoperative morbidity, the selection of patients, preoperative rehabilitation and postoperative fast-track concepts are feasible strategies of perioperative management. Future directives aim to further centralize esophageal services, to individualize surgical treatment for high-risk patients and to implement intraoperative imaging modalities modifying the oncological extent of resection and facilitating surgical reconstruction.

Evaluating the Cost for Robotic vs "Non-Robotic" Transhiatal Esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

This study was undertaken to analyze and compare the cost of robotic transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) to "non-robotic" THE (ie, "open" and laparoscopic).

METHODS

With IRB approval, we prospectively followed 82 patients who underwent THE. We analyzed clinical outcomes and perioperative charges and costs associated with THE. To compare profitability, the robotic approach was analyzed against "non-robotic" approaches of THE using F-test, Mann-Whitney U test/Student's t-test, and Fisher's exact test. Statistical significance was reported as P ≤0.05. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD).

RESULTS

67 patients underwent the robotic approach, and 15 patients underwent "non-robotic" approach; 4 were "open" and 11 were laparoscopic. 79 patients had adenocarcinoma. Operative duration for robotic THE was 327 (331 ± 82.8) vs 213 (225 ± 62.0) minutes (P = 0.0001) and estimated blood loss was 150 (184 ± 136.1) vs 300 (476 ± 708.7) mL (P = 0.0001). Length of stay was 7 (11 ± 11.8) vs 8 (12 ± 10.6) days (P = 0.76). 16 patients had post-operative complications with a Clavien-Dindo score of three or more. Hospital charges for robotic THE were $197,405 ($259,936 ± 203,630.8) vs "non-robotic" THE $159,588 ($201,565 ± $185,763.5) (P = 0.31). Cost of care for robotic THE was $34,822 ($48,844 ± $45,832.8) vs "non-robotic" THE was $23,939 ($39,386 ± $44,827.2) (P = 0.47). Payment received for robotic THE was $14,365 ($30,003 ± $40,874.7) vs "non-robotic" THE was $28,080 ($41,087 ± $44,509.1) (P = 0.41). 15% of robotic operations were profitable vs 13% of "non-robotic" operations.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients were predominantly older overweight men who had adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. The robotic approach had increased operative time and minimal blood loss. More than a fourth of operations included concomitant procedures. Patients were discharged approximately one week after THE. Overall, the robotic approach has no apparent significant differences in charges, cost, or profitability.

Outcomes of Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery During Eight Years of Surgical Auditing by the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate changes in treatment and outcomes of esophagogastric cancer surgery after introduction of the DUCA. In addition, the presence of risk-averse behavior was assessed.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Clinical auditing is seen as an important quality improvement tool; however, its long-term efficacy remains largely unknown. In addition, critics claim that enhancements result from risk-averse behavior rather than positive effects of auditing.

METHODS

DUCA data were used from registration start (1-1-2011) until 31-12-2018. Trends in patient, tumor, hospital and treatment characteristics were univariably assessed. Trends in short-term outcomes were investigated using multilevel multivariable logistic regression. Presence of risk aversion was described by the corrected proportion of patients undergoing surgery, using data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. To evaluate the impact of centralization on time trends identified, the association between hospital volume and outcomes was investigated.

RESULTS

This study included 6172 patients with esophageal and 3,690 with gastric cancer who underwent surgery. Pathological outcomes (lymph node yield, radicality) improved and futile surgery decreased over the years. In-hospital/30-day mortality decreased for esophagectomy (4.2% to 2.5%) and for gastrectomy (7.1% to 4.3%). Reinterventions, (minor) complications and readmissions increased. Risk aversion appeared absent. Between 2011-2018, annual median hospital volumes increased from 38 to 53 for esophagectomy and from 14 to 29 for gastrectomy. Higher hospital volumes were associated with several improved outcomes measures.

CONCLUSIONS

During 8 years of auditing, outcomes improved, with no signs of risk-averse behavior. These improvements occurred in parallel with centralization. Feedback on postoperative complications remains the focus of the DUCA.

Outcomes of Patients with Anastomotic Leakage After Transhiatal, McKeown or Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Background

Anastomotic leakage has a great impact on clinical outcomes after esophagectomy. It has never been studied whether anastomotic leakage is of equal severity between different types of esophagectomy (i.e., transhiatal, McKeown and Ivor Lewis) in terms of postoperative mortality and morbidity.

Methods

All esophageal cancer patients with anastomotic leakage after transhiatal, McKeown or Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between 2011 and 2019 were selected from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) registry. The primary outcome was 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, re-operation and ICU readmission rate.

Results

Data from 1030 patients with anastomotic leakage after transhiatal (n=287), McKeown (n=397) and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (n=346) were evaluated. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate was 4.5% in patients with leakage after transhiatal esophagectomy, 8.1% after McKeown and 8.1% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P=0.139). After correction for confounders, leakage after transhiatal resection was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.152–0.699, P=0.004), but mortality after McKeown and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was similar. Re-operation rate was 24.0% after transhiatal, 40.6% after McKeown and 41.3% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P<0.001). ICU readmission rate was 24.0% after transhiatal, 37.8% after McKeown and 43.4% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P<0.001).

Conclusion

This study in patients with anastomotic leakage confirms a strong association between severity of clinical consequences and different types of esophagectomy. It supports the hypothesis that cervical leakage is generally less severe than intrathoracic leakage. The clinical impact of anastomotic leakage should be taken into account, in addition to its incidence, when different types of esophagectomy are compared by clinicians or researchers.

Overall Volume Trends in Esophageal Cancer Surgery Results From the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit

OBJECTIVE

In the pursuit of quality improvement, this study aimed to investigate volume-outcome trends in oncologic esophagectomy in the Netherlands.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Concentration of Dutch esophageal cancer care was dictated by introducing an institutional minimum of 20 resections/yr.

METHODS

This nationwide cohort study included all esophagectomy patients registered in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit in 2016-2019 from hospitals currently still performing esophagectomies. Annual esophagectomy hospital volume was assigned to each patient and categorized into quartiles. Multivariable logistic regression investigated short-term surgical outcomes. Restricted cubic splines investigated if volume-outcome relationships eventually plateaued.

RESULTS

In 16 hospitals, 3135 esophagectomies were performed. First volume quartile hospitals performed 24-39 resections/yr; second, third, and fourth quartile hospitals performed 40-53, 54-69, and 70-101, respectively. Compared to quartile 1, in quartiles 2 to 4, overall/severe/technical complication, anastomotic leakage, and prolonged hospital/intensive care unit stay rates were significantly lower and textbook outcome and lymph node yield were higher. When raising the cut-off from the first to second quartile, higher-volume centers had less technical complications [Adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-0.96], less anastomotic leakage (aOR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.66-0.97), more textbook outcome (aOR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.07-1.46), shorter intensive care unit stay (aOR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69-0.93), and higher lymph node yield (aOR: 3.56, 95% CI: 2.68-4.77). For most outcomes the volume-outcome trend plateaued at 50-60 annual resections, but lymph node yield and anastomotic leakage continued to improve.

CONCLUSION

Although this study does not reflect on individual hospital quality, there appears to be a volume trend towards better outcomes in high-volume centers. Projects have been initiated to improve national quality of care by reducing hospital variation (irrespective of volume) in outcomes in The Netherlands.