Search

Objective: To assess the impact of surgical technique in regard to morbidity and mortality after neoadjuvant treatment for esophageal cancer. Background: The SAKK trial 75/08 was a multicenter phase III trial (NCT01107639) comparing induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and surgery in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Methods: Patients in the control arm received induction chemotherapy with cisplatin and docetaxel, followed by concomitant chemoradiation therapy with cisplatin, docetaxel, and 45Gy. In the experimental arm, the same regimen was used with addition of cetuximab. After completion of neoadjuvant treatment, patients underwent esophagectomy. The experimental arm received adjuvant cetuximab. Surgical outcomes and complications were prospectively recorded and analyzed. Results: Total of 259 patients underwent esophagectomy. Overall complication rate was 56% and reoperation rate was 15% with no difference in complication rates for transthoracic versus transhiatal resections (56% vs 54%, P = 0.77), nor for video assisted thoracic surgeries (VATS) versus open transthoracic resections (67% vs 55%, P = 0.32). There was a trend to higher overall complication rates in squamous cell carcinoma versus adenocarcinoma (65% vs 51%, P = 0.035), and a significant difference in ARDS in squamous cell carcinoma with 14% versus 2% in adenocarcinoma (P = 0.0002). For patients with involved lymph nodes, a lymph node ratio of ≥0.1 was an independent predictor of PFS (HR 2.5, P = 0.01) and OS (HR 2.2, P = 0.03). Conclusions: This trial showed no difference in surgical complication rates between transthoracic and transhiatal resections. For patients with involved lymph nodes, lymph node ratio was an independent predictor of progression free survival and overall survival. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The management of acute pancreatitis (AP) is still based on speculative and unproven paradigms in many centers. Therefore, we performed an evidence-based analysis to assess the best available treatment., Methods: A comprehensive Medline and Cochrane Library search was performed evaluating the indication and timing of interventional and surgical approaches, and the value of aprotinin, lexipafant, gabexate mesylate, and octreotide treatment. Each study was ranked according to the evidence-based methodology of Sackett; whenever feasible, we performed new meta-analyses using the random-effects model. Recommendations were based on the available level of evidence (A=large randomized; B=small randomized; C=prospective trial)., Results: None of the evaluated medical treatments is recommended (level A). Patients with AP should receive early enteral nutrition (level B). While mild biliary AP is best treated by primary cholecystectomy (level B), patients with severe biliary AP require emergency endoscopic papillotomy followed by interval cholecystectomy (level A). Patients with necrotizing AP should receive imipenem or meropenem prophylaxis to decrease the risk of infected necrosis and mortality (level A). Sterile necrosis per se is not an indication for surgery (level C), and not all patients with infected necrosis require immediate surgery (level B). In general, early necrosectomy should be avoided (level B), and single necrosectomy with postoperative lavage should be preferred over "open-packing" because of fewer complications with comparable mortality rates (level C)., Conclusions: While providing new insights into key aspects of AP management, this evidence-based analysis highlights the need for further clinical trials, particularly regarding the indications for antibiotic prophylaxis and surgery.