Search

Background Large studies comparing totally minimally invasive oesophagectomy (TMIE) with laparoscopically assisted (hybrid) oesophagectomy are lacking. Although randomized trials have compared TMIE invasive with open oesophagectomy, daily clinical practice does not always resemble the results reported in such trials. The aim of the present study was to compare complications after totally minimally invasive, hybrid and open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy in patients with oesophageal cancer. Methods The study was performed using data from the International Esodata Study Group registered between February 2015 and December 2019. The primary outcome was pneumonia, and secondary outcomes included the incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage, (major) complications, duration of hospital stay, escalation of care, and 90-day mortality. Data were analysed using multivariable multilevel models. Results Some 8640 patients were included between 2015 and 2019. Patients undergoing TMIE had a lower incidence of pneumonia than those having hybrid (10.9 versus 16.3 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0.56, 95 per cent c.i. 0.40 to 0.80) or open (10.9 versus 17.4 per cent; OR 0.60, 0.42 to 0.84) oesophagectomy, and had a shorter hospital stay (median 10 (i.q.r. 8–16) days versus 14 (11–19) days (P = 0.041) and 11 (9–16) days (P = 0.027) respectively). The rate of anastomotic leakage was higher after TMIE than hybrid (15.1 versus 10.7 per cent; OR 1.47, 1.01 to 2.13) or open (15.1 versus 7.3 per cent; OR 1.73, 1.26 to 2.38) procedures. Conclusion Compared with hybrid and open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy, TMIE resulted in a lower pneumonia rate, a shorter duration of hospital stay, but higher anastomotic leakage rates. Therefore, no clear advantage was seen for either TMIE, hybrid or open Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy when performed in daily clinical practice.

Background Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA) are potential tools for the detection of residual disease after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for esophageal cancer. This study investigated yield of EUS and FNA for detection of malignant lymph nodes (LNs) after nCRT. Methods This was a post hoc analysis of the preSANO trial. EUS was performed 10 – 12 weeks after nCRT. 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography – computed tomography (18F-FDG PET-CT) was used to guide targeting of suspicious LNs. Consecutive FNA sampling was performed for suspicious LNs identified on EUS and/or PET-CT. EUS nodal staging was compared with histopathological examination of the resection specimen. The primary outcome was the proportion of correctly identified patients with malignant LNs by radial EUS. Results 101 consecutive patients were included: 79 patients had no malignant LNs, of whom 62 were classified correctly by EUS (specificity 78 %); 22 patients had malignant LNs, of whom 11 were identified (sensitivity 50 %). Six of these patients had ≥ 1 suspicious LN not fulfilling EUS criteria (round, hypoechogenic, > 5 mm). Malignant LNs in falsely negative patients were predominantly located at distal LN stations. Specificity and sensitivity of conclusive FNA outcomes were 100 % (7/7) and 75 % (3/4), respectively. FNA outcome was uncertain in eight patients, half of whom appeared to have malignant LNs. Conclusions EUS only detected 50 % of patients with malignant LNs 10 – 12 weeks after nCRT. To optimize sensitivity and minimize the risk of missing residual disease, FNA of LNs should be performed even in cases of low endosonographic suspicion.