Search

Background Data on the long-term symptom burden in patients surviving oesophageal cancer surgery are scarce. The aim of this study was to identify the most prevalent symptoms and their interactions with health-related quality of life. Methods This was a cross-sectional cohort study of patients who underwent oesophageal cancer surgery in 20 European centres between 2010 and 2016. Patients had to be disease-free for at least 1 year. They were asked to complete a 28-symptom questionnaire at a single time point, at least 1 year after surgery. Principal component analysis was used to assess for clustering and association of symptoms. Risk factors associated with the development of severe symptoms were identified by multivariable logistic regression models. Results Of 1081 invited patients, 876 (81.0 per cent) responded. Symptoms in the preceding 6 months associated with previous surgery were experienced by 586 patients (66.9 per cent). The most common severe symptoms included reduced energy or activity tolerance (30.7 per cent), feeling of early fullness after eating (30.0 per cent), tiredness (28.7 per cent), and heartburn/acid or bile regurgitation (19.6 per cent). Clustering analysis showed that symptoms clustered into six domains: lethargy, musculoskeletal pain, dumping, lower gastrointestinal symptoms, regurgitation/reflux, and swallowing/conduit problems; the latter two were the most closely associated. Surgical approach, neoadjuvant therapy, patient age, and sex were factors associated with severe symptoms. Conclusion A long-term symptom burden is common after oesophageal cancer surgery.

Race is an important prognostic factor affecting receipt of surgical intervention and survival from cancer in the USA. The findings of this study highlight the importance of implementing changes aimed at narrowing the disparities in outcomes between race in patients with cancers.Race is an important prognostic factor affecting receipt of surgical intervention and survival from cancer in the USA. The findings of this study highlight the importance of implementing changes aimed at narrowing the disparities in outcomes between race in patients with cancers.

Background Although both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and chemotherapy (nCT) are used as neoadjuvant treatment for oesophageal cancer, it is unknown whether one provides a survival advantage over the other, particularly with respect to histological subtype. This study aimed to compare prognosis after nCRT and nCT in patients undergoing oesophagectomy for oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) or squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Methods Data from the National Cancer Database (2006–2015) were used to identify patients with OAC and OSCC. Propensity score matching and Cox multivariable analyses were used to account for treatment selection biases. Results The study included 11 167 patients with OAC (nCRT 9972, 89.3 per cent; nCT 1195, 10.7 per cent) and 2367 with OSCC (nCRT 2155, 91.0 per cent; nCT 212, 9.0 per cent). In the matched OAC cohort, nCRT provided higher rates of complete pathological response (35.1 versus 21.0 per cent; P Conclusion Despite pathological benefits, including primary tumour response to nCRT, there was no prognostic benefit of nCRT compared with nCT for OAC suggesting that these two modalities are equally acceptable. However, for OSCC, nCRT followed by surgery appears to remain the optimal treatment approach.

Background The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes between minimally invasive and open oesophagectomy for cancer at different postoperative time points. Methods A search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library was performed for studies that compared open with minimally invasive oesophagectomy. A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for studies that measured HRQoL scores using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18 questionnaires. Mean differences (MDs) greater than 10 in scores were considered clinically relevant. Pooled effects of MDs with 95 per cent confidence intervals were estimated to assess statistical significance. Results Nine studies were included in the qualitative analysis, involving 1157 patients who had minimally invasive surgery and 907 patients who underwent open surgery. Minimally invasive surgery resulted in better scores for global quality of life (MD 11·61, 95 per cent c.i. 3·84 to 19·39), physical function (MD 11·88, 3·92 to 19·84), fatigue (MD −13·18, −17·59 to −8·76) and pain (MD −15·85, −20·45 to −11·24) compared with open surgery at 3 months after surgery. At 6 and 12 months, no significant differences remained. Conclusion Patients report better global quality of life, physical function, fatigue and pain 3 months after minimally invasive surgery compared with open surgery. No such differences remain at longer follow-up of 6 and 12 months.

Background Intrahepatic recurrence of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following resection is common. However, no current consensus guidelines exist to inform management decisions in these patients. Systematic review and meta-analysis of survival following different treatment modalities may allow improved treatment selection. This review aimed to identify the optimum treatment strategies for HCC recurrence. Methods A systematic review, up to September 2016, was conducted in accordance with MOOSE guidelines. The primary outcome was the hazard ratio for overall survival of different treatment modalities. Meta-analysis of different treatment modalities was carried out using a random-effects model, with further assessment of additional prognostic factors for survival. Results Nineteen cohort studies (2764 patients) were included in final data analysis. The median 5-year survival rates after repeat hepatectomy (525 patients), ablation (658) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) (855) were 35·2, 48·3 and 15·5 per cent respectively. Pooled analysis of ten studies demonstrated no significant difference between overall survival after ablation versus repeat hepatectomy (hazard ratio 1·03, 95 per cent c.i. 0·68 to 1·55; P = 0·897). Pooled analysis of seven studies comparing TACE with repeat hepatectomy showed no statistically significant difference in survival (hazard ratio 1·61, 0·99 to 2·63; P = 0·056). Conclusion Based on these limited data, there does not appear to be a significant difference in survival between patients undergoing repeat hepatectomy or ablation for recurrent HCC. The results also identify important negative prognostic factors (short disease-free interval, multiple hepatic metastases and large hepatic metastases), which may influence choice of treatment.

Background Defined clinical pathways can contribute to improved outcomes in patients undergoing oesophageal cancer surgery. A standardized oesophagectomy clinical pathway (SOCP) established at the Virginia Mason Medical Center (VMMC) in Seattle, Washington, USA was introduced into the Royal Surrey County Hospital (RSCH), Guildford, UK in 2011. The aim of this study was to see whether transfer and implementation of an oesophagectomy care pathway could change postoperative outcomes significantly. Methods Three consecutively accrued study groups were examined at the RSCH: patients operated on immediately before the introduction of the SOCP (group 1), patients operated on after the introduction of the SOCP but not included in the pathway (group 2), and patients managed according to the SOCP (group 3). Outcomes were compared with those of patients who had surgery at the VMMC between 2009 and 2011 using the SOCP (group 4). Results There were 12 patients in each of the first three groups and 74 in group 4. All groups were similar with respect to body mass index, medical co-morbidities and clinical stage. The median age of patients in group 3 was significantly lower than that in group 1, and median American Society of Anesthesiologists score was significantly better in group 3 compared with group 4. Following initiation of the SOCP there was an increase in immediate extubation (8 of 12 in group 1 versus 12 of 12 in group 3) and first-day mobilization (1 of 12 versus 12 of 12 respectively), and a reduction in complications (9 of 12 versus 4 of 12), length of critical care stay (4 (range 2–20) days in group 1 versus 3 (1–5) days in group 3) and length of hospital stay (17 (12–30) to 7 (6–37) days respectively). Patients not on the pathway but who had surgery during the same interval experienced small but non-significant improvements in length of critical care and hospital stay, and in first-day mobilization. Conclusion The study demonstrated improvement in short-term outcomes after oesophagectomy following the adoption of an established multidisciplinary standardized postoperative pathway.

Background Although there is plentiful evidence regarding the use of laparoscopic surgery for primary inguinal hernia, there is a paucity of literature concerning its role after recurrence. There has been no quantitative review of the evidence, despite suggestions that pooled analysis of existing data is required. Methods Medline, Embase, trial registries, conference proceedings and reference lists were searched for controlled trials of laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery for mesh repair of recurrent hernia. The primary outcomes were recurrence and chronic pain. Secondary outcomes were operating time, visual analogue pain score, superficial wound infection, haematoma or seroma formation, time to return to normal activities and serious complications requiring operation. Pooled odds ratios were calculated for categorical outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. Results Four trials were included in the analysis. There was no effect on recurrence or chronic pain. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with significantly less postoperative pain, a quicker return to normal activities and fewer wound infections, at the cost of a longer operating time. There was no difference in haematoma formation or the need for additional operations. Conclusion Careful patient selection and surgeons' experience are important in the selection of technique for recurrent inguinal hernia repair.