Search

Esophagectomy is a complex and complication laden procedure. Despite centralization, variations in perioparative strategies reflect a paucity of evidence regarding optimal routines. The use of nasogastric (NG) tubes post esophagectomy is typically associated with significant discomfort for the patients. We hypothesize that immediate postoperative removal of the NG tube is non-inferior to current routines. All Nordic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer centers were invited to participate in this open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Inclusion criteria include resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. A pretrial survey was undertaken and was the foundation for a consensus process resulting in the Kinetic trial, an RCT allocating patients to either no use of a NG tube (intervention) or 5 days of postoperative NG tube use (control) with anastomotic leakage as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include pulmonary complications, overall complications, length of stay, health related quality of life. A sample size of 450 patients is planned (Kinetic trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39935085). Thirteen Nordic centers with a combined catchment area of 17 million inhabitants have entered the trial and ethical approval was granted in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. All centers routinely use NG tube and all but one center use total or hybrid minimally invasive-surgical approach. Inclusion began in January 2022 and the first annual safety board assessment has deemed the trial safe and recommended continuation. We have launched the first adequately powered multi-center pragmatic controlled randomized clinical trial regarding NG tube use after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction.

Esophagectomy is a complex and complication laden procedure. Despite centralization, variations in perioparative strategies reflect a paucity of evidence regarding optimal routines. The use of nasogastric (NG) tubes post esophagectomy is typically associated with significant discomfort for the patients. We hypothesize that immediate postoperative removal of the NG tube is non-inferior to current routines. All Nordic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer centers were invited to participate in this open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Inclusion criteria include resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. A pretrial survey was undertaken and was the foundation for a consensus process resulting in the Kinetic trial, an RCT allocating patients to either no use of a NG tube (intervention) or 5 days of postoperative NG tube use (control) with anastomotic leakage as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include pulmonary complications, overall complications, length of stay, health related quality of life. A sample size of 450 patients is planned (Kinetic trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39935085). Thirteen Nordic centers with a combined catchment area of 17 million inhabitants have entered the trial and ethical approval was granted in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. All centers routinely use NG tube and all but one center use total or hybrid minimally invasive-surgical approach. Inclusion began in January 2022 and the first annual safety board assessment has deemed the trial safe and recommended continuation. We have launched the first adequately powered multi-center pragmatic controlled randomized clinical trial regarding NG tube use after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction.

Esophagectomy is a complex and complication laden procedure. Despite centralization, variations in perioparative strategies reflect a paucity of evidence regarding optimal routines. The use of nasogastric (NG) tubes post esophagectomy is typically associated with significant discomfort for the patients. We hypothesize that immediate postoperative removal of the NG tube is non-inferior to current routines. All Nordic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer centers were invited to participate in this open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Inclusion criteria include resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. A pretrial survey was undertaken and was the foundation for a consensus process resulting in the Kinetic trial, an RCT allocating patients to either no use of a NG tube (intervention) or 5 days of postoperative NG tube use (control) with anastomotic leakage as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include pulmonary complications, overall complications, length of stay, health related quality of life. A sample size of 450 patients is planned (Kinetic trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39935085). Thirteen Nordic centers with a combined catchment area of 17 million inhabitants have entered the trial and ethical approval was granted in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. All centers routinely use NG tube and all but one center use total or hybrid minimally invasive-surgical approach. Inclusion began in January 2022 and the first annual safety board assessment has deemed the trial safe and recommended continuation. We have launched the first adequately powered multi-center pragmatic controlled randomized clinical trial regarding NG tube use after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction.

Esophagectomy is a complex and complication laden procedure. Despite centralization, variations in perioparative strategies reflect a paucity of evidence regarding optimal routines. The use of nasogastric (NG) tubes post esophagectomy is typically associated with significant discomfort for the patients. We hypothesize that immediate postoperative removal of the NG tube is non-inferior to current routines. All Nordic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer centers were invited to participate in this open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Inclusion criteria include resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. A pretrial survey was undertaken and was the foundation for a consensus process resulting in the Kinetic trial, an RCT allocating patients to either no use of a NG tube (intervention) or 5 days of postoperative NG tube use (control) with anastomotic leakage as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include pulmonary complications, overall complications, length of stay, health related quality of life. A sample size of 450 patients is planned (Kinetic trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39935085). Thirteen Nordic centers with a combined catchment area of 17 million inhabitants have entered the trial and ethical approval was granted in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. All centers routinely use NG tube and all but one center use total or hybrid minimally invasive-surgical approach. Inclusion began in January 2022 and the first annual safety board assessment has deemed the trial safe and recommended continuation. We have launched the first adequately powered multi-center pragmatic controlled randomized clinical trial regarding NG tube use after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction., Study protocol

BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the most common bariatric procedures. Internal herniation may lead to small bowel ischemia requiring small bowel resection, resulting in short bowel syndrome. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of extensive small bowel resection in patients operated with RYGB. We also aimed to look for early clinical warning signs among patients requiring extensive small bowel resection. SETTING: Cohort from national quality registers. METHODS: All patients having undergone RYGB between January 2007 to June 2019 were analyzed in the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry (SOReg). We identified patients with small bowel obstruction (SBO) for whom small bowel resection was necessary. Additionally, we assessed clinical signs in these patients. RESULTS: The study included 57,255 patients having undergone RYGB. Closure of the mesenteric openings was performed in 78%. Surgery for SBO was required in 3659 (6%) of patients, and small bowel resection in 188 (.3%). Extensive small bowel resection, resulting in less than 1.5 meters of remaining small bowel, was required in 7 patients (.01%). All patients with extensive small bowel resection presented with abdominal pain and had confirmed internal herniation as the cause of the small bowel resection, and 2 of 7 patients died. Closure of mesenteric defects was not associated with a reduction in overall small bowel resection rates (P = .89) CONCLUSION: Surgery for SBO after RYGB was common (6%). The risk of extensive small bowel resection leading to short bowel was low (.01%). Patients with abdominal pain after RYGB should be assessed for internal hernia, as it can be devastating.

Background: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the most common bariatric procedures. Internal herniation may lead to small bowel ischemia requiring small bowel resection, resulting in short bowel syndrome. Objective: To determine the incidence of extensive small bowel resection in patients operated with RYGB. We also aimed to look for early clinical warning signs among patients requiring extensive small bowel resection. Setting: Cohort from national quality registers. Methods: All patients having undergone RYGB between January 2007 to June 2019 were analyzed in the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry (SOReg). We identified patients with small bowel obstruction (SBO) for whom small bowel resection was necessary. Additionally, we assessed clinical signs in these patients. Results: The study included 57,255 patients having undergone RYGB. Closure of the mesenteric openings was performed in 78%. Surgery for SBO was required in 3659 (6%) of patients, and small bowel resection in 188 (.3%). Extensive small bowel resection, resulting in less than 1.5 meters of remaining small bowel, was required in 7 patients (.01%). All patients with extensive small bowel resection presented with abdominal pain and had confirmed internal herniation as the cause of the small bowel resection, and 2 of 7 patients died. Closure of mesenteric defects was not associated with a reduction in overall small bowel resection rates (P = .89) CONCLUSION: Surgery for SBO after RYGB was common (6%). The risk of extensive small bowel resection leading to short bowel was low (.01%). Patients with abdominal pain after RYGB should be assessed for internal hernia, as it can be devastating.

Esophagectomy is a complex and complication laden procedure. Despite centralization, variations in perioparative strategies reflect a paucity of evidence regarding optimal routines. The use of nasogastric (NG) tubes post esophagectomy is typically associated with significant discomfort for the patients. We hypothesize that immediate postoperative removal of the NG tube is non-inferior to current routines. All Nordic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer centers were invited to participate in this open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Inclusion criteria include resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. A pretrial survey was undertaken and was the foundation for a consensus process resulting in the Kinetic trial, an RCT allocating patients to either no use of a NG tube (intervention) or 5 days of postoperative NG tube use (control) with anastomotic leakage as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include pulmonary complications, overall complications, length of stay, health related quality of life. A sample size of 450 patients is planned (Kinetic trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39935085). Thirteen Nordic centers with a combined catchment area of 17 million inhabitants have entered the trial and ethical approval was granted in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. All centers routinely use NG tube and all but one center use total or hybrid minimally invasive-surgical approach. Inclusion began in January 2022 and the first annual safety board assessment has deemed the trial safe and recommended continuation. We have launched the first adequately powered multi-center pragmatic controlled randomized clinical trial regarding NG tube use after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction., Funding Agencies|Swedish Cancer Foundation [CAN 2021/1086]

Esophagectomy is a complex and complication laden procedure. Despite centralization, variations in perioparative strategies reflect a paucity of evidence regarding optimal routines. The use of nasogastric (NG) tubes post esophagectomy is typically associated with significant discomfort for the patients. We hypothesize that immediate postoperative removal of the NG tube is non-inferior to current routines. All Nordic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer centers were invited to participate in this open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Inclusion criteria include resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. A pretrial survey was undertaken and was the foundation for a consensus process resulting in the Kinetic trial, an RCT allocating patients to either no use of a NG tube (intervention) or 5 days of postoperative NG tube use (control) with anastomotic leakage as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include pulmonary complications, overall complications, length of stay, health related quality of life. A sample size of 450 patients is planned (Kinetic trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39935085). Thirteen Nordic centers with a combined catchment area of 17 million inhabitants have entered the trial and ethical approval was granted in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. All centers routinely use NG tube and all but one center use total or hybrid minimally invasive-surgical approach. Inclusion began in January 2022 and the first annual safety board assessment has deemed the trial safe and recommended continuation. We have launched the first adequately powered multi-center pragmatic controlled randomized clinical trial regarding NG tube use after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction.

Esophagectomy is a complex and complication laden procedure. Despite centralization, variations in perioparative strategies reflect a paucity of evidence regarding optimal routines. The use of nasogastric (NG) tubes post esophagectomy is typically associated with significant discomfort for the patients. We hypothesize that immediate postoperative removal of the NG tube is non-inferior to current routines. All Nordic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer centers were invited to participate in this open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Inclusion criteria include resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. A pretrial survey was undertaken and was the foundation for a consensus process resulting in the Kinetic trial, an RCT allocating patients to either no use of a NG tube (intervention) or 5 days of postoperative NG tube use (control) with anastomotic leakage as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include pulmonary complications, overall complications, length of stay, health related quality of life. A sample size of 450 patients is planned (Kinetic trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39935085). Thirteen Nordic centers with a combined catchment area of 17 million inhabitants have entered the trial and ethical approval was granted in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. All centers routinely use NG tube and all but one center use total or hybrid minimally invasive-surgical approach. Inclusion began in January 2022 and the first annual safety board assessment has deemed the trial safe and recommended continuation. We have launched the first adequately powered multi-center pragmatic controlled randomized clinical trial regarding NG tube use after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction.

Esophagectomy is a complex and complication laden procedure. Despite centralization, variations in perioparative strategies reflect a paucity of evidence regarding optimal routines. The use of nasogastric (NG) tubes post esophagectomy is typically associated with significant discomfort for the patients. We hypothesize that immediate postoperative removal of the NG tube is non-inferior to current routines. All Nordic Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer centers were invited to participate in this open-label pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT). Inclusion criteria include resection for locally advanced esophageal cancer with gastric tube reconstruction. A pretrial survey was undertaken and was the foundation for a consensus process resulting in the Kinetic trial, an RCT allocating patients to either no use of a NG tube (intervention) or 5 days of postoperative NG tube use (control) with anastomotic leakage as primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints include pulmonary complications, overall complications, length of stay, health related quality of life. A sample size of 450 patients is planned (Kinetic trial: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN39935085). Thirteen Nordic centers with a combined catchment area of 17 million inhabitants have entered the trial and ethical approval was granted in Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. All centers routinely use NG tube and all but one center use total or hybrid minimally invasive-surgical approach. Inclusion began in January 2022 and the first annual safety board assessment has deemed the trial safe and recommended continuation. We have launched the first adequately powered multi-center pragmatic controlled randomized clinical trial regarding NG tube use after esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction.

Background Laparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer. Methods Patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression. Results In total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001). Conclusions Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery.

Background Laparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer. Methods Patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression. Results In total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001). Conclusions Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery.

Background Laparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer. Methods Patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression. Results In total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001). Conclusions Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery.

Background Laparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer. Methods Patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression. Results In total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001). Conclusions Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery.

Objective: To examine the hypothesis that survival in esophageal cancer increases with more removed lymph nodes during esophagectomy up to a plateau, after which it levels out or even decreases with further lymphadenectomy. Summary of Background Data: There is uncertainty regarding the ideal extent of lymphadenectomy during esophagectomy to optimize long-term survival in esophageal cancer. Methods: This population-based cohort study included almost every patient who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in Sweden or Finland in 2000-2016 with follow-up through 2019. Degree of lymphadenectomy, divided into deciles, was analyzed in relation to all-cause 5-year mortality. Multivariable Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) adjusted for all established prognostic factors. Results: Among 2,306 patients, the 2nd (4-8 nodes), 7th (21-24 nodes) and 8th decile (25-30 nodes) of lymphadenectomy showed the lowest all-cause 5-year mortality compared to the 1st decile (HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.97, HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.99, and HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.93, respectively). In stratified analyses, the survival benefit was greatest in decile 7 for patients with pathological T-stage T3/T4 (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.78), although it was statistically improved in all deciles except decile 10. For patients without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, survival was greatest in decile 7 (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.86), although survival was also statistically significantly improved in deciles 2, 6, and 8. Conclusion: Survival in esophageal cancer was not improved by extensive lymphadenectomy, but resection of a moderate number (20-30) of nodes was prognostically beneficial for patients with advanced T-stages (T3/T4) and those not receiving neoadjuvant therapy.

BackgroundLaparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.MethodsPatients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression.ResultsIn total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001).ConclusionsLaparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery., Funding Agencies|Karolinska Institute

BackgroundLaparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.MethodsPatients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression.ResultsIn total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001).ConclusionsLaparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery., Funding Agencies|Karolinska Institute

BackgroundLaparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.MethodsPatients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression.ResultsIn total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001).ConclusionsLaparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery., Funding Agencies|Karolinska Institute

Background Laparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer. Methods Patients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression. Results In total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001). Conclusions Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery.

BackgroundLaparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.MethodsPatients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression.ResultsIn total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001).ConclusionsLaparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery., Funding Agencies|Karolinska Institute

BackgroundLaparoscopic gastrectomy is increasingly used for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer but concerns remain whether similar results can be obtained compared to open gastrectomy, especially in Western populations. This study compared the short-term postoperative, oncological and survival outcomes following laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy based on data from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer.MethodsPatients who underwent surgery with curative intent for adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction Siewert type III from 2015 to 2020 were identified, and 622 patients with cT2-4aN0-3M0 tumors were included. The impact of surgical approach on short-term outcomes was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. Long-term survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression.ResultsIn total, 350 patients underwent open and 272 laparoscopic gastrectomy, of which 12.9% were converted to open surgery. The groups were similar regarding distribution of clinical disease stage (27.6% stage I, 46.0% stage II, and 26.4% stage III). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered to 52.7% of the patients. There was no difference in the rate of postoperative complications, but laparoscopic approach was associated with lower 90 day mortality (1.8 vs 4.9%, p = 0.043). The median number of resected lymph nodes was higher after laparoscopic surgery (32 vs 26, p < 0.001), while no difference was found in the rate of tumor-free resection margins. Better overall survival was observed after laparoscopic gastrectomy (HR 0.63, p < 0.001).ConclusionsLaparoscopic gastrectomy can be safely preformed for advanced gastric cancer and is associated with improved overall survival compared to open surgery., Funding Agencies|Karolinska Institute

OBJECTIVE: To examine the hypothesis that survival in esophageal cancer increases with more removed lymph nodes during esophagectomy up to a plateau, after which it levels out or even decreases with further lymphadenectomy. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: There is uncertainty regarding the ideal extent of lymphadenectomy during esophagectomy to optimize long-term survival in esophageal cancer. METHODS: This population-based cohort study included almost every patient who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in Sweden or Finland in 2000-2016 with follow-up through 2019. Degree of lymphadenectomy, divided into deciles, was analyzed in relation to all-cause 5-year mortality. Multivariable Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) adjusted for all established prognostic factors. RESULTS: Among 2,306 patients, the 2nd (4-8 nodes), 7th (21-24 nodes) and 8th decile (25-30 nodes) of lymphadenectomy showed the lowest all-cause 5-year mortality compared to the 1st decile (HR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.97, HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.99, and HR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.93, respectively). In stratified analyses, the survival benefit was greatest in decile 7 for patients with pathological T-stage T3/T4 (HR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.40-0.78), although it was statistically improved in all deciles except decile 10. For patients without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, survival was greatest in decile 7 (HR = 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.86), although survival was also statistically significantly improved in deciles 2, 6, and 8. CONCLUSION: Survival in esophageal cancer was not improved by extensive lymphadenectomy, but resection of a moderate number (20-30) of nodes was prognostically beneficial for patients with advanced T-stages (T3/T4) and those not receiving neoadjuvant therapy., Funding: Swedish Research Council [201900209]; Swedish Cancer Society [180684]

The ingestion of button batteries (BB) by children has become more common, and this can cause oesophageal injury, perforation and even life-threatening haemorrhage.A 1-year-old infant who presented to the emergency room with loss of appetite and vomiting, and was discharged with suspected gastro-enteritis is described. One week later she returned with haematemesis. Chest radiography detected a BB in the stomach and it was removed operatively. Haematemesis and hypovolaemic shock ensued and, while waiting for the paediatric cardiothoracic team, the profuse oesophageal bleeding was controlled using an adult-size Sengstaken-Blakemore tube (SBT). An aorto-oesophageal fistula at the aortic arch was identified and repaired. This case highlights the importance of suspecting ingestion of BB, and performing a chest radiography in children who present with swallowing difficulties, haematemesis and haemodynamic instability. The adult-size SBT was well tolerated by the child and was lifesaving in controlling the bleeding from the aorta.AbbreviationAEF: aorto-oesophageal fistula;BB: button battery;CTA: computed tomography angiography;ER: emergency room;GI: gastro-intestinal;SBT: Sengstaken-Blakemore tubeAbbreviationAEF: aorto-oesophageal fistula;BB: button battery;CTA: computed tomography angiography;ER: emergency room;GI: gastro-intestinal;SBT: Sengstaken-Blakemore tubeAbbreviationAEF: aorto-oesophageal fistula;BB: button battery;CTA: computed tomography angiography;ER: emergency room;GI: gastro-intestinal;SBT: Sengstaken-Blakemore tubeAbbreviationAEF: aorto-oesophageal fistula;BB: button battery;CTA: computed tomography angiography;ER: emergency room;GI: gastro-intestinal;SBT: Sengstaken-Blakemore tubeAbbreviationAEF: aorto-oesophageal fistula;BB: button battery;CTA: computed tomography angiography;ER: emergency room;GI: gastro-intestinal;SBT: Sengstaken-Blakemore tubeAbbreviationAEF: aorto-oesophageal fistula;BB: button battery;CTA: computed tomography angiography;ER: emergenc

Background Recent research indicates long-term survival benefits of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) compared with open esophagectomy (OE) for patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers, but there is a need for more population-based studies. Methods We conducted a prospective population-based nationwide cohort study including all patients in Sweden diagnosed with esophageal or junctional cancer who underwent a transthoracic esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis. Data were collected from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer in 2006-2019. Patients were grouped into OE and MIE including hybrid MIE (HMIE) and totally MIE (TMIE). Overall survival and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared using Cox regression and logistic regression models, respectively. All models were adjusted for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, clinical T and N stage, neoadjuvant therapy, year of surgery, and hospital volume. Results Among 1404 patients, 998 (71.1%) underwent OE and 406 (28.9%) underwent MIE. Compared with OE, overall survival was better following MIE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.94), TMIE (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.94), and possibly also after HMIE (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.02). MIE was associated with shorter operation time, less intraoperative bleeding, higher number of resected lymph nodes, and shorter hospital stay compared with OE. MIE was also associated with fewer overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.47-1.03) as well as non-surgical complications (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.40-1.00). Conclusions MIE seems to offer better survival and similar or improved short-term postoperative outcomes in esophageal and GEJ cancers compared with OE in this unselected population-based cohort.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up., Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council [2019-00423]; Swedish Cancer Society [200736]; Region of Stockholm [20200119]

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background Esophageal perforation is a rare and life-threatening condition with several treatment options. The aim was to assess the incidence, type of treatment and mortality of esophageal perforations in Sweden and to identify risk factors for 90-day mortality. Method All patients admitted with an esophageal perforation from 2007 to 2017 were identified from the National Patient Register. Mortality was assessed by linkage with the Cause of Death Registry. We analyze the incidence and the impact of age, sex, comorbidities on mortality. Results 879 patients with esophageal perforation were identified, giving an incidence rate of 1.09 per 100,000 person-years. The median age at diagnosis was 68.8 years and 60% were men. The mortality was 26% at 90 days. Independent risk factors for death within 90 days were age (odds ratio (OR): 6.20; 95% (confidence interval) CI: 2.16-17.79 at 60-74 years and OR: 11.58; 95% CI: 4.04-33.15 at 75 years or older), peripheral vascular disease (OR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.44-5.92) and underlying malignant disease (OR: 5.91; 95% CI: 3.86-9.03). In patients younger than 45 years, survival was lower among women than among men (at 5 years 73 and 93%, respectively). The cause of death among young women was often drug-related or suicide. Conclusions 90-day mortality was 26%, old age, vascular disease and underlying malignant disease were risk factors.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up., Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council [2019-00423]; Swedish Cancer Society [200736]; Region of Stockholm [20200119]

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background Esophageal perforation is a rare and life-threatening condition with several treatment options. The aim was to assess the incidence, type of treatment and mortality of esophageal perforations in Sweden and to identify risk factors for 90-day mortality. Method All patients admitted with an esophageal perforation from 2007 to 2017 were identified from the National Patient Register. Mortality was assessed by linkage with the Cause of Death Registry. We analyze the incidence and the impact of age, sex, comorbidities on mortality. Results 879 patients with esophageal perforation were identified, giving an incidence rate of 1.09 per 100,000 person-years. The median age at diagnosis was 68.8 years and 60% were men. The mortality was 26% at 90 days. Independent risk factors for death within 90 days were age (odds ratio (OR): 6.20; 95% (confidence interval) CI: 2.16-17.79 at 60-74 years and OR: 11.58; 95% CI: 4.04-33.15 at 75 years or older), peripheral vascular disease (OR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.44-5.92) and underlying malignant disease (OR: 5.91; 95% CI: 3.86-9.03). In patients younger than 45 years, survival was lower among women than among men (at 5 years 73 and 93%, respectively). The cause of death among young women was often drug-related or suicide. Conclusions 90-day mortality was 26%, old age, vascular disease and underlying malignant disease were risk factors.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up., Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council [2019-00423]; Swedish Cancer Society [200736]; Region of Stockholm [20200119]

Background Esophageal perforation is a rare and life-threatening condition with several treatment options. The aim was to assess the incidence, type of treatment and mortality of esophageal perforations in Sweden and to identify risk factors for 90-day mortality. Method All patients admitted with an esophageal perforation from 2007 to 2017 were identified from the National Patient Register. Mortality was assessed by linkage with the Cause of Death Registry. We analyze the incidence and the impact of age, sex, comorbidities on mortality. Results 879 patients with esophageal perforation were identified, giving an incidence rate of 1.09 per 100,000 person-years. The median age at diagnosis was 68.8 years and 60% were men. The mortality was 26% at 90 days. Independent risk factors for death within 90 days were age (odds ratio (OR): 6.20; 95% (confidence interval) CI: 2.16-17.79 at 60-74 years and OR: 11.58; 95% CI: 4.04-33.15 at 75 years or older), peripheral vascular disease (OR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.44-5.92) and underlying malignant disease (OR: 5.91; 95% CI: 3.86-9.03). In patients younger than 45 years, survival was lower among women than among men (at 5 years 73 and 93%, respectively). The cause of death among young women was often drug-related or suicide. Conclusions 90-day mortality was 26%, old age, vascular disease and underlying malignant disease were risk factors.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up., Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council [2019-00423]; Swedish Cancer Society [200736]; Region of Stockholm [20200119]

Background Recent research indicates long-term survival benefits of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) compared with open esophagectomy (OE) for patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancers, but there is a need for more population-based studies. Methods We conducted a prospective population-based nationwide cohort study including all patients in Sweden diagnosed with esophageal or junctional cancer who underwent a transthoracic esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis. Data were collected from the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer in 2006-2019. Patients were grouped into OE and MIE including hybrid MIE (HMIE) and totally MIE (TMIE). Overall survival and short-term postoperative outcomes were compared using Cox regression and logistic regression models, respectively. All models were adjusted for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, clinical T and N stage, neoadjuvant therapy, year of surgery, and hospital volume. Results Among 1404 patients, 998 (71.1%) underwent OE and 406 (28.9%) underwent MIE. Compared with OE, overall survival was better following MIE (hazard ratio [HR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.94), TMIE (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47-0.94), and possibly also after HMIE (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.56-1.02). MIE was associated with shorter operation time, less intraoperative bleeding, higher number of resected lymph nodes, and shorter hospital stay compared with OE. MIE was also associated with fewer overall complications (odds ratio [OR] 0.70, 95% CI 0.47-1.03) as well as non-surgical complications (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.40-1.00). Conclusions MIE seems to offer better survival and similar or improved short-term postoperative outcomes in esophageal and GEJ cancers compared with OE in this unselected population-based cohort.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up., Funding Agencies|Swedish Research Council [2019-00423]; Swedish Cancer Society [200736]; Region of Stockholm [20200119]

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background Esophageal perforation is a rare and life-threatening condition with several treatment options. The aim was to assess the incidence, type of treatment and mortality of esophageal perforations in Sweden and to identify risk factors for 90-day mortality. Method All patients admitted with an esophageal perforation from 2007 to 2017 were identified from the National Patient Register. Mortality was assessed by linkage with the Cause of Death Registry. We analyze the incidence and the impact of age, sex, comorbidities on mortality. Results 879 patients with esophageal perforation were identified, giving an incidence rate of 1.09 per 100,000 person-years. The median age at diagnosis was 68.8 years and 60% were men. The mortality was 26% at 90 days. Independent risk factors for death within 90 days were age (odds ratio (OR): 6.20; 95% (confidence interval) CI: 2.16-17.79 at 60-74 years and OR: 11.58; 95% CI: 4.04-33.15 at 75 years or older), peripheral vascular disease (OR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.44-5.92) and underlying malignant disease (OR: 5.91; 95% CI: 3.86-9.03). In patients younger than 45 years, survival was lower among women than among men (at 5 years 73 and 93%, respectively). The cause of death among young women was often drug-related or suicide. Conclusions 90-day mortality was 26%, old age, vascular disease and underlying malignant disease were risk factors.

Background: The globally dominant treatment with curative intent for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) with subsequent esophagectomy. This multimodal treatment leads to around 60% overall 5-year survival, yet with impaired post-surgical quality of life. Observational studies indicate that curatively intended chemoradiotherapy, so-called definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) followed by surveillance of the primary tumor site and regional lymph node stations and surgery only when needed to ensure local tumor control, may lead to similar survival as nCRT with surgery, but with considerably less impairment of quality of life. This trial aims to demonstrate that dCRT, with selectively performed salvage esophagectomy only when needed to achieve locoregional tumor control, is non-inferior regarding overall survival, and superior regarding health-related quality of life (HRQOL), compared to nCRT followed by mandatory surgery, in patients with operable, locally advanced ESCC. Methods: This is a pragmatic open-label, randomized controlled phase III, multicenter trial with non-inferiority design with regard to the primary endpoint overall survival and a superiority hypothesis for the experimental intervention dCRT with regard to the main secondary endpoint global HRQOL one year after randomization. The control intervention is nCRT followed by preplanned surgery and the experimental intervention is dCRT followed by surveillance and salvage esophagectomy only when needed to secure local tumor control. A target sample size of 1200 randomized patients is planned in order to reach 462 events (deaths) during follow-up.

Background Esophageal perforation is a rare and life-threatening condition with several treatment options. The aim was to assess the incidence, type of treatment and mortality of esophageal perforations in Sweden and to identify risk factors for 90-day mortality. Method All patients admitted with an esophageal perforation from 2007 to 2017 were identified from the National Patient Register. Mortality was assessed by linkage with the Cause of Death Registry. We analyze the incidence and the impact of age, sex, comorbidities on mortality. Results 879 patients with esophageal perforation were identified, giving an incidence rate of 1.09 per 100,000 person-years. The median age at diagnosis was 68.8 years and 60% were men. The mortality was 26% at 90 days. Independent risk factors for death within 90 days were age (odds ratio (OR): 6.20; 95% (confidence interval) CI: 2.16-17.79 at 60-74 years and OR: 11.58; 95% CI: 4.04-33.15 at 75 years or older), peripheral vascular disease (OR: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.44-5.92) and underlying malignant disease (OR: 5.91; 95% CI: 3.86-9.03). In patients younger than 45 years, survival was lower among women than among men (at 5 years 73 and 93%, respectively). The cause of death among young women was often drug-related or suicide. Conclusions 90-day mortality was 26%, old age, vascular disease and underlying malignant disease were risk factors.

The main curative treatment modality for esophageal cancer is resection. Patients initially deemed suitable for resection may become unsuitable, most commonly due to signs of generalized disease or having become unfit for surgery. The aim was to assess risk factors for abandoning esophagectomy and its impact on survival. All patients diagnosed with an esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer in the Swedish National Register for Esophageal and Gastric Cancer from 2006-2016 were included and risk factors associated with becoming ineligible for resection were analyzed in multivariable logistic regression analysis. Overall survival was explored by multivariable Cox regression models. Among 1,792 patients planned for resection, 189 (11%) became unsuitable for resection before surgery and 114 (6%) had exploratory surgery without resection. Intermediate and high educational levels were associated with an increased probability of resection (odds ratio (OR) 1.46, 95% CI 1.05-2.05, OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.28-2.87, respectively) as was marital status (married: OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.01-1.85). Clinically advanced disease (cT4: OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.16-0.87; cN3: OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.81) and neoadjuvant treatment were associated with a decreased probability of resection (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.88). Five-year survival for non-resected patients was only 4.5% although neoadjuvant treatment was associated with improved survival (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56-0.99). Non-resected patients with squamous cell carcinoma had comparatively reduced survival (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.10-2.43). High socioeconomic status was associated with an increased probability of completing the plan to resect whereas clinically advanced disease and neoadjuvant treatment were independent factors associated with increased risk of abandoning resectional intent.