Emergency oesophagectomy for oesophageal perforation after chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal cancer

Emergent Esophagectomy in Patients with Esophageal Malignancy Is Associated with Higher Rates of Perioperative Complications but No Independent Impact on Short-Term Mortality

Background

Data on perioperative outcomes of emergent versus elective resection in esophageal cancer patients requiring esophagectomy are lacking. We investigated whether emergent resection was associated with increased risks of morbidity and mortality.

Methods

Data on patients with esophageal malignancy who underwent esophagectomy from 2005 to 2020 were retrospectively analyzed from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Thirty-day complication and mortality rates were compared between emergent esophagectomy (EE) and non-emergent esophagectomy. Logistic regression assessed factors associated with complications and mortality.

Results

Of 10,067 patients with malignancy who underwent esophagectomy, 181 (1.8%) had EE, 64% had preoperative systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis, or septic shock, and 44% had bleeding requiring transfusion. The EE group had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class and functional dependency. More transhiatal esophagectomies and diversions were performed in the EE group. After EE, the rates of 30-day mortality (6.1% vs. 2.8%), overall complications (65.2% vs. 44.2%), bleeding, pneumonia, prolonged intubation, and positive margin (17.7% vs. 7.4%) were higher, while that of anastomotic leak was similar. On adjusted logistic regression, older age, lower albumin, higher ASA class, and fragility were associated with increased complications and mortality. McKeown esophagectomy and esophageal diversion were associated with a higher risk of postoperative complications. EE was associated with 30-day postoperative complications (odds ratio, 2.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.66-3.43; p<0.0001).

Conclusion

EE was associated with a more than 2-fold increase in complications compared to elective procedures, but no independent increase in short-term mortality. These findings may help guide data-driven critical decision-making for surgery in select cases of complicated esophageal malignancy.

Retrospective cohort study on treatment modalities and survival time after oesophageal fistula in patients with oesophageal cancer in a regional cancer care centre in China

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal fistula (perforation) is a devastating complication in patients with oesophageal cancer . The optimal treatment remains uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to present real-world evidence on treatment modalities and survival postfistula in patients with oesophageal cancer.

DESIGN, SETTINGS AND MAIN OUTCOMES

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with oesophageal cancer with oesophageal fistulae diagnosed between June 2010 and June 2020 in a regional cancer care centre in Zhengzhou, China (n=352). The treatment options included surgical resection, oesophageal stent grafting, gastrostomy, nasogastric tube and conservative care. The primary outcome was survival time (months) postfistula. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) life regression was used to estimate the differences in survival time accounting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

The median survival time was 2.3 months (IQR: 0.7-6.0 months). Survival times were shorter in patients of male sex, T4 stage and oesophagotracheal versus oesophageal-mediastinal fistulae, and longer for any treatment option versus conservative care. The IPTW life regression analyses showed that in patients with oesophagotracheal fistulae, survival times were longer for stent grafting (+0.90 (95% CI 0.60 to 1.19) months) or gastrostomy (+0.81 (95% CI 0.47 to 1.13) months) versus nasogastric tube. In patients with oesophageal-mediastinal fistulae, survival times were shorter for stent grafting versus nasogastric tube (-0.36 (95% CI -0.63 to -0.09) months) and gastric tube (-0.29 (95% CI -0.50 to -0.08) months). Surgical resection was recorded in nine patients with oesophageal-mediastinal fistulae, and it was associated with the longest survival time in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Stent grafting or gastrostomy may be preferable to nasogastric tube in survival prognosis for patients with oesophageal cancer with oesophagotracheal fistulae. In contrast, stent grafting may be not preferable to nasogastric tube or gastrostomy in survival prognosis for patients with oesophageal-mediastinal fistulae.

Endoscopic management of anastomotic leak after esophageal or gastric resection for malignancy: a multicenter experience

BACKGROUND

Most anastomotic leaks after surgical resection for esophageal or esophagogastric junction malignancies are treated endoscopically with esophageal stents. Internal drainage by double pigtail stents has been used for the endoscopic management of leaks following bariatric surgery, and recently introduced for anastomotic leaks after resections for malignancies. Our aim was to assess the overall efficacy of the endoscopic treatment for anastomotic leaks after esophageal or gastric resection for malignancies.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective study in four digestive endoscopy tertiary referral centers in France. We included consecutive patients managed endoscopically for anastomotic leak following esophagectomy or gastrectomy for malignancies between January 2016 and December 2018. The primary outcome was the efficacy of the endoscopic management on leak closure.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight patients were included, among which 46 men and 22 women, with a mean ± SD age of 61 ± 11 years. Forty-four percent had an Ivor Lewis procedure, 16% a tri-incisional esophagectomy, and 40% a total gastrectomy. The median time between surgery and the diagnosis of leak was 9 (6-13) days. Endoscopic treatment was successful in 90% of the patients. The efficacy of internal drainage and esophageal stents was 95% and 77%, respectively (p = 0.06). The mortality rate was 3%. The only predictive factor of successful endoscopic treatment was the initial use of internal drainage (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic management of early postoperative leak is successful in 90% of patients, preventing highly morbid surgical revisions. Internal endoscopic drainage should be considered as the first-line endoscopic treatment of anastomotic fistulas whenever technically feasible.

Emergency surgery for gastrointestinal cancer: A nationwide study in Japan based on the National Clinical Database

BACKGROUND

Emergency gastrointestinal surgery, although rare, is known for its high mortality and morbidity. However, the risks of emergency surgery for gastrointestinal cancer have not been investigated in depth. This study aimed to investigate the impact of emergency surgery on mortality and morbidity in patients with gastrointestinal cancers and to identify associated risk factors.

METHODS

We extracted data from the National Clinical Database, a nationwide surgery registration system in Japan, for patients with gastrointestinal cancer who underwent esophageal resection, total gastrectomy, distal gastrectomy, right hemicolectomy, or low anterior resection between 2012 and 2017. The impacts of emergency surgery on 30-day mortality and incidence of overall postoperative complications were compared with those of non-emergency surgery. Risk factors for mortality and overall postoperative complications were then sought in patients who underwent emergency surgery.

RESULTS

Thirty-day mortality and incidence of overall postoperative complications were significantly higher in emergency surgeries for gastric, colon, and rectal cancers than in non-emergency surgeries (odds ratios 4.86-6.98 and 1.68-2.18, respectively; all P < .001). Various risk factors were identified in the group that underwent emergency surgery, including preoperative sepsis and lower body mass index. Some of the risk factors were common to all types of surgery and others were specific to a certain type of surgery.

CONCLUSION

The actual risk of emergency surgery and the risk factors for overall postoperative complications in emergency cases are shown to serve as a reference for postoperative management. Emergency surgery had an additional burden on patients depending on the type of surgery.

Risk factors and therapeutic measures for postoperative complications associated with esophagectomy

Esophageal cancer is one of the most common cancers associated with the high mortality rate. Timely diagnosis and treatment are important to manage the disease and prevent comorbidities. Surgical resection of the tumor and lymph nodes is usually practiced either with or without chemo or chemoradiotherapy. Despite advancements in surgical methods and skills, complex nature of the esophagus and invasiveness of the surgery can lead to serious complications in these patients. In order to predict postoperative outcomes, preoperative examination of the patients, in addition to risk factors, should be conducted. Conclusion: Lastly, early detection of adverse postoperative events may help faster recovery, reduce hospital stay and prevent other morbidities.

Risk Factors for Esophageal Fistula in Esophageal Cancer Patients Treated with Radiotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

<b><i>Objective:</i></b> Esophageal fistula is a critical and fatal complication of esophageal cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to explore the risk factors for esophageal perforation in esophageal cancer patients treated with radiotherapy. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Data from the PubMed and Embase databases were retrieved for clinical research published between 1990 and 2018. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of the articles. A meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software provided by the Cochrane Collaboration Network. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Seventeen articles were eligible for the meta-analysis. In these articles, over 35 risk factors for esophageal fistula formation were described and 17 risk factors were analyzed. Significant differences in the odds of developing an esophageal perforation were found with regard to age (OR 2.34, 95% CI 1.08–5.03, <i>p</i> = 0.001), ulcerative type (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.43–5.16, <i>p</i> = 0.002), histology (OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.14–15.12, <i>p</i> = 0.03), T stage (OR 2.66, 95% CI 1.44–4.91, <i>p</i> = 0.002), short-term response (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.06–4.62, <i>p</i> = 0.03), chemotherapy regimen (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.38–5.68, <i>p</i> = 0.005), and stenosis (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.03–3.89, <i>p</i> = 0.04). <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> An age of &#x3c;60–65 years, ulcerative type, squamous cell cancer, T4 stage, incomplete response, fluorouracil-based regimen, and stenosis were associated with an increased risk of esophageal fistula during or after radiotherapy. However, further, large-scale prospective studies are needed to establish the validity of this associ­ation.

Staged esophagectomy: surgical legacy or a bailout option?

Staged esophagectomy was developed in the mid-twentieth century in an attempt to reduce high rates of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Nowadays, the operation has almost been abandoned due to its significant disadvantages, especially the need for multiple surgeries, inability of patients to feed between operations, and morbidity of esophageal stoma. However, staged esophagectomy is still occasionally useful for very high-risk patients and in particular cases, for example multiple cancers of the aerodigestive tract and emergent esophagectomy. Staged esophagectomy is based on the division of surgical stress into two operations, which gives the patient time to recover before final restoration. Gastric tube ischemic preparation may be a more important mechanism in staged esophagectomy. This approach may survive and expand with the application of ischemic gastric pre-conditioning through embolization or laparoscopic ligation of the gastric arteries, which is a less explored and promising technique.