Search

Summary Large hiatus hernias with a significant paraesophageal component (types II–IV) have a range of insidious symptoms. Management of symptomatic hernias includes conservative treatment or surgery. Currently, there is no paraesophageal hernia disease-specific symptom questionnaire. As a result, many clinicians rely on the health-related quality of life questionnaires designed for gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GORD) to assess patients with hiatal hernias pre- and postoperatively. In view of this, a paraesophageal hernia symptom tool (POST) was designed. This POST questionnaire now requires validation and assessment of clinical utility. Twenty-one international sites will recruit patients with paraesophageal hernias to complete a series of questionnaires over a five-year period. There will be two cohorts of patients—patients with paraesophageal hernias undergoing surgery and patients managed conservatively. Patients are required to complete a validated GORD-HRQL, POST questionnaire, and satisfaction questionnaire preoperatively. Surgical cohorts will also complete questionnaires postoperatively at 4–6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and then annually for a total of 5 years. Conservatively managed patients will repeat questionnaires at 1 year. The first set of results will be released after 1 year with complete data published after a 5-year follow-up. The main results of the study will be patient’s acceptance of the POST tool, clinical utility of the tool, assessment of the threshold for surgery, and patient symptom response to surgery. The study will validate the POST questionnaire and identify the relevance of the questionnaire in routine management of paraesophageal hernias.

Background There is a paucity of data describing the incidence and causes of escalation in level of care after oesophagectomy for cancer. This study aimed to address this, including the description of baseline predisposing variables, and contrasting the profile of care escalation among different surgical approaches to oesophagectomy. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database (‘CODA’) at a UK tertiary centre. CODA is a bespoke, high-quality resource, based on senior clinician and data scientist data entry at every stage of the care of the patient's pathway. Complications are updated weekly using the Esophageal Complications Consensus group definition-set. The inclusion criteria were anyone undergoing cancer oesophagectomy between 01/06/2015 and 31/05/2021. Exclusion criteria included patients not on the ‘Enhanced Recovery after Surgery’ pathway and patients with delayed extubation (>2 days post-operatively). Escalation of care was defined as re-admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) or re-intubation on ICU. Standard care at our centre is to maintain epidural analgesia for four days after surgery. Inadequate analgesia was defined as more than one reference to inadequate pain control in the first four days after surgery when the patient deteriorated and required care escalation. Characteristics were compared between patients with and without care escalation, and between patients with and without respiratory failure related to inadequate analgesia. Results From 448 oesophagectomys, 42 patients had escalation in their level of care (9.38%). Baseline characteristics between oesophagectomy patients with and without escalation in care were similar, except for escalated patients more likely to have squamous cell carcinoma histology (28.6% vs 14.3%, P = 0.02). 20.0% of 3-phase oesophagectomy patients required care escalation but this just failed to achieve significance when compared with other oesophagectomy approaches (9.6%, P = 0.06). Of escalated patients, 35.7% had respiratory failure related to inadequate analgesia, 33.3% had respiratory failure not related to inadequate analgesia and 31.0% did not have respiratory failure as the reason for care escalation. The major cause of respiratory failure not related to analgesia was pneumonia (6 of 14, 42.9%) and the most frequent cause of non-respiratory failure associated escalation in care was re-operation (5 of 13, 38.5%). Inadequate analgesia was more commonly a contributing factor to escalation in care after left thoracoabdominal oesophagectomy compared to all other approaches (11 of 18 [61.1%] vs 4 of 24 [16.7%], P = 0.003). Conclusions The overall rate for escalation in care in this centre was low at 9.38%. This figure may be useful for benchmarking and ongoing research into morbidity after oesophagectomy. There was no clear influence from baseline characteristics or surgical approach on the rate of escalation in care. Respiratory failure contributed to escalation in care for the majority of patients. Our data indicates that left thoraco-abdominal incisions are particularly sensitive to inadequate analgesia, which suggests that effective analgesic rescue plans are especially critical after this type of oesophagectomy.

Background Perforation of the oesophagus (OP) represent a potentially lethal yet poorly managed clinical condition due to its rarity, variation in clinical presentation and little consensus on the optimal management of these patients. Previous studies have shown that timely and appropriate treatment of OPs is the most important determinant of patient outcomes, and a delay in initiating the correct management within 24 hours increased the mortality rate from 10% to over 60%. Historically, patients have been managed based on the personal experience and preference of the surgeon, and accordingly most patients underwent surgical management based on data from small retrospective case series. Depending on the cause of injury, location of perforation and status of the patient, options include conservative management; endoscopy (stenting or clipping); and surgery (drainage, diversion, primary repair, or oesophagectomy). Currently, there are no recent large-scale studies investigating the outcomes in oesophageal perforation, leading to a paucity of high-grade evidence on the management of oesophageal injuries. This study aims to characterise the variation in the management of OPs, update its epidemiology in the UK; and evaluate the mortality and morbidity outcomes of surgical and non-surgical modalities in managing OP. Methods This was a multi-centred cohort study involving eligible centers from the Association of Upper Gastro-intestinal Surgeons for Great Britain and Ireland (AUGIS) research network. All adult patients who were admitted with a diagnosis of esophageal perforation (iatrogenic, spontaneous or traumatic causes) and managed as an inpatient for more than 24 hours were included in the study. Exclusion criteria were as follows: pediatric population; OP due to anastomotic leaks post-esophagectomy; and unavailability of data matching primary outcome measures. The time period for inclusion of patients was from January 2016 to December 2020. Investigators were asked to actively monitor patients and their electronic medical records to identify post-intervention complications up to 90 days from time of intervention if appropriate. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Other secondary outcomes included the incidence of complications secondary to OP or interventions; incidence of 30-day re-intervention; length of hospital stay (LOS) and intensive care unit (ICU) stay; readmission within 30 days; and recurrence. Results During the study period 369 patients with oesophageal perforation from eight centres and were included in the study. The mean age of the population was 63 (18) years, body mass index was 25 (9)kg/m2, 60% were male, 30% were ASA grade 3, and 41% ECOG performance status 0. The aetiology of OP was spontaneous in 57% and iatrogenic in 37%. The mean time from presentation to referral and intervention were 37 hours and 111 hours respectively. In patients transferred from a district general to a tertiary hospital the mean time from presentation to transfer was 100 hours. Surgery was used as the primary treatment approach in 31%, endoscopic intervention in 10% and conservative management in 56%. Thoractomy and laparotomy was used in 20% and 24% respectively, endosponge and endoscopic stent used in 11% and 7% respectively. 90-day mortality was 20% across the cohort, 30-day re-admission rate was 18%, mean ICU stay, and LOS were 10 days and 37 days respectively. 90-day mortality was significantly reduced in the surgery group (9%) when compared with endoscopic (24%) and conservative management groups (28%) (p Conclusions In a centralised oesophageal and gastric cancer service, the management of complex upper gastrointestinal conditions including oesophageal perforation is most commonly centralised to oesophageal and gastric cancer centres. This large multi-centre collaborative study provides robust data concerning modern practices of the management of oesophageal perforation in the UK. Through a detailed and highly granular dataset, we have examined factors associated with the patient pathway, presentation and treatment that are associated with mortality following oesophageal perforation.

In 2015 the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) reported consensus definitions for complications after oesophagectomy. This aimed to reduce variation in complication reporting, attributed to heterogeneous definitions. This systematic review aimed to describe the implementation of this definition-set, including the effect on complication frequency and variation. A systematic literature review was performed, identifying all observational and randomised studies reporting complication frequencies after oesophagectomy since the ECCG publication. Recruitment periods before and subsequent to the index ECCG publication date were included. Coefficients of variance were calculated to assess outcome heterogeneity. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa score. Of 144 studies which met inclusion criteria, 70 (48.6%) used ECCG definitions. The median number of separately reported complication types was five per study; only one study reported all ECCG complications. The coefficients of variance of the reported frequencies of eight of the ten most common complications was reduced in ECCG adopting studies vs non-adopting studies (p = 0.036) (see Figure 1). Among ECCG studies, the frequencies of post-operative pneumothorax, re-intubation and pulmonary emboli were reduced in 2020–2021, compared to 2015–2019 (p = 0.006, 0.034 and 0.037 respectively). There was no difference in the quality of ECCG adopting studies and non-adopting studies. The ECCG definition-set has reduced variation in oesophagectomy morbidity reporting. This adds greater confidence to the observed gradual improvement in outcomes with time, and its ongoing use and wider dissemination should be encouraged. However, only a handful of outcomes are widely reported, and only rarely is it used in its entirety.

Background No well validated and contemporaneous tools for personalized prognostication of gastric adenocarcinoma exist. This study aimed to derive and validate a prognostic model for overall survival after surgery for gastric adenocarcinoma using a large national dataset. Methods National audit data from England and Wales were used to identify patients who underwent a potentially curative gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the stomach. A total of 2931 patients were included and 29 clinical and pathological variables were considered for their impact on survival. A non-linear random survival forest methodology was then trained and validated internally using bootstrapping with calibration and discrimination (time-dependent area under the receiver operator curve (tAUC)) assessed. Results The median survival of the cohort was 69 months, with a 5-year survival of 53.2 per cent. Ten variables were found to influence survival significantly and were included in the final model, with the most important being lymph node positivity, pT stage and achieving an R0 resection. Patient characteristics including ASA grade and age were also influential. On validation the model achieved excellent performance with a 5-year tAUC of 0.80 (95 per cent c.i. 0.78 to 0.82) and good agreement between observed and predicted survival probabilities. A wide spread of predictions for 3-year (14.8–98.3 (i.q.r. 43.2–84.4) per cent) and 5-year (9.4–96.1 (i.q.r. 31.7–73.8) per cent) survival were seen. Conclusions A prognostic model for survival after a potentially curative resection for gastric adenocarcinoma was derived and exhibited excellent discrimination and calibration of predictions.

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.

In 2015 the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group (ECCG) reported consensus definitions for complications after esophagectomy. This aimed to reduce variation in complication reporting, attributed to heterogeneous definitions. This systematic review aimed to describe the implementation of this definition set, including the effect on complication frequency and variation. A systematic literature review was performed, identifying all observational and randomized studies reporting complication frequencies after esophagectomy since the ECCG publication. Recruitment periods before and subsequent to the index ECCG publication date were included. Coefficients of variance were calculated to assess outcome heterogeneity. Of 144 studies which met inclusion criteria, 70 (48.6%) used ECCG definitions. The median number of separately reported complication types was five per study; only one study reported all ECCG complications. The coefficients of variance of the reported frequencies of eight of the 10 most common complications were reduced in studies which used the ECCG definitions compared with those that did not (P = 0.036). Among ECCG studies, the frequencies of postoperative pneumothorax, reintubation, and pulmonary emboli were significantly reduced in 2020–2021, compared with 2015–2019 (P = 0.006, 0.034, and 0.037 respectively). The ECCG definition set has reduced variation in esophagectomy morbidity reporting. This adds greater confidence to the observed gradual improvement in outcomes with time, and its ongoing use and wider dissemination should be encouraged. However, only a handful of outcomes are widely reported, and only rarely is it used in its entirety.

Background The typical paradigm for surgical service evaluation is intermittent audit based on perceived clinical need and mandated requirements. A better model would be monitoring patient outcomes automatically in real-time, with up-to-date cumulative frequencies of key surgical performance indicators such as surgical quality and morbidity, as changes in performance could be detected and reacted to at an earlier stage. This study aimed to develop a dashboarding technology to support real-time visualisation of prospectively maintained oesophagogastric cancer surgery data. Methods CODA is a bespoke databank (implemented in MS SQL Server, with HTML, C# and JavaScript) for oesophagogastric cancer care at our centre. We built on a custom dashboard interface for displaying this information in real-time, using Shiny for R and Tableau. We identified the key performance indicators (KPIs) to monitor in the dashboard, and defined benchmarks based on accepted standards, or our prevailing performance (based on 448 consecutive patients who underwent oesophagectomy between 2015 – 2020). The domains selected were surgical quality, length of stay, early mortality, and priority complications. Complications were defined according to the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group. Results For surgical quality, our benchmarks based on prevailing performance were (i) >90% >15 lymph node yield (ii) 33% meeting 8 day discharge target (ii) 2 / year, monitored 2-yearly) (ii) impactful complications (>1 / year, >1 week median additional stay, monitored 5-yearly) Conclusions The CODA dashboard provides real-time appraisal of oesophagogastric cancer surgery practice, highlighting changes in performance and providing opportunity for early intervention. The platform can be used for personal, departmental or inter-institutional service evaluation. The KPIs will be extended to oesophagogastric cancer survival as the test set matures. The interface and wider benefits of CODA implementation are presented, together with the dissemination plan for use in other oesophagogastric centres.

Background Perioperative chemotherapy is widely used in the treatment of oesophageal cancer with substantial survival benefit over surgery alone. However, the postoperative part of these regimens is given in less than half of cases, reflecting uncertainty about its benefit. This study estimates the effect of postoperative chemotherapy after surgery for oesophageal cancer using a large population-based dataset and modern statistical methods. Methods Patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2012 and 2018 and underwent preoperative chemotherapy followed by surgery, were identified from a national level audit in England and Wales (National Oesophagogastric Cancer Audit). Postoperative therapy was defined as the receipt of at least one cycle of systemic chemotherapy within 90 days of surgery. The comparative effectiveness of postoperative chemotherapy compared to observation was estimated using inverse propensity treatment weighting (IPTW). Results The study included 2,814 patients, in whom postoperative therapy was given to 1,054 (37.5%). Patients who received postoperative therapy were younger, with a lower ASA grade and were less likely to have surgical complications of any type, including anastomotic leak (all p Conclusions Among patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma treated with preoperative chemotherapy and surgery, improved overall survival was observed in those patients who received postoperative chemotherapy. Minimising surgical complications and improving patient fitness could increase the use of postoperative chemotherapy, leading to better outcomes for patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

Background Over 1,500 patients with oesophageal cancer undergo a resection in the UK each year. At surgery, patients commonly have a nasogastric tube (NGT) placed and may undergo a pyloric intervention. There is conflicting evidence on the use of both NGTs and pyloric interventions during oesophageal resections. We performed a national survey of oesophageal centres and assessed practice variation. Methods An electronic survey was distributed to all resection centres in England, Wales and Scotland. Variations in practice regarding NGTs and pyloric intervention were assessed, and compared to nationally reported centre volumes and length-of-stay data Results Most centres (31/39, 79%) responded to the survey. All centres reported routine NGT use. The majority of centres (19/31, 61%) did not perform pyloric interventions. When used, surgical pyloroplasty was the most frequent strategy (8/31, 26%). Routine post-operative radiological assessment was utilised in 9/31 (29%) of centres. Criteria for NGT removal and dietary progression was highly variable, with every centre reporting different protocols. There were no significant differences in practice between high and low volume centres. There were also no trends seen when comparing centres above vs at-or-below the median length-of-stay. The majority (68%) of centres were willing to take part in a trial assessing NGT use and pyloric interventions. Conclusions Pyloric intervention use varies widely, with no clear link to outcomes. NGT use remains standard practice despite evidence for safe omission. Surgeons require and recognise the need for a trial to assess requirement for NGTs and pyloric intervention after oesophageal resection.

Background Both curative chemoradiotherapy (cCRT) and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery (nCRTS) can be considered as treatments for potentially curable oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). Whilst this equipoise does not exist in oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC), there are patients in whom treatment decisions are not straightforward, creating an overlapping group in which cCRT might be considered in preference to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy and surgery (nC(R)TS). We aim to see how survival changes between unmatched and matched cohorts of patients with OAC and OSCC treated with cCRT or nC(R)TS, to reflect difficult multidisciplinary team treatment decisions. Methods Patients treated with nC(R)TS or cCRT for OSCC and OAC were identified on an intention-to-treat basis from April 2016 to April 2019, allowing a minimum 2-year follow up from diagnosis. Upper third tumours were excluded due to clear preference for cCRT. Preoperative variables were compared using descriptive statistics, with OSCC and OAC analysed separately. Significantly different variables were used to generate propensity scores. Cohorts were then matched and analysis repeated to assess cohort symmetry. Overall survival and 2-year survival were investigated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and log-rank testing. Analysis was performed in R. Results 60 and 231 patients with OSCC and OAC were treated with cCRT or nC(R)TS. In the unmatched analysis, nC(R)TS had superior overall and 2-year survival, however there were significant differences in age, Charlson comorbidity index and cancer stage in OSCC and OAC cohorts, and in tumour site for the OAC cohort. After propensity score matching, differences in overall and 2-year survival reduced, though no results reached significance (OSCC: nCRTS 2y survival 58% vs 51% and 54% in unmatched and matched cCRT cohorts, respectively; OAC: cCRT 2y survival 51% vs 60% and 56% in unmatched and matched nC(R)TS cohorts, respectively). Conclusions These data suggest that as patient and cancer related factors increase the difficulty of treatment decisions, the survival benefit of surgery reduces in both OSCC and OAC. These results underline the need for randomised controlled trials using current treatment and staging strategies, as there have been considerable advances since original comparisons of neoadjuvant and curative chemoradiotherapy. This study is limited by relatively short follow up and unpowered sample sizes, however the coded nature of the analysis provides a structure for regular review of outcomes in our unit using routinely collected data, and could be easily applied more widely.

Background Patients with a para-oesophageal hernia (POH) report a complex range of symptoms and quality of life (QOL) issues. Clinicians often utilise existing health related quality of life tools to (1) identify patients who are eligible for surgical management and (2) to evaluate the benefit of surgical intervention. However, the most commonly used tools for this purpose are not disease specific. As such, crucial POH specific symptoms which impact QOL may not be captured. In order to address this issue, a modified Delphi consensus study was undertaken to establish a HRQOL instrument specific to POH. Methods A two-round modified Delphi consensus study was conducted with a group of international experts. Participants were identified through (1) their authorship in landmark POH studies and (2) the professional networks of the study investigators. Prior to the Delphi process, a scoping survey was undertaken in order to generate a list of candidate items. Participants were asked to rate the items’ importance in assessing patients with POH using a 5-point Likert scale. The a priori threshold for inclusion was 80% for scores of 4 or 5. If consensus was not achieved, the item was carried through to the next round. Results The candidate list of items consisted of 64 symptoms, refined to 20 for inclusion within the first modified Delphi round. Four symptoms; ‘difficulty getting solid foods down’, ‘chest pain after meals’, ‘difficulty getting liquids down’ and ‘shortness of breath only after meals’, reached consensus threshold of 80% in the first round and one additional symptom, ‘early feeling of fullness after eating’, reached consensus in the second. A total of 26 participants took part in the first and 24 in the second round. These five symptoms have been identified to form the initial version of the Para-Oesophageal Hernia Symptom Tool (POST). Conclusions POST is the first tool that aims to capture POH-specific symptoms that impact upon HRQOL. Prior to clinical use, this tool will be presented in international patient workshops to assess its construct validity. Following this, we aim to assess the content validity of the tool through a longitudinal study in a cohort of patients with POH who are undergoing repair. We hope that this tool will serve as a decision support tool for clinicians who are evaluating the risk-benefit of surgical intervention in this cohort of patients.

Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal approach to decreasing morbidity and accelerating return-of-function after major surgery. However, the majority of patients undergoing oesophagectomy for cancer experience some kind of complication, which extends their admission and causes pathway deviation. Thus, the value of having a discharge target (Day 8 at our institution) could be challenged. In this study we reviewed our experience using this pathway, with a focus on: (i) whether length of stay and morbidity has improved since pathway implementation (ii) describing the medical and non-medical reasons for extended admission (iii) identifying pre-operative predictors of pathway deviation. Methods A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed. Complications are recorded during routine clinical care using standardised definitions set out by the Esophageal Complications Consensus group, and are updated in the database at a weekly departmental meeting. Median and interquartile range were used for descriptors and differences tested with Mann-Whitney U test or Chi squared tests, using SPSS ver 26. Multivariable models were fitted to establish independent predictors of pathway deviation, using a binary logistic regression approach with bootstrapping. Results 150 of 448 patients met the 8-day target. Patients treated since 2018 were significantly more likely meet their discharge date (OR 1.28, P = 0.041) compared to 2015-2017, and have less complications. Surgical quality was unchanged. Thirty-day mortality increased but was still low (0.9% vs 1.8%, P = 0.067). Aside from having a complication (OR 4.15, P < 0.001), independent predictor of delayed discharge was female sex (OR 2.6, P = 0.003), squamous cell cancer histology (OR 2.8, P = 0.014) and low socio-economic status (OR 1.33, P = 0.014), but not age, smoking, BMI, co-morbidities and other baseline variables. Conclusions Enhanced recovery after oesophagectomy provides clear goals for the patient and multi-disciplinary team, however the target is often not met owing to the frequent nature of post-operative complications. Nonetheless these targets provide a culture for accelerated recovery, with steady improvement in short-term outcomes over time. A number of specific patient-groups are more likely to have extended admissions independent of complications, which has implications for optimising prehabilitation services. Overall , these findings suggest that having a discharge target is valuable, even though it often is not met.

Background Oesophago-gastric malignancies are associated with a high recurrence rate, yet there is a lack of evidence to inform guidelines for the standardisation and structure of post-operative surveillance after curatively intended treatment. This study aimed to capture the variation in post-operative surveillance strategies across the United Kingdom and Ireland, and enquire the opinions and beliefs around surveillance from practicing clinicians. Methods A web based survey consisting of forty questions was sent to surgeons or allied health professionals performing or involved in surgical care for oesophago-gastric cancers at high volume centers in the United Kingdom (UK). Respondents from each centre completed the survey on what best represented their centre. The first section of the survey evaluated the timing and components of follow-ups, and their variation between centres. The second section evaluated respondents perspective on how surveillance can be structured. Results Thirty five surgeons from 25 centers consisting 28 consultants, 6 senior trainees and 1 specialist nurse had completed the questionnaire. 45.7% of responders arranged clinical follow-up at 2-4 weeks. Twenty responders had a specific post-operative surveillance protocol for their patients. Of these, 31.4% had a standardised protocol for all patients, while 25.7% tailored it to patient needs. Patient preference, comorbidities and chance of recurrence were considered as major factors for necessitating more intense surveillance than currently practised. Conclusions There is a significant variation in how patients are monitored after surgery between centers in the UK. Randomised controlled trials are necessary to link surveillance strategies to both survival outcomes and quality of life of patients and to evaluate the prognostic value of different post-operative surveillance strategies.

Left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy (LTE) facilitates complete resection of esophageal cancer particularly for bulky tumors, but there are concerns that this approach is associated with significant morbidity. The aim of the current study was to evaluate short-term and oncological outcomes of left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy compared to minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. Methods Prospectively entered esophagectomy databases from three high volume centers were reviewed for patients undergoing LTE or MIE 2012–2018. Patient demographics, tumour characteristics, operative outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and pathologic surrogates of oncologic efficacy (R0 resection rate, and number of resected lymph nodes) were compared. In total 844 patients were included in the study, LTE was applied in 654 (77.5%) patients, and MIE in 190 (22.5%) patients. Results LTE patients had more neoadjuvant treatment (LTE = 74.5%, MIE = 64.9%, P = 0.027). There was no difference in overall postoperative complications (LTE = 61.9%, MIE = 64.6%, P = 0.517), severe complications (Clavien Dindo >IIIa (LTE = 26.6%, MIE 26.5%, P = 0.982), pneumonia (LTE = 29.8%, MIE = 26.3%, P = 0.349), anastomotic leak (LTE = 7.7%, MIE = 9.9%, P = 0.348), or in-hospital mortality (LTE = 1.5%, MIE = 2.1%, P = 0.584). Median length of stay was 11 days after LTE vs. 8 days after MIE (P Conclusion LTE was used for tumors with greater lymph node burden in patients that were more likely to have received neoadjuvant treatment compared to MIE. MIE was associated with significantly shorter length of hospital stay, however postoperative morbidity and Clavien-Dindo scores were equal to that of MIE in this cohort.

Introduction For patients with oesophageal cancer, producing accurate prediction models for survival after oesophagectomy has proved challenging. We investigated whether Random Survival Forests (RSF), a novel machine learning method, could produce an accurate prognostic model for overall survival after oesophagectomy. Method The study used data from the National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit and included patients diagnosed with oesophageal adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma between 2012 and 2018 in England and Wales and who underwent a curative oesophagectomy with adequate lymphadenectomy (15 LN) and survived to discharge (n=6198). Missing data was handled using multiple imputation and the data was split into training and validation cohorts. 13 variables were selected for inclusion using Random Forest variable importance and used to train the final model. The same variables were used to develop a traditional Cox regression model. Result Median survival was 53 months in both cohorts. The final RSF model had good discrimination in the validation cohort with a C-index of 0.757(0.755-0.759), exceeding the Cox model; 0.748(0.746-0.750). At 3 years post-surgery, overall survival was 56.2%. The RSF yielded a mean predicted survival of 55.8%(IQR 29.5%-81.7%) compared to 55.4%(40.0%-77.7%) for the Cox model. The most important variables were lymph node involvement and pT/ypT stage, however other variables including neoadjuvant treatment completion and surgical complications were also found to be important. Conculsion A Random Forest survival model provided better performance in predicting survival after curative oesophagectomy. This will allow more personalised predictions to be delivered clinicians and patients. Take-home message Random Forest survival models can accurately predict post-operative prognosis after oesophagectomy.

Aim Long-term functional outcomes and the associations to health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after esophagectomy is largely unknown. LASER is a multi-center European study aimed to identify the most prevalent symptoms, and those with the greatest impact upon HRQOL among patients surviving more than one-year after esophagectomy for cancer, and to develop a clinically relevant symptom-based tool to measure HRQOL. Background & Methods Between 2010 and 2016, patients from 20 European Centers who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, and were disease-free at least one year postoperatively were invited to complete the LASER questionnaire, EORTC-QLQ30 and OG25. Specific symptom questionnaire items that were associated with a poor HRQOL as identified by EORTC-QLQC30 and OG25 were identified by multivariable linear and logistic regression analysis and combined to form a tool, which was tested using receiver operating characteristics curve analysis. Results A total of 876 of 1081 invited patients responded to the questionnaire, giving a response rate of 81%. Of these, 66.9% stated in the last 6 months they had had symptoms associated with their esophagectomy and 52.4% of patients had sought medical treatment for their symptoms. Ongoing weight loss was reported by 10.4% of patients while 32.4% were struggling to maintain their body weight, and 18.8% of patients required supplemental oral nutrition. Only 13.8% of patients had returned to work with the same activities as before. Three LASER symptoms in multivariate analysis were correlated with poor HRQOL; pain on scars on chest (Odds ratio (OR) 1.27; 95% CI 0.97-1.65), low mood (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.15-1.77) and reduced energy or activity tolerance (OR 1.37; 95% CI 1.18-1.59). The areas under the curves for the development and validation datasets were 0.81±0.02 and 0.82±0.09 respectively. Conclusions Two-thirds of patients experience symptoms related to their esophagectomy more than one year after surgery. The three key symptoms associated with poor HRQOL identified in this study should be further validated, and could be used in clinical practice to identify patients who require increased long-term term support.

Background Following CT, guidelines for staging oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) cancer recommend endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), PET–CT and laparoscopy for T3–T4 GOJ tumours. These recommendations are based on generic utilities, but it is unclear whether the test risk outweighs the potential benefit for some patients. This study sought to quantify investigation risks, benefits and utilities, in order to develop pragmatic, personalized staging recommendations. Methods All patients with a histological diagnosis of oesophageal or GOJ cancer staged between May 2006 and July 2013 comprised a development set; those staged from July 2013 to July 2014 formed the prospective validation set. Probability thresholds of altering management were calculated and predictive factors identified. Algorithms and models (decision tree analysis, logistic regression, artificial neural networks) were validated internally and independently. Results Some 953 patients were staged following CT, by [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET–CT (918), EUS (798) and laparoscopy (458). Of these patients, 829 comprised the development set (800 PET–CT, 698 EUS, 397 laparoscopy) and 124 the validation set (118 PET–CT, 100 EUS, 61 laparoscopy). EUS utility in the 71·8 per cent of patients with T2–T4a disease on CT was minimal (0·4 per cent), its risk exceeding benefit. EUS was moderately accurate for pT1 N0 disease. A number of factors predicted metastases on PET–CT and laparoscopy, although none could inform an algorithm. PET–CT altered management in 23·0 per cent, and laparoscopy in 7·1 per cent, including those with T2 and distal oesophageal tumours. Conclusion Although EUS provided additional information on T and N category, its risk outweighed potential benefit in patients with T2–T4a disease on CT. Laparoscopy seemed justified for distal oesophageal tumours of T2 or greater.

The ability to predict complications following esophagectomy/extended total gastrectomy would be of great clinical value. A recent study demonstrated significant correlations between anastomotic leak (AL) and numerical values of C-reactive protein (CRP), white cell count (WCC) and albumin measured on postoperative day (POD) 4. A predictive model comprising all three (NUn score >10) was found to be highly sensitive and discriminant in predicting AL and complications. We attempted a retrospective validation in our center. Data were collected on all resections performed during a 5-year period (April 2008-2013) using prospectively maintained databases. Our biochemistry laboratory uses a maximum CRP value (156 mg/L), unlike that of the original study; otherwise all variables and outcome measures were comparable. Analysis was performed for all patients with complete blood results on POD4. Three hundred twenty-six patients underwent resection, of which 248 had POD4 bloods. There were 21 AL overall (6.44%); 16 among those with complete POD4 blood results (6.45%). There were 8 (2.45%) in-hospital deaths; 7 (2.82%) in those with POD4 results. No parameters were associated with AL or complication severity on univariate analysis. WCC was associated with AL in multivariate binary logistic regression with albumin and CRP (OR 1.23 [95% CI 1.03-1.47]; P = 0.021). When a binary variable of CRP ≥ 156 mg/L was used rather than an absolute value, no factors were significant. Mean NUn was 8.30 for AL, compared with 8.40 for non-AL (P = 0.710 independent t-test). NUn > 10 predicted 0 of 16 leaks (sensitivity 0.00%, specificity 94.4%, receiver operator curve [ROC] area under the curve [AUC] 0.485; P = 0.843). NUn > 7.65 was 93% sensitive and 21.6% specific. ROC for WCC alone was comparable with NUn (AUC 0.641 [0.504-0.779]; P = 0.059; WCC > 6.89 93.8% sensitive, 20.7% specific; WCC > 15 6.3% sensitive and 97% specific). There were no associations between any parameters and other complications. In a comparable cohort with the original study, we demonstrated a similar multivariate association between WCC alone on POD4 and subsequent demonstration of AL, but not albumin or CRP (measured up to 156 mg/L). The NUn score overall (calculated with this caveat) and a threshold of 10 was not found to have clinical utility in predicting AL or complications.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways aim to accelerate functional return and discharge from hospital. They have proven effective in many forms of surgery, most notably colorectal. However, experience in esophagectomy has been limited. A recent study reported significant reductions in pulmonary complications, mortality, and length of stay following the introduction of an ERAS protocol alone, without the introduction of any clinical changes. We instituted a similar change 16 months ago, introducing a protocol to provide a formal framework, for our existing postoperative care. This retrospective analysis compared outcome following esophagectomy for the 16 months before and 20 months after this change. Data were collected from prospectively maintained secure web-based multidisciplinary databases. Complication severity was classified using the Clavien-Dindo scale. Operative mortality was defined as death within 30 days of surgery, or at any point during the same hospital admission. Lower respiratory tract infection was defined as clinical evidence of infection, with or without radiological signs. Respiratory complications included lower respiratory tract infection, pleural effusion (irrespective of drainage), pulmonary collapse, and pneumothorax. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS v21. One hundred thirty-two patients underwent esophagectomy (55 protocol group; 77 before). All were performed open. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of age, gender, operation, use of neoadjuvant therapy, cell type, stage, tumor site, or American Society of Anesthesiologists grade. Median length of stay was 14.0 days (protocol) compared with 12.0 before (interquartile range 9-19 and 9.5-15.5, respectively; P = 0.073, Mann-Whitney U-test). Readmission within 30 days of discharge occurred in five (9.26%) and six (8.19%; P = 1.000, Fisher's exact test). There were four in-hospital deaths (3.03%): one (1.82%) and three (3.90%), respectively (P = 0.641). There were no differences in the severity of complications (P = non-significant; Pearson's chi-squared). There were no differences in the type of complications occurring in either group. The protocol was completed successfully by 26 (47.3%). No baseline factors were predictive of this. In contrast to previous studies, we did not demonstrate any improvement in outcome by formalizing our existing pathway using a written protocol. Consequently, improvements in short-term outcome from esophagectomy within ERAS would seem to be primarily due to improvements in components of perioperative care. Consequently, we would recommend that centers introducing new (or reviewing existing) ERAS pathways for esophagectomy focus on optimizing clinical aspects of such standardized pathways.

Background In an era of increased utilisation of multimodality treatment for oesophageal adenocarcinoma the role of radical lymphadenectomy remains controversial. The objectives of this population-based cohort study were to evaluate the influence of lymph node harvest upon short- and long-term mortality following oesophagectomy for oesophageal adenocarcinoma, with subset analysis of patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. Methods The UK National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit (NOGCA) was used to identify suitable patients operated on between 1st April 2012 and 31st March 2016. Logistic regression of confounders was used to generate predicted mortality probabilities for utilisation in Risk-Adjusted Cumulative Sum (RA-CUSUM) analysis to identify the lymph node harvest change-points associated with changes in one-, two- and three-year mortality. Results Within the three-year study period, 3883 patients were included of these 2192 patients (56%) received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. For all patients there were non-significant change-points in 1-, 2-, and 3-year mortality at 19, 27 and 19 lymph nodes respectively. For patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy change-point analysis did show statistically significant reductions in 2-year mortality (44.9% before to 39.2% after 19 lymph nodes; P = 0.017) and 3-year mortality (55.0% before to 47.4% after 20 lymph nodes; P = 0.035). 30-day and 90-day mortality and anastomotic leak were not significantly by lymph node harvest of greater than 19 lymph nodes. Conclusion The results of this national population-based cohort study suggest that at least 20 lymph nodes should be harvested during oesophagectomy given the prognostic importance in oesophageal adenocarcinoma, and the benefits to improve pathological staging of the patient and appropriately allocate adjuvant therapy. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

SUMMARY The left thoracoabdominal approach to esophagectomy is not widely performed, despite offering excellent exposure to tumors of the esophagogastric junction. Criticisms of the approach have focused on historically high rates of mortality, complications, and positive resection margins. Our aim was to determine whether left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy could combine a radical oncological resection with acceptably low mortality and morbidity. A retrospective cohort study of all left thoracoabdominal esophagectomies was performed at a single specialist center over an 11-year period. Primary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, complications, resection margin involvement, and lymph node yield; secondary outcomes were 1-year and 5-year survival. Two hundred eleven esophagectomies were performed. In-hospital mortality was 5.7% (12/211). One hundred one subjects (47.9%) had an uncomplicated recovery; 110 subjects (52.1%) developed at least one complication. There were 15 clinically significant anastomotic leaks (7.1%). Twenty-four subjects (11.4%) required emergency reoperation, the most common indication being anastomotic leakage. Complete tumor excision (R0 resection) was achieved in 151 of 211 cases (71.6%); median lymph node yield was 24. One-year and 5-year survival rates were 70% (147/211) and 21% (24/116), respectively. Left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy can combine a radical oncological resection with acceptably low mortality and morbidity.