Search

Curative treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer consists of (neo)adjuvant treatment followed by esophagectomy. Both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and perioperative chemotherapy improve the 5-year overall survival rate compared with surgery alone. However, it is unknown whether these treatment strategies are associated with differences in long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL). The aim of this study is to compare long-term HRQL in patients after esophagectomy treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy. Disease-free cancer patients having undergone esophagectomy and (neo)adjuvant treatment in one of the participating lasting symptoms after esophageal resection (LASER) study centers between 2010 and 2016, were identified from the LASER study dataset. Included patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-OG25, and LASER questionnaires at least 1 year after the completion of treatment. Long-term HRQL was compared between patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy, using univariable and multivariable regression and presented as differences in mean score. Among the 565 included patients, 349 (61.8%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and 216 (38.2%) perioperative chemotherapy. Patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy reported more symptomatology for diarrhea (difference in means 5.93), reflux (difference in means 7.40), and odynophagia (difference in means 4.66). The differences did not exceed the 10 points to be of clinical relevance. No significant differences for the LASER key symptoms were observed. The observed differences in long-term HRQL are in favor of patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy; however, the differences were small. Patients need to be informed about long-term HRQL when considering allocation of (neo)adjuvant treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are no internationally recognized criteria available to determine preparedness for hospital discharge after esophagectomy. This study aims to achieve international consensus using Delphi methodology. The expert panel consisted of 40 esophageal surgeons spanning 16 countries and 4 continents. During a 3-round, web-based Delphi process, experts voted for discharge criteria using 5-point Likert scales. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Consensus was reached if agreement was ≥75% in round 3. Consensus was achieved for the following basic criteria: nutritional requirements are met by oral intake of at least liquids with optional supplementary nutrition via jejunal feeding tube. The patient should have passed flatus and does not require oxygen during mobilization or at rest. Central venous catheters should be removed. Adequate analgesia at rest and during mobilization is achieved using both oral opioid and non-opioid analgesics. All vital signs should be normal unless abnormal preoperatively. Inflammatory parameters should be trending down and close to normal (leucocyte count ≤12G/l and C-reactive protein ≤80 mg/dl). This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for consensus criteria to determine 'fit-for-discharge' status after esophagectomy. Results of this Delphi survey may be applied to clinical outcomes research as an objective measure of short-term recovery. Furthermore, standardized endpoints identified through this process may be used in clinical practice to guide decisions regarding patient discharge and may help to reduce the risk of premature discharge or prolonged admission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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<0.001) and margin-negative resections (90.1 versus 85.9 per cent; P<0.001). However, patients who had nCRT had similar survival to those who received nCT (hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, 95 per cent c.i. 0.95 to 1.14). Five-year survival rates for patients who had nCRT and nCT were 36 and 37 per cent respectively (P=0.123). For OSCC, nCRT had higher rates of complete pathological response (50.9 versus 30.4 per cent; P<0.001) and margin-negative resections (92.8 versus 82.4 per cent; P<0.001). A statistically significant overall survival benefit was evident for nCRT (HR 0.78, 0.62 to 0.97). Five-year survival rates for patients who had nCRT and nCT were 45.0 and 38.0 per cent respectively (P=0.026). 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND Postoperative complications, especially pulmonary complications, affect more than half the patients who undergo open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Whether hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy results in lower morbidity than open esophagectomy is unclear. METHODS We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized, controlled trial involving patients 18 to 75 years of age with resectable cancer of the middle or lower third of the esophagus. Patients were randomly assigned to undergo transthoracic open esophagectomy (open procedure) or hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (hybrid procedure). Surgical quality assurance was implemented by the credentialing of surgeons, standardization of technique, and monitoring of performance. Hybrid surgery comprised a two-field abdominal-thoracic operation (also called an Ivor-Lewis procedure) with laparoscopic gastric mobilization and open right thoracotomy. The primary end point was intraoperative or postoperative complication of grade II or higher according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (indicating major complication leading to intervention) within 30 days. Analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS From October 2009 through April 2012, we randomly assigned 103 patients to the hybrid-procedure group and 104 to the open-procedure group. A total of 312 serious adverse events were recorded in 110 patients. A total of 37 patients (36%) in the hybrid- procedure group had a major intraoperative or postoperative complication, as compared with 67 (64%) in the open-procedure group (odds ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.18 to 0.55; P<0.001). A total of 18 of 102 patients (18%) in the hybrid- procedure group had a major pulmonary complication, as compared with 31 of 103 (30%) in the open-procedure group. At 3 years, overall survival was 67% (95% CI, 57 to 75) in the hybrid-procedure group, as compared with 55% (95% CI, 45 to 64) in the open-procedure group; disease-free survival was 57% (95% CI, 47 to 66) and 48% (95% CI, 38 to 57), respectively. CONCLUSIONS We found that hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy resulted in a lower incidence of intraoperative and postoperative major complications, specifically pulmonary complications, than open esophagectomy, without compromising overall and disease-free survival over a period of 3 years. (Funded by the French National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00937456.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Obesity increases the risk of several types of cancer. Whether bariatric surgery influences the risk of obesity‐related cancer is not clear. This study aimed to uncover the risk of hormone‐related (breast, endometrial and prostate), colorectal and oesophageal cancers following obesity surgery. Methods: This national population‐based cohort study used data from the Hospital Episode Statistics database in England collected between 1997 and 2012. Propensity matching on sex, age, co‐morbidity and duration of follow‐up was used to compare cancer risk among obese individuals undergoing bariatric surgery (gastric bypass, gastric banding or sleeve gastrectomy) and obese individuals not undergoing such surgery. Conditional logistic regression provided odds ratios (ORs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals. Results: In the study period, from a cohort of 716 960 patients diagnosed with obesity, 8794 patients who underwent bariatric surgery were matched exactly with 8794 obese patients who did not have surgery. Compared with the no‐surgery group, patients who had bariatric surgery exhibited a decreased risk of hormone‐related cancers (OR 0·23, 95 per cent c.i. 0·18 to 0·30). This decrease was consistent for breast (OR 0·25, 0·19 to 0·33), endometrium (OR 0·21, 0·13 to 0·35) and prostate (OR 0·37, 0·17 to 0·76) cancer. Gastric bypass resulted in the largest risk reduction for hormone‐related cancers (OR 0·16, 0·11 to 0·24). Gastric bypass, but not gastric banding or sleeve gastrectomy, was associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (OR 2·63, 1·17 to 5·95). Longer follow‐up after bariatric surgery strengthened these diverging associations. Conclusion: Bariatric surgery is associated with decreased risk of hormone‐related cancers, whereas gastric bypass might increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Obesity affects cancer risk [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pancreatic cancer has a very poor prognosis as most patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage when curative treatments are not possible. Breath volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have shown potential as novel biomarkers to detect cancer. The aim of the study was to quantify differences in exhaled breath VOCs of patients with pancreatic cancers compared with cohorts without cancer. Methods: Patients were recruited to an initial development cohort and a second validation cohort. The cancer group included patients with localized and metastatic cancers, whereas the control group included patients with benign pancreatic disease or normal pancreas. The reference test for comparison was radiological imaging using abdominal CT, ultrasound imaging or endoscopic ultrasonography, confirmed by histopathological examination as appropriate. Breath was collected from the development cohort with steel bags, and from the validation cohort using the ReCIVA™ system. Analysis was performed using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Results: A total of 68 patients were recruited to the development cohort (25 with cancer, 43 no cancer) and 64 to the validation cohort (32 with cancer, 32 no cancer). Of 66 VOCs identified, 12 were significantly different between groups in the development cohort on univariable analysis. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis using significant volatile compounds and the validation cohort produced an area under the curve of 0·736 (sensitivity 81 per cent, specificity 58 per cent) for differentiating cancer from no cancer, and 0·744 (sensitivity 70 per cent, specificity 74 per cent) for differentiating adenocarcinoma from no cancer. Conclusion: Breath VOCs may distinguish patients with pancreatic cancer from those without cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this national population‐based cohort study was to compare rates of reintervention after surgical myotomy versus sequential pneumatic dilatation for the primary management of oesophageal achalasia. Methods: Patients with oesophageal achalasia diagnosed between 2002 and 2012, and without an intervention in the preceding 5 years were identified from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Patients were divided into two groups based on the primary treatment, and propensity score matching was used to compensate for differences in baseline characteristics. Results: Some 14 705 patients were diagnosed with oesophageal achalasia, of whom 7487 (50·9 per cent) received interventional treatment: 1742 (23·3 per cent) surgical myotomy, 4534 (60·6 per cent) pneumatic dilatation and 1211 (16·2 per cent) endoscopic botulinum toxin injection. As age increased, the proportion of patients receiving myotomy decreased and the proportion undergoing dilatation increased. Patients who underwent surgical myotomy were younger (mean age 44·8 years versus 58·5 years among those who had pneumatic dilatation; P < 0·001), a greater proportion had a Charlson co‐morbidity index score of 0 (90·1 versus 87·7 per cent; P = 0·003) and they were more commonly men (55·6 versus 51·8 per cent; P = 0·020). Following propensity score matching, the safety of the two initial treatment approaches was equivalent, with no difference in incidence of oesophageal perforation (1·3 and 1·4 per cent after myotomy and dilatation respectively; P = 0·750). However, dilatation was associated with increased need for reintervention (59·6 versus 13·8 per cent; P < 0·001) and frequency of reinterventions (mean 0·34 versus 0·06 per year; P < 0·001). Conclusion: Surgical myotomy was associated with a lower rate of reintervention and could be offered as primary treatment in patients with oesophageal achalasia who are fit for surgery. For those unfit for surgery, pneumatic dilatation may provide symptomatic relief with approximately 60 per cent of patients requiring reintervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous researchers have focused upon the influence of postoperative complications upon prognosis from esophagectomy, with very little attention paid to the potential negative effects of complications during neoadjuvant therapy. The hypothesis under investigation in this study was that the prognosis after esophageal cancer surgery is negatively influenced by complications causing hospital admission during neoadjuvant therapy. Patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy and surgery for esophageal cancer between 1987 and 2010 were identified from a populationbased nationwide Swedish cohort study and followed up until 2016. The association between hematological and nonhematological complications during neoadjuvant therapy and risk of short- and long-term mortality following surgery was analyzed using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, providing hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The HRs were adjusted for appropriate confounding variables. Among 587 patients, complications during neoadjuvant therapy requiring emergency hospitalization affected 65 (12%) patients. Hematological complications were associated with an increased 90-day overall mortality (HR = 5.60; 95% CI 1.27-24.75), particularly in subgroups of patients of tumor stage 0-II, adenocarcinoma, and radical and nonradical resection margins, and rendered increased 5-year disease-specific mortality specifically for esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR = 3.22; 95% CI 1.00-10.40). Occurrence of nonhematological complications was followed by an increase in 5-year mortality (HR= 2.35; 95% CI 1.15-4.81) in poor prognostic groups (tumor stage III-IV). There was no increased 5-year mortality following hematological or nonhematological complications in other subgroups of patients. Complications during neoadjuvant therapy may adversely impact short and long-term mortality in subgroups of patients with esophageal cancer receiving esophagectomy. Patient selection, optimization of neoadjuvant therapy, and timing of surgical resection, remain important areas for future development in the management of esophageal cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

SUMMARY: Perioperative blood transfusion has been linked to poorer long-term survival in patients undergoing esophagectomy, presumably due to its potential immunomodulatory effects. This review aims to summarize existing evidence relating to the influence of blood transfusion on long-term survival following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. A systematic literature search (up to February 2017) was conducted for studies reporting the effects of perioperative blood transfusion on survival following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Meta-analysis was used to summate survival outcomes. Twenty observational studies met the criteria for inclusion. Eighteen of these studies compared the outcomes of patients who received allogenic blood transfusion to patients who did not receive this intervention. Meta-analysis of outcomes revealed that allogenic blood transfusion significantly reduced long-term survival (HR = 1.49; 95% CI 1.26 to 1.76; P < 0.001). There appeared to be a dose-related response with patients who received ≥3 units of blood having lower long-term survival compared to patient who received between 0 and 2 units (HR = 1.59; 95% CI 1.31 to 1.93; P < 0.001). Two studies comparing patients who received allogenic versus autologous blood transfusion showed superior survival in the latter group. Factors associated with the requirement for perioperative blood transfusion included: intraoperative blood loss; preoperative hemoglobin; operative approach; operative time, and; presences of advanced disease. These findings indicate that perioperative blood transfusion is associated with significantly worse long-term survival in patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Autologous donation of blood, meticulous intraoperative hemostasis, and avoidance of unnecessary transfusions may prevent additional deaths attributed to this intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This narrative review aims to evaluate the evidence for the different nutritional approaches employed during neoadjuvant therapy in patients with locoregional esophageal cancer. Patients with esophageal cancer are often malnourished and difficult to optimize nutritionally. While evidence suggests that neoadjuvant therapy can offer a survival advantage, associated toxicity can exacerbate poor nutritional status. There is currently no accepted standard of care regarding optimal nutritional approach. A systematic literature search was undertaken. Studies describing the utilization of an additional nutritional intervention in patients with esophageal cancer receiving neoadjuvant therapy prior to esophagectomy were included. Primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality after esophagectomy. Secondary outcome measures were loss of weight during neoadjuvant therapy, completion rate of intended neoadjuvant therapy, complications from nutritional intervention, 30-day postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy and quality of life during neoadjuvant treatment. Given the heterogeneity of retrieved articles results was presented as a narrative review. Twenty-five studies were included of which 16 evaluated esophageal stenting, four feeding jejunostomy, three gastrostomy, one nasogastric feeding, and one comparative study of esophageal stenting to feeding jejunostomy. 30-day postoperative mortality was only reported in two of the 26 included studies limiting comparison between nutritional strategies. All studies of esophageal stents reported improvements in dysphagia with reported weight change ranging from -5.4 to +6 kg and one study reported 30-day postoperative mortality after esophagectomy (10%). In patients undergoing esophageal stenting for their neoadjuvant treatment overall migration rate was 29.9%. Studies of laparoscopically inserted jejunostomy were all retrospective reviews that demonstrated an increase in weight ranging from 0.4 to 11.8 kg and similarly no study reported 30-day postoperative mortality. Only one comparative study was included that compared esophageal stents to jejunostomy. This study reported no significant difference between the two groups in respect to complication rates (stents 22% vs. jejunostomy 4%, P = 0.11) or increase in weight (stents 4.4 kg vs. jejunostomy 4.2 kg, P = 0.59). Quality of life was also poorly reported. This review demonstrates the uncertainty on the optimal nutritional approach for patients with resectable esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant treatment prior to esophagectomy. A prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study is needed to determine current practice and inform a prospective clinical trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this systematic review is to identify key components of enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) that lead to improved length of hospital stay (LOS) following esophagectomy. Relevant electronic databases were searched for studies comparing clinical outcome from esophagectomy followed by a conventional pathway versus ERP. Relevant outcome measures were compared and metaregression was performed to identify the key ERP components associated with reduced in LOS. Thirteen publications were included, ERP was associated with no changes in in-hospital mortality, total complications, anastomotic leak, or pulmonary complications compared with a conventional pathway, however LOS was reduced in the ERP group. Metaregression identified that immediate extubation was associated with reduced LOS (OR=-0.51, 95%CI -0.77 to -0.25; P < 0.01). Several postoperative factors were associated with a significant reduction in length of hospital stay and in order of most important were (i) gastrograffin swallow ⩽5 days (OR=-4.27, 95%CI -4.50 to -4.03); (ii) mobilization on postoperative day ⩽1 (OR=-2.49, 95%CI -2.63 to -2.34); (iii) removal of urinary catheter ⩽2 days (OR=-0.99, 95%CI -1.15 to -0.84); (iv) oral intake with at least sips of fluid ⩽1 day (OR=-0.96, 95%CI -1.24 to -0.68); (v) enteral diet with feeding jejunostomy or gastrostomy ⩽ 1 day (OR=-0.57, 95%CI -0.80 to -0.35) and (vi) epidural removal ⩽ 4 days (OR=-0.17, 95%CI -0.27 to -0.07). Several core ERP components and principles appear to be associated with LOS reduction. These elements should form a part of the core ERP for the specialty, while surgical teams incorporate other elements through an iterative process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Periampullary cancers are uncommon malignancies, often amenable to surgery. Several studies have suggested a role for adjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy in improving survival of patients with periampullary cancers, with variable results. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine the survival benefit of adjuvant therapy for periampullary cancers. Methods A systematic review was undertaken of literature published between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2015 to elicit and analyse the pooled overall survival associated with the use of either adjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy versus observation in the treatment of surgically resected periampullary cancer. Included articles were also screened for information regarding stage, prognostic factors and toxicity-related events. Results A total of 704 titles were screened, of which 93 full-text articles were retrieved. Fourteen full-text articles were included in the study, six of which were RCTs. A total of 1671 patients (904 in the control group and 767 who received adjuvant therapy) were included. The median 5-year overall survival rate was 37·5 per cent in the control group, compared with 40·0 per cent in the adjuvant group (hazard ratio 1·08, 95 per cent c.i. 0·91 to 1·28; P = 0·067). In 32·2 per cent of patients who had adjuvant therapy, one or more WHO grade 3 or 4 toxicity-related events were noted. Advanced T category was associated worse survival (regression coefficient −0·14, P = 0·040), whereas nodal status and grade of differentiation were not. Conclusion This systematic review found no associated survival benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy in the treatment of periampullary cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim Long-term survival after oesophagectomy remains poor, with recurrence a feared common outcome. Prediction tools can help clinicians identify high-risk patients and optimise treatment decisions based on their prognostic factors. This study developed and evaluated a prediction model to predict long-term survival and time-to-recurrence following surgery for oesophageal cancer. Methods Patients who underwent curative surgery between June 2009–2015 from the European iNvestigation of SUrveillance After Resection for Esophageal Cancer study were included. Prediction models were developed for overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) using Cox proportional hazards (CPH) and Random Survival Forest (RSF). Model performance was evaluated using discrimination (time-dependent area under the curve (tAUC)) and calibration (visual comparison of predicted and observed survival probabilities). Results This study included 4719 patients with an OS of 47.7% and DFS of 48.4% at 5 years. Sixteen variables were included in the final model. CPH and RSF demonstrated good discrimination with a tAUC of 78.2% (95% CI 77.4–79.1%) and 77.1% (95% CI 76.1–78.1%) for OS and a tAUC of 79.4% (95% CI 78.5–80.2%) and 78.6% (95% CI 77.5–79.5%) respectively for DFS at 5 years. CPH showed good agreement between predicted and observed probabilities in all quintiles. RSF showed good agreement for patients with survival probabilities between 20–80% and moderate agreement in the <20% and > 80% quintile groups. Conclusion This study demonstrated the ability of a statistical model to accurately predict long-term survival and time-to-recurrence after surgery for oesophageal cancer, with CPH and RSF models showing good discrimination and calibration. Identification of patient groups at risk of recurrence and poor long-term survival can improve patient outcomes by enhancing selection of treatment methods and surveillance strategies. Future work evaluating prediction-based decisions against standard decision-making is required to improve understanding of the clinical utility derived from prognostic model use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anastomotic leak is a potentially devastating complication following gastrointestinal anastomosis. Some surgeons believe that reinforcing the anastomosis with omentum reduces the incidence and severity of anastomotic leak. A comprehensive electronic search of EMBASE, Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane databases was performed. Pooled odds ratios (POR) were calculated for discrete variables. There were six studies investigating esophageal anastomosis and 3 studies investigating colorectal anastomosis identified by the literature search. A total of 2296 patients were included, 1073 with omentoplasty and 1223 without. In esophageal surgery omentoplasty significantly reduced the rate of anastomotic leak (2.9% vs 10.5% (POR = 0.28; 95% CI = 0.17 to 0.47; P < 0.0001), but there was no significant effect upon in-hospital mortality (2.3% vs. 2.5%; POR = 0.911 [95% CI 0.439-1.887]; P = 0.802) or anastomotic stricture between the two groups (6.6% vs 9.1%; POR = 0.842 [95% CI 0.331 to 2.145]; P = 0.720). In colorectal surgery there was no significant difference in anastomotic leak rate (5.0% vs 8.4%; POR: 0.50; 95% CI 0.21 to 1.17) or inhospital mortality (4.2% vs 4.1%; POR: 0.90; 95% CI 0.34 to 2.41). The results of this analysis show that omentoplasty significantly reduced the rate of anastomotic leak following esophageal anastomosis but these results were not observed in colorectal anastomosis. Omentoplasty could be used as an adjunct technique to reduce the incidence of anastomotic leak in oesophageal anastomosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim Established and emerging therapies for recurrent esophageal cancer may impact survival and health-related quality-of-life (HRQL), however surveillance protocols after primary curative treatment are inconsistent. Specifically, whether advantages exist for adjunctive surveillance modalities is unknown and was the focus of this study. Methods ENSURE was an international multicenter observational study of consecutive patients undergoing curative-intent surgery for esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancers (2009–2015) across 20 European and North American cancer centers (NCT03461341). The initial report from ENSURE assessed the impact of intensive imaging surveillance on the primary outcome measure of overall survival (OS); secondary outcomes included treatment, disease-specific survival, recurrence pattern, and HRQL. In the present study, multivariable linear, logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to determine the independent impact of adjunctive surveillance modalities on oncologic outcome. Results Results 4,682 patients were studied (72.6% adenocarcinoma, 69.1% neoadjuvant therapy). Routine biochemistry, nutritional profiling, tumor markers, surveillance endoscopy and flexible nasolaryngoscopy were routinely assessed in 37, 33, 15, 19 and 7% of Centers, respectively. Routine biochemistry and tumour markers were associated with reduced risk of symptomatic recurrence, however neither modality was associated with survival benefit. Endoscopic surveillance was independently associated with increased probability of isolated local or anastomotic recurrence (OR1.49 [1.05–2.14]), and reduced probability of symptomatic recurrence (OR0.17 [0.12–0.25]), but not with improved OS. On subgroup analysis, endoscopic surveillance was associated with reduced symptomatic recurrence (OR0.19 [0.12–0.29]) and increased probability of tumour-directed therapy among patients with adenocarcinoma (OR1.65 [1.14–2.38]), but not those with SCC. Endoscopic surveillance was associated with improved OS (HR0.73 [0.55–0.98]) among patients with Barrett's oesophagus, while flexible nasolaryngoscopy was associated with improved OS among patients with SCC (HR0.19 [0.05–0.80]). Nutritional surveillance was independently associated with increased tumor-directed therapy, improved HRQL (P  = 0.015) and OS (HR0.89 [0.80–0.99]), while a multimodal surveillance approach was also associated with improved OS (HR0.83 [0.72–0.95]). Conclusion These data suggest that a multimodal and tailored surveillance approach may improve oncologic outcomes following curative-intent surgery for esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer. These findings may inform guideline development and shared decision-making with patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of this study is to identify the incidence of and risk factors associated with the development of esophageal cancer in treated achalasia patients in a national cohort. Patients with esophageal achalasia diagnosed and receiving a treatment between 2002 and 2012 were identified in England. Patient and treatment factors were compared between individuals who developed esophageal cancer and those that did not using univariate and multivariate analyses. A total of 7487 patients receiving an interventional treatment for esophageal achalasia were included and 101 patients (1.3%) developed esophageal cancer. The incidence of esophageal cancer was 205 cases per 100,000 patient years at risk. Patients who developed esophageal cancer were older and more commonly primarily treated with pneumatic dilation (82.2% vs. 60.3%; P  < 0.001). In the esophageal cancer group, there was an increase in the number of patients requiring reinterventions (47.5% vs. 38.0%; P  = 0.041) and the average total number of reinterventions per patient (1.2 vs. 0.8; P  = 0.026). Multivariate analysis suggested associations between increased reintervention following both surgical myotomy (HR = 5.1; 95%CI 1.12–23.16) and pneumatic dilation (HR = 1.48; 95%CI 0.95–2.29), and esophageal cancer risk. Increasing patient age and reintervention following primary achalasia treatment are important potential risk factors for the development of esophageal cancer. Treated achalasia patients with symptom recurrence should be carefully evaluated for potential development of esophageal cancer prior to considering reintervention, and increased vigilance may help diagnose esophageal cancer in these individuals at an early stage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Management of achalasia is potentially complex. Previous studies have identified equivalence between pneumatic dilatation and surgical cardiomyotomy in terms of clinical outcomes. However, previous research has not investigated whether a management strategies and outcomes are different in high-volume achalasia centers. This national population-based cohort study aimed to identify the treatment modalities utilized in centers, which regularly manage achalasia and those which manage it infrequently. This study also assessed rates of re-intervention and complications to establish if a volume–outcome relationship exists for the management of achalasia in England. In this study, the Hospitals Episode Statistics database was used to identify all patients treated for achalasia in England from 2002 to 2012. Primary treatment was defined as surgical cardiomyotomy, sequential pneumatic dilatation, or botulinum toxin therapy. Primary outcome measure was reintervention. Centers were divided into regular achalasia centers (≥5.7 cases per annum) and infrequent achalasia centers (<5.7 cases per annum), and were analyzed according to tertiary cancer center status. In total, there were 7,487 patients treated for achalasia. Out of 1,947 cases (26%) were treated in regular achalasia centers, with 5,540 (74%) treated in infrequent centers. In binary logistic regression modeling regular centers treated a similar proportion of patients with primary surgical cardiomyotomy (OR: 1.11 (95% CI 0.98–1.27)) and had similar rates of re-intervention to infrequent achalasia centers (HR: 1.03 (0.94–1.12)). RA-CUSUM analysis demonstrated no relationship between total hospital volume and reintervention rates. Tertiary cancer centers treated more achalasia patients with primary surgical cardiomyotomy (OR: 1.51 (95% CI 1.31–1.73)) but there was no significant difference in reintervention rates (OR: 1.05 (95% CI 0.95–1.16)). In conclusion, this analysis failed to demonstrate a volume–outcome relationship in the management of achalasia in England. This study highlights that achalasia is treated infrequently by the majority of centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has recently been increased interest in the assessment of body composition in patients with esophageal cancer for the purpose of nutritional evaluation and prognostication. This systematic review and meta-analysis intends to summarize and critically evaluate the current literature concerning the assessment of body composition in patients with esophageal cancer and to assess its potential implication upon early and late outcomes. A systematic literature search (up to August, 2017) was conducted for studies describing the assessment of body composition in patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal junctional cancer. Meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes including long-term survival was performed using random effects models. Twenty-nine studies reported the assessment of body composition in 3193 patients. Methods used to assess body composition in patients with esophageal cancer included computerized tomography (n  = 18 studies), bioelectrical impedance analysis (n  = 10), and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (n  = 1). Significant variability was observed in regard to study design and the criteria used to define individual parameters of body composition. Sarcopenic patients had a higher incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (7 studies, OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.32–3.11, P  = 0.001) after esophagectomy. Meta-analysis of six studies presenting long-term outcomes after esophagectomy identified significantly worse survival in patients who were sarcopenic (HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.33– 2.17, P  < 0.0001). The assessment of body composition has the potential to become a clinically useful tool that could support decision-making in patients with esophageal cancer. Current evidence is however weakened by inconsistencies in methods of assessing and reporting body composition in this patient group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Postoperative complications following major surgery have been shown to be associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQL), and severe complications may have profound negative effects. This study aimed to examine whether long-term HRQL differs with the occurrence and severity of complications in a European multicenter prospective dataset of patients following esophagectomy for cancer., Methods: Disease-free patients following esophagectomy for cancer between 2010 and 2016 from the LASER study were included. Patients completed the LASER, EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OG25 questionnaires >1 year following treatment. Long-term HRQL was compared between patients with and without postoperative complications, subgroup analysis was performed for severity of complications (no, minor [Clavien-Dindo I-II], severe [Clavien-Dindo ≥ III]), using univariable and multivariable regression., Results: 645 patients were included: 283 patients with no, 207 with minor and 155 with severe complications. Significantly more dyspnea (QLQ-C30) was reported by patients with compared to patients without complications (differenceinmeans6.3). In subgroup analysis, patients with severe complications reported more dyspnea (difference in means 8.3) than patients with no complications. None of the differences were clinically relevant (difference in means ≥ 10 points). LASER-based low mood (OR2.3) was statistically different for minor versus severe complications., Conclusion: Comparable HRQL was found in patients with and without postoperative complications following esophagectomy for cancer, after a mean follow-up of 4.4 years. Furthermore, patients with different levels of severity of complications had comparable HRQL. The level of HRQL in esophageal cancer patients are more likely explained by the impact of the complex procedure of the esophagectomy itself., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)