Search

Background: The optimal extent of lymph node dissection (LND) and the anatomic boundaries per lymph node station (LNS) during minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for esophageal cancer remain a topic of debate. This study investigated the opinion of Dutch esophageal cancer surgeons on their routine LND extent and anatomic boundaries per LNS during MIE., Methods: In April 2023, an English web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted. In each of the 15 Dutch hospitals performing MIE, two MIE surgeons were asked to participate. The routine LND extent (quantity, specific LNS) for distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, (dis)agreement with the TIGER definition, and anatomic boundaries for each LNS in six directions were queried., Results: The survey was completed by 24 Dutch MIE surgeons (80% response rate). Consensus on the routine LND extent ( ≥ 85% of the participating surgeons) included the left and right paracardial, left gastric artery, celiac trunk, proximal splenic artery, common hepatic artery, subcarinal middle mediastinal paraoesophageal, lower mediastinal paraoesophageal, pulmonary ligament, and upper mediastinal paraoesophageal LNSs. Other LNSs were not widely considered routine. Although, certain anatomic boundaries were consistent among the surgeons, the majority varied, even when they agreed on the TIGER definition., Conclusion: Significant variations in surgical practice among Dutch esophageal surgeons regarding their routine extent of LND and anatomic boundaries of LNSs during MIE were demonstrated. Variation may have an impact on clinical outcomes, hampering uniform treatment strategies and hindering comparison of performance assessments. This study highlighted the need for an international follow-up study toward one uniform defined LND during MIE for esophageal cancer., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy is a surgical technique that offers radical oesophagectomy without the need for transthoracic access. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy procedure and to report the refinement of this technique in a Western cohort., Methods: A single-centre prospective cohort study was designed as an IDEAL stage 2A study. Patients with oesophageal cancer (cT1b-4a N0-3 M0) who were scheduled for oesophagectomy with curative intent were eligible for inclusion in the study. The main outcome parameter was the postoperative pulmonary complication rate and the secondary outcomes were the anastomotic leakage, recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, and R0 resection rates, as well as the lymph node yield., Results: In total, 75 patients underwent minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy between January 2021 and November 2023. Several modifications to the surgical technique were registered, evaluated, and implemented in the context of IDEAL stage 2A. A total of 12 patients (16%) had postoperative pulmonary complications, including pneumonia (4 patients) and pleural effusion with drainage or aspiration (8 patients). Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was observed in 33 of 75 patients (44%), with recovery in 30 of 33 patients (91%). A total of 5 of 75 patients (7%) had anastomotic leakage. The median number of resected lymph nodes was 29 (interquartile range 22-37) and the R0 resection rate was 96% (72 patients)., Conclusion: Introducing minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer in a Dutch institution is associated with a low rate of postoperative pulmonary complications and a high rate of temporary recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Foundation Ltd.)

Importance: Suboptimal surgical performance is hypothesized to be associated with less favorable patient outcomes in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Establishing this association may lead to programs that promote better surgical performance of MIE and improve patient outcomes., Objective: To investigate associations between surgical performance and postoperative outcomes after MIE., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this nationwide cohort study of 15 Dutch hospitals that perform more than 20 MIEs per year, 7 masked expert MIE surgeons assessed surgical performance using videos and a previously developed and validated competency assessment tool (CAT). Each hospital submitted 2 representative videos of MIEs performed between November 4, 2021, and September 13, 2022. Patients registered in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021, were included to examine patient outcomes., Exposure: Hospitals were divided into quartiles based on their MIE-CAT performance score. Outcomes were compared between highest (top 25%) and lowest (bottom 25%) performing quartiles. Transthoracic MIE with gastric tube reconstruction., Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) within 30 days after surgery. Multilevel logistic regression, with clustering of patients within hospitals, was used to analyze associations between performance and outcomes., Results: In total, 30 videos and 970 patients (mean [SD] age, 66.6 [9.1] years; 719 men [74.1%]) were included. The mean (SD) MIE-CAT score was 113.6 (5.5) in the highest performance quartile vs 94.1 (5.9) in the lowest. Severe postoperative complications occurred in 18.7% (41 of 219) of patients in the highest performance quartile vs 39.2% (40 of 102) in the lowest (risk ratio [RR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.24-0.99). The highest vs the lowest performance quartile showed lower rates of conversions (1.8% vs 8.9%; RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.21-0.21), intraoperative complications (2.7% vs 7.8%; RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.04-0.94), and overall postoperative complications (46.1% vs 65.7%; RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.24-0.96). The R0 resection rate (96.8% vs 94.2%; RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.97-1.05) and lymph node yield (mean [SD], 38.9 [14.7] vs 26.2 [9.0]; RR, 3.20; 95% CI, 0.27-3.21) increased with oncologic-specific performance (eg, hiatus dissection, lymph node dissection). In addition, a high anastomotic phase score was associated with a lower anastomotic leakage rate (4.6% vs 17.7%; RR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06-0.31)., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that better surgical performance is associated with fewer perioperative complications for patients with esophageal cancer on a national level. If surgical performance of MIE can be improved with MIE-CAT implementation, substantially better patient outcomes may be achievable.

Importance: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex procedure with substantial learning curves. In other complex minimally invasive procedures, suboptimal surgical performance has convincingly been associated with less favorable patient outcomes as assessed by peer review of the surgical procedure., Objective: To develop and validate a procedure-specific competency assessment tool (CAT) for MIE., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this international quality improvement study, a procedure-specific MIE-CAT was developed and validated. The MIE-CAT contains 8 procedural phases, and 4 quality components per phase are scored with a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 4. For evaluation of the MIE-CAT, intraoperative MIE videos performed by a single surgical team in the Esophageal Center East Netherlands were peer reviewed by 18 independent international MIE experts (with more than 120 MIEs performed). Each video was assessed by 2 or 3 blinded experts to evaluate feasibility, content validity, reliability, and construct validity. MIE-CAT version 2 was composed with refined content aimed at improving interrater reliability. A total of 32 full-length MIE videos from patients who underwent MIE between 2011 and 2020 were analyzed. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to January 2023., Exposure: Performance assessment of transthoracic MIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis., Main Outcomes and Measures: Feasibility, content validity, interrater and intrarater reliability, and construct validity, including correlations with both experience of the surgical team and clinical parameters, of the developed MIE-CAT., Results: Experts found the MIE-CAT easy to understand and easy to use to grade surgical performance. The MIE-CAT demonstrated good intrarater reliability (range of intraclass correlation coefficients [ICCs], 0.807 [95% CI, 0.656 to 0.892] for quality component score to 0.898 [95% CI, 0.846 to 0.932] for phase score). Interrater reliability was moderate (range of ICCs, 0.536 [95% CI, -0.220 to 0.994] for total MIE-CAT score to 0.705 [95% CI, 0.473 to 0.846] for quality component score), and most discrepancies originated in the lymphadenectomy phases. Hypothesis testing for construct validity showed more than 75% of hypotheses correct: MIE-CAT performance scores correlated with experience of the surgical team (r = 0.288 to 0.622), blood loss (r = -0.034 to -0.545), operative time (r = -0.309 to -0.611), intraoperative complications (r = -0.052 to -0.319), and severe postoperative complications (r = -0.207 to -0.395). MIE-CAT version 2 increased usability. Interrater reliability improved but remained moderate (range of ICCs, 0.666 to 0.743), and most discrepancies between raters remained in the lymphadenectomy phases., Conclusions and Relevance: The MIE-CAT was developed and its feasibility, content validity, reliability, and construct validity were demonstrated. By providing insight into surgical performance of MIE, the MIE-CAT might be used for clinical, training, and research purposes.

It is unknown whether Ivor Lewis (IL) or McKeown (McK) esophagectomy is preferred in patients with potentially curable esophageal or gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. Patients with mid- and distal esophageal and GEJ cancer without distant metastases who underwent IL or McK esophagectomy in the Netherlands between 2015 and 2017, were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were propensity score matched for sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologist classification, comorbidity, tumor type, tumor location, clinical stage, neoadjuvant treatment and year of diagnosis. The primary outcome was a 3-year relative survival (RS). Secondary outcome parameters were number of lymph nodes examined, number of positive lymph nodes, radical resection rate, tumor regression grade, post-operative complications and mortality. A total of 1627 patients who underwent IL (n = 1094) or McK (n = 533) esophagectomy were included. Patient and tumor characteristics were balanced after propensity score matching, leaving 658 patients to be compared. The 3-year RS was 54% after IL and 50% after McK esophagectomy, P = 0.140. The median number of lymph nodes examined, median number of positive lymph nodes, radical resection rate and tumor regression grade were comparable between both groups. Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (2 vs. 5%, P = 0.006) occurred less frequently after IL esophagectomy. No differences were observed in post-operative anastomotic leakage rate, pulmonary complication rate and mortality rates. There was no statistically significant difference in the 3-year RS between IL and McK esophagectomy. Based on these results, both IL and McK esophagectomy can be performed in patients with mid to distal esophageal and GEJ cancer., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a severe complication after esophagectomy. Clinical presentation of AL is diverse and there is large practice variation regarding treatment of AL. This study aimed to explore different AL treatment strategies and their underlying rationale. This mixed-methods study consisted of an international survey among upper gastro-intestinal (GI) surgeons and focus groups with expert upper GI surgeons. The survey included 10 case vignettes and data sources were integrated after separate analysis. The survey was completed by 188 respondents (completion rate 69%) and 6 focus groups were conducted with 20 international experts. Prevention of mortality was the most important goal of primary treatment. Goals of secondary treatment were to promote tissue healing, return to oral feeding and safe hospital discharge. There was substantial variation in the preferred treatment principles (e.g. drainage or defect closure) and modalities (e.g. stent or endoVAC) within different presentations of AL. Patients with local symptoms were treated by supportive means only or by non-surgical drainage and/or defect closure. Drainage was routinely performed in patients with intrathoracic collections and often combined with defect closure. Patients with conduit necrosis were predominantly treated by resection and reconstruction of the anastomosis or by esophageal diversion. This mixed-methods study shows that overall treatment strategies for AL are determined by vitality of the conduit and presence of intrathoracic collections. There is large variation in preferred treatment principles and modalities. Future research may investigate optimal treatment for specific AL presentations and aim to develop consensus-based treatment guidelines for AL after esophagectomy., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.)

Background: Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after oesophagectomy. It is unknown how to determine the severity of AL objectively at diagnosis. Determining leak severity may guide treatment decisions and improve future research. This study aimed to identify leak-related prognostic factors for mortality, and to develop a Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score., Methods: This international, retrospective cohort study in 71 centres worldwide included patients with AL after oesophagectomy between 2011 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Leak-related prognostic factors were identified after adjusting for confounders and were included in multivariable logistic regression to develop the SEAL score. Four classes of leak severity (mild, moderate, severe, and critical) were defined based on the risk of 90-day mortality, and the score was validated internally., Results: Some 1509 patients with AL were included and the 90-day mortality rate was 11.7 per cent. Twelve leak-related prognostic factors were included in the SEAL score. The score showed good calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 0.81). Higher classes of leak severity graded by the SEAL score were associated with a significant increase in duration of ICU stay, healing time, Comprehensive Complication Index score, and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group classification., Conclusion: The SEAL score grades leak severity into four classes by combining 12 leak-related predictors and can be used to the assess severity of AL after oesophagectomy., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Background: The number of older patients undergoing curative esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is increasing, and minimally invasive techniques are being increasingly used. The aim of this study is to compare postoperative outcomes after curative esophagectomy between older and younger patients., Methods: Data was retrieved from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA), a national surgical outcome registry. The primary outcome was severe complications, defined as complications graded Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3. The secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, reintervention rates, length of hospital stays, and mortality. Outcomes were compared between patients aged ≥75 and < 75 years. We performed additional subgroup analyses between these age groups after totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE) and in patients with severe complications. We adjusted for the following parameters: gender, BMI, Charlson Comorbidity Index score (CCI), ASA score, histology, type of neoadjuvant therapy, and surgical technique., Results: Of all 3775 included patients, 455 (12.1%) were aged ≥75 years and 3302 (87.9%) were aged <75 years. Overall, severe complications occurred in 184 (40.4%) older and in 1140 (34.5%) younger patients (CI = 1.009-1.080). After TMIE, severe complications occurred in 150 (42.1%) older and in 891 (35.8%) younger patients (CI = 1.007-1.088). In patients with severe complications, rates of complications, reinterventions, mortality, and ICU stays were comparable between older and younger patients. After adjustment for casemix, age and CCI score were not independent risk factors for (severe) complications and mortality., Conclusions: Age and Charlson Comorbidity Index are not adequate predictors of postoperative morbidity and mortality after curative esophagectomy for esophageal cancer., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex and technically demanding procedure with a long learning curve, which is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. To master MIE, training in essential steps is crucial. Yet, no consensus on essential steps of MIE is available. The aim of this study was to achieve expert consensus on essential steps in Ivor Lewis and McKeown MIE through Delphi methodology., Methods: Based on expert opinion and peer-reviewed literature, essential steps were defined for Ivor Lewis (IL) and McKeown (McK) MIE. In a round table discussion, experts finalized the lists of steps and an online Delphi questionnaire was sent to an international expert panel (7 European countries) of minimally invasive upper GI surgeons. Based on replies and comments, steps were adjusted and rephrased and sent in iterative fashion until consensus was achieved., Results: Two Delphi rounds were conducted and response rates were 74% (23 out of 31 experts) for the first and 81% (27 out of 33 experts) for the second round. Consensus was achieved on 106 essential steps for both the IL and McK approach. Cronbach's alpha in the first round was 0.78 (IL) and 0.78 (McK) and in the second round 0.92 (IL) and 0.88 (McK)., Conclusions: Consensus among European experts was achieved on essential surgical steps for both Ivor Lewis and McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: Anastomotic leakage has a great impact on clinical outcomes after esophagectomy. It has never been studied whether anastomotic leakage is of equal severity between different types of esophagectomy (i.e., transhiatal, McKeown and Ivor Lewis) in terms of postoperative mortality and morbidity., Methods: All esophageal cancer patients with anastomotic leakage after transhiatal, McKeown or Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between 2011 and 2019 were selected from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) registry. The primary outcome was 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, re-operation and ICU readmission rate., Results: Data from 1030 patients with anastomotic leakage after transhiatal (n=287), McKeown (n=397) and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (n=346) were evaluated. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate was 4.5% in patients with leakage after transhiatal esophagectomy, 8.1% after McKeown and 8.1% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P=0.139). After correction for confounders, leakage after transhiatal resection was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.152-0.699, P=0.004), but mortality after McKeown and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was similar. Re-operation rate was 24.0% after transhiatal, 40.6% after McKeown and 41.3% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P<0.001). ICU readmission rate was 24.0% after transhiatal, 37.8% after McKeown and 43.4% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P<0.001)., Conclusion: This study in patients with anastomotic leakage confirms a strong association between severity of clinical consequences and different types of esophagectomy. It supports the hypothesis that cervical leakage is generally less severe than intrathoracic leakage. The clinical impact of anastomotic leakage should be taken into account, in addition to its incidence, when different types of esophagectomy are compared by clinicians or researchers., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Background: This study investigated whether a supervised exercise programme improves quality of life (QoL), fatigue and cardiorespiratory fitness in patients in the first year after oesophagectomy., Methods: The multicentre PERFECT trial randomly assigned patients to an exercise intervention (EX) or usual care (UC) group. EX patients participated in a 12-week moderate- to high-intensity aerobic and resistance exercise programme supervised by a physiotherapist. Primary (global QoL, QoL summary score) and secondary (QoL subscales, fatigue and cardiorespiratory fitness) outcomes were assessed at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks and analysed as between-group differences using either linear mixed effects models or ANCOVA., Results: A total of 120 patients (mean(s.d.) age 64(8) years) were included and randomized to EX (61 patients) or UC (59 patients). Patients in the EX group participated in 96 per cent (i.q.r. 92-100 per cent) of the exercise sessions and the relative exercise dose intensity was high (92 per cent). At 12 weeks, beneficial EX effects were found for QoL summary score (3.5, 95 per cent c.i. 0.2 to 6.8) and QoL role functioning (9.4, 95 per cent c.i. 1.3 to 17.5). Global QoL was not statistically significant different between groups (3.0, 95 per cent c.i. -2.2 to 8.2). Physical fatigue was lower in the EX group (-1.2, 95 per cent c.i. -2.6 to 0.1), albeit not significantly. There was statistically significant improvement in cardiorespiratory fitness following EX compared with UC (peak oxygen uptake (1.8 ml/min/kg, 95 per cent c.i. 0.6 to 3.0)). After 24 weeks, all EX effects were attenuated., Conclusions: A supervised exercise programme improved cardiorespiratory fitness and aspects of QoL., Trial Registration: Dutch Trial Register NTR 5045 (www.trialregister.nl/trial/4942)., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd.)

Background: Transthoracic minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly performed as part of curative multimodality treatment. There appears to be no robust evidence on the preferred location of the anastomosis after transthoracic MIE., Objective: To compare an intrathoracic with a cervical anastomosis in a randomized clinical trial., Design, Setting, and Participants: This open, multicenter randomized clinical superiority trial was performed at 9 Dutch high-volume hospitals. Patients with midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer planned for curative resection were included. Data collection occurred from April 2016 through February 2020., Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to transthoracic MIE with intrathoracic or cervical anastomosis., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was anastomotic leakage requiring endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes were overall anastomotic leak rate, other postoperative complications, length of stay, mortality, and quality of life., Results: Two hundred sixty-two patients were randomized, and 245 were eligible for analysis. Anastomotic leakage necessitating reintervention occurred in 15 of 122 patients with intrathoracic anastomosis (12.3%) and in 39 of 123 patients with cervical anastomosis (31.7%; risk difference, -19.4% [95% CI, -29.5% to -9.3%]). Overall anastomotic leak rate was 12.3% in the intrathoracic anastomosis group and 34.1% in the cervical anastomosis group (risk difference, -21.9% [95% CI, -32.1% to -11.6%]). Intensive care unit length of stay, mortality rates, and overall quality of life were comparable between groups, but intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with fewer severe complications (risk difference, -11.3% [-20.4% to -2.2%]), lower incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (risk difference, -7.3% [95% CI, -12.1% to -2.5%]), and better quality of life in 3 subdomains (mean differences: dysphagia, -12.2 [95% CI, -19.6 to -4.7]; problems of choking when swallowing, -10.3 [95% CI, -16.4 to 4.2]; trouble with talking, -15.3 [95% CI, -22.9 to -7.7])., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, intrathoracic anastomosis resulted in better outcome for patients treated with transthoracic MIE for midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer., Trial Registration: Trialregister.nl Identifier: NL4183 (NTR4333).

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., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Delayed gastric conduit emptying (DGCE) after esophagectomy for cancer is associated with adverse outcomes and troubling symptoms. Widely accepted diagnostic criteria and a symptom grading tool for DGCE are missing. This hampers the interpretation and comparison of studies. A modified Delphi process, using repeated web-based questionnaires, combined with live interim group discussions was conducted by 33 experts within the field, from Europe, North America, and Asia. DGCE was divided into early DGCE if present within 14 days of surgery and late if present later than 14 days after surgery. The final criteria for early DGCE, accepted by 25 of 27 (93%) experts, were as follows: >500 mL diurnal nasogastric tube output measured on the morning of postoperative day 5 or later or >100% increased gastric tube width on frontal chest x-ray projection together with the presence of an air-fluid level. The final criteria for late DGCE accepted by 89% of the experts were as follows: the patient should have 'quite a bit' or 'very much' of at least two of the following symptoms; early satiety/fullness, vomiting, nausea, regurgitation or inability to meet caloric need by oral intake and delayed contrast passage on upper gastrointestinal water-soluble contrast radiogram or on timed barium swallow. A symptom grading tool for late DGCE was constructed grading each symptom as: 'not at all', 'a little', 'quite a bit', or 'very much', generating 0, 1, 2, or 3 points, respectively. For the five symptoms retained in the diagnostic criteria for late DGCE, the minimum score would be 0, and the maximum score would be 15. The final symptom grading tool for late DGCE was accepted by 27 of 31 (87%) experts. For the first time, diagnostic criteria for early and late DGCE and a symptom grading tool for late DGCE are available, based on an international expert consensus process., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.)

Background: Despite modern imaging modalities, staging of clinically staged T2N0M0 (cT2N0M0) oesophageal cancer is suboptimal, often leading to overtreatment. Endoscopic resection - the first-line therapy for early localised tumours - could be used to improve staging and to attain predictors of nodal upstaging enabling more stage-guided treatment decisions., Objective: A systematic literature review and a meta-analysis were conducted to assess the prevalence and the pathological risk factors of lymph node metastases in cT2N0M0 oesophageal cancer., Methods: Databases of PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane were searched for literature. The primary outcome was lymph node metastases determined after primary surgical resection., Results: Nine studies with a total of 1650 cT2N0M0 patients were included. The prevalence of lymph node metastases was 43% (95% confidence interval: 35-50%) with heterogeneity being high across studies ( I 2  = 0.86, p  < 0.001). Factors potentially attainable by endoscopic resection and having a significant association with lymph node metastases were invasion depth, differentiation grade, tumour size, depth of invasion in the muscularis propria and lymphovascular invasion., Conclusions: Clinical lymph node staging is inaccurate in almost half of cT2N0M0 oesophageal cancer. Endoscopic resection is a promising diagnostic modality that might even be a valid alternative to surgery in selected patients without high-risk features, but further evidence is warranted.

Introduction: Totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE) is increasingly used in treatment of patients with esophageal carcinoma. However, it is currently unknown if McKeown TMIE or Ivor Lewis TMIE should be preferred for patients in whom both procedures are oncologically feasible., Methods: The study was performed in 4 high-volume Dutch esophageal cancer centers between November 2009 and April 2017. Prospectively collected data from consecutive patients with esophageal cancer localized in the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction undergoing McKeown TMIE or Ivor Lewis TMIE were included. Patients were propensity score matched for age, body mass index, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, Charlson Comorbidity Index, tumor type, tumor location, clinical stage, neoadjuvant treatment, and the hospital of surgery. The primary outcome parameter was anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation. Secondary outcome parameters were operation characteristics, pathology results, complications, reinterventions, reoperations, length of stay, and mortality., Results: Of all 787 included patients, 420 remained after matching. The incidence of anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation was 23.3% after McKeown TMIE versus 12.4% after Ivor Lewis TMIE (P = 0.003). Ivor Lewis TMIE was significantly associated with a lower incidence of pulmonary complications (46.7% vs 31.9%), recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (9.5% vs 0.5%), reoperations (18.6% vs 11.0%), 90-day mortality (7.1% vs 2.9%), shorter median intensive care unit length of stay (2 days vs 1 day) and shorter median hospital length of stay (12 vs 11 days) (all P < 0.05). R0 resection rate was similar between the groups. The median number of examined lymph nodes was 21 after McKeown TMIE and 25 after Ivor Lewis TMIE (P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Ivor Lewis TMIE is associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage, 90-day mortality and other postoperative morbidity compared to McKeown TMIE in patients in whom both procedures are oncologically feasible.

Background: The impact of cardiorespiratory comorbidity on operative outcomes after esophagectomy remains controversial. This study investigated the effect of cardiorespiratory comorbidity on postoperative complications for patients treated for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer., Patients and Methods: A European multicenter cohort study from five high-volume esophageal cancer centers including patients treated between 2010 and 2017 was conducted. The effect of cardiorespiratory comorbidity and respiratory function upon postoperative outcomes was assessed., Results: In total 1590 patients from five centers were included; 274 (17.2%) had respiratory comorbidity, and 468 (29.4%) had cardiac comorbidity. Respiratory comorbidity was associated with increased risk of overall postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, pneumonia, increased Clavien-Dindo score, and critical care and hospital length of stay. After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, respiratory comorbidity was associated with increased risk of anastomotic leak [odds ratio (OR) 1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-3.04], pneumonia (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.10-2.47), and any pulmonary complication (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.04-2.22), an effect which was not observed following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery alone. Cardiac comorbidity was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular and pulmonary complications, respiratory failure, and Clavien-Dindo score ≥ IIIa. Among all patients, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio > 70% was associated with reduced risk of overall postoperative complications, cardiovascular complications, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary complications, and pneumonia., Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that cardiorespiratory comorbidity and impaired pulmonary function are associated with increased risk of postoperative complications after esophagectomy performed in high-volume European centers. Given the observed interaction with neoadjuvant approach, these data indicate a potentially modifiable index of perioperative risk.

Background: The number of elderly patients suffering from esophageal cancer is increasing, due to an increasing incidence of esophageal cancer and increasing life expectancy. However, the effect of age on morbidity, mortality, and survival after Ivor Lewis total minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE) is not well known., Methods: A prospectively documented database from December 2010 to June 2017 was analyzed, including all patients who underwent Ivor Lewis TMIE for esophageal cancer in three Dutch high-volume esophageal cancer centers. Patients younger than 75 years (younger group) were compared to patients aged 75 years or older (elderly group). Baseline patient characteristics and perioperative data were included. Surgical complications were graded using the Clavien-Dindo scale. The primary outcome was postoperative complications Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3. Secondary outcome parameters were postoperative complications, in-hospital mortality, 30- and 90-day mortality and survival., Results: Four hundred and forty-six patients were included, 357 in the younger and 89 in the elderly group. No significant differences were recorded regarding baseline patient characteristics. There was no significant difference in complications graded Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 and overall complications, short-term mortality, and survival. Delirium occurred in 27.0% in the elderly and 11.8% in the younger group (p < 0.001). After correction for baseline comorbidity this difference remained significant (p = 0.001). Median hospital length of stay was 13 days in the elderly and 11 days in the younger group (p = 0.010)., Conclusions: Ivor Lewis TMIE can be safely performed in selected elderly patients without increasing postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Background: Anastomotic leakage (0-30%) after esophagectomy is a severe complication and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to determine which treatment for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy have the best clinical outcome, based on the currently available literature., Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science until April 2017. All studies reporting on the specific treatment of cervical or intrathoracic anastomotic leakage following esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction for esophageal or cardia cancer were included. The primary outcome parameter was postoperative mortality. Methodological quality was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale., Results: Nineteen retrospective cohort studies including 273 patients were identified. Methodological quality of all studies was poor to moderate. Mortality rates of intrathoracic anastomotic leakages in the treatment groups were as follows: conservative (14%), endoscopic stent (8%), endoscopic drainage (8%), endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure system (0%), and surgery treatment group (50%). Mortality rates of cervical anastomotic leakages in the treatment groups were as follows: conservative (8%), endoscopic stent (29%), and endoscopic dilatation (0%)., Discussion: Due to small cohorts, heterogeneity between studies, and lack of data regarding leakage characteristics, no evidence supporting a specific treatment for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy was found. A severity score based on leakage characteristics instead of treatment given is essential for determining the optimal treatment of anastomotic leakage. In the absence of robust evidence-based treatment guidelines, we suggest customized treatment depending on sequelae of the leak and clinical condition of the patient. PrDepartment of Surgery, Radboudumc, P.O.B. 9101/618 NLactical advices are provided., Trial Registration: Registration number PROSPERO: CRD42016032374., Competing Interests: Not applicable.Not applicable.The authors declare that they have no competing interests.Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (Ivor Lewis TMIE) is a technically challenging procedure and is associated with a learning curve. Refinement of surgical technique is an important part of this learning curve. However, detailed descriptions of these refinements according to the idea, development, exploration, assessment, and long-term follow-up (IDEAL) framework are lacking and this study was undertaken to fill this knowledge gap. From 2010 until 2016, all consecutive patients (n = 164) were included from the first patient undergoing Ivor Lewis TMIE. Surgical reports were analyzed and surgeons were interviewed to determine surgical refinements. These data were used to describe the transition of the surgical technique from IDEAL stage IIB to stage III. The main findings were that four refinements were made to the surgical procedure in IDEAL stage IIB: (1) At case 9, the use of the 25 mm OrVil was abandoned, exchanged for a 28 mm EEA stapler and a large omental wrap around the anastomosis was introduced; (2) at case 27, the omental wrap was reduced in volume; (3) at case 60, the omental wrap was refined to cover the full 360° of the anastomosis and (4) at case 77, the fixation of the anvil with the Endostitch was replaced by fixation with two Endoloops®. During the transition from IDEAL stage IIB to stage III, the incidence of anastomotic leakage decreased from 26.0% to 4.6% (P < 0.001) and the incidence of textbook outcome increased from 31.2% to 47.1% (P = 0.039). In conclusion, this study describes the surgical refinements that were made during the progression of Ivor Lewis TMIE from IDEAL stage IIB to IDEAL stage III. During IDEAL stage IIB, postoperative outcome improved as surgical proficiency was gained and the technique was refined., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.)

Background: Surgery proficiency gain curves must be shortened to reduce patient harm during esophagectomy learning., Objective: This study aimed to test whether surgeon volume and surgeon age influenced the length of period of surgical proficiency gain., Methods: This population-based cohort study included 1384 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy by any of the 36 highest-volume surgeons in Sweden between 1987 and 2010, with follow-up until 2016. Annual surgeon volume was dichotomized by the median values into 'higher-volume surgeons' (≥ 4 cases per year) and 'lower-volume surgeons' (< 4 cases per year), and surgeon age at the start of practicing esophagectomies into 'younger surgeons' (aged < 45 years) and 'older surgeons' (aged ≥ 45 years). Proficiency gain curves were constructed using risk-adjusted cumulative sum analysis for 1- to 5-year mortality (main outcome) and secondary outcomes (presented below). The results were adjusted for all established prognostic factors., Results: For 1- to 5-year mortality, the change point was at 14 cases among 'higher-volume surgeons', while 'lower-volume surgeons' had a later change point at 31 cases. The corresponding change points were at 13 cases among 'younger surgeons' and at 48 cases among 'older surgeons'. Similar patterns of differences in the proficiency gain curves were seen for the secondary outcomes of 30-day mortality and resection margin status (tumor involvement)., Conclusion: Higher-volume- and younger surgeons seem to have a substantially shorter period of proficiency gain for long-term mortality and other outcomes following surgery for esophageal cancer. This indicates a value of intensified training of younger surgeons for these complex operations.

Objective: To investigate the morbidity that is associated with the learning curve of minimally invasive esophagectomy., Background: Although learning curves have been described, it is currently unknown how much extra morbidity is associated with the learning curve of technically challenging surgical procedures., Methods: Prospectively collected data were retrospectively analyzed of all consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in 4 European expert centers. The primary outcome parameter was anastomotic leakage. Secondary outcome parameters were operative time and textbook outcome ("optimal outcome"). Learning curves were plotted using weighted moving average and CUSUM analysis was used to determine after how many cases the plateau was reached. Learning associated morbidity was calculated with area under the curve analysis., Results: This study included 646 patients. Three of the 4 hospitals reached the plateau of 8% anastomotic leakage. The length of the learning curve was 119 cases. The mean incidence of anastomotic leakage decreased from 18.8% during the learning phase to 4.5% after the plateau had been reached (P < 0.001). Thirty-six extra patients (10.1% of all patients operated on during the learning curve) experienced learning associated anastomotic leakage, that could have been avoided if patients were operated by surgeons who had completed the learning curve. The incidence of textbook outcome increased from 28% to 53% and the mean operative time decreased from 344 minutes to 270 minutes., Conclusions: A considerable number of 36 extra patients (10.1%) experienced learning associated anastomotic leakage. More research is urgently needed to investigate how learning associated morbidity can be reduced to increase patient safety during learning curves.

Surgical innovation and pioneering are important for improving patient outcome, but can be associated with learning curves. Although learning curves in surgery are a recognized problem, the impact of surgical learning curves is increasing, due to increasing complexity of innovative surgical procedures, the rapid rate at which new interventions are implemented and a decrease in relative effectiveness of new interventions compared to old interventions. For minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), there is now robust evidence that implementation can lead to significant learning associated morbidity (morbidity during a learning curve, that could have been avoided if patients were operated by surgeons that have completed the learning curve). This article provides an overview of the evidence of the impact of learning curves after implementation of MIE. In addition, caveats for implementation and available evidence regarding factors that are important for safe implementation and safe pioneering of MIE are discussed., Competing Interests: Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors have no conflict of interest to declare. The work has not been previously published and has not been submitted for publication elsewhere.

Background: Up to 40 per cent of patients undergoing oesophagectomy develop pneumonia. The aim of this study was to assess whether preoperative inspiratory muscle training (IMT) reduces the rate of pneumonia after oesophagectomy., Methods: Patients with oesophageal cancer were randomized to a home-based IMT programme before surgery or usual care. IMT included the use of a flow-resistive inspiratory loading device, and patients were instructed to train twice a day at high intensity (more than 60 per cent of maximum inspiratory muscle strength) for 2 weeks or longer until surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative pneumonia; secondary outcomes were inspiratory muscle function, lung function, postoperative complications, duration of mechanical ventilation, length of hospital stay and physical functioning., Results: Postoperative pneumonia was diagnosed in 47 (39·2 per cent) of 120 patients in the IMT group and in 43 (35·5 per cent) of 121 patients in the control group (relative risk 1·10, 95 per cent c.i. 0·79 to 1·53; P = 0·561). There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative outcomes between the groups. Mean(s.d.) maximal inspiratory muscle strength increased from 76·2(26·4) to 89·0(29·4) cmH 2 O (P < 0·001) in the intervention group and from 74·0(30·2) to 80·0(30·1) cmH 2 O in the control group (P < 0·001). Preoperative inspiratory muscle endurance increased from 4 min 14 s to 7 min 17 s in the intervention group (P < 0·001) and from 4 min 20 s to 5 min 5 s in the control group (P = 0·007). The increases were highest in the intervention group (P < 0·050)., Conclusion: Despite an increase in preoperative inspiratory muscle function, home-based preoperative IMT did not lead to a decreased rate of pneumonia after oesophagectomy. Registration number: NCT01893008 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov)., (© 2018 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

A nil-by-mouth regime with enteral nutrition via an artificial route is frequently applied following esophagectomy. However, early initiation of oral feeding could potentially improve recovery and has shown to be beneficial in many types of abdominal surgery. Although short-term nutritional safety of oral intake after an esophagectomy has been documented, long-term effects of this feeding regimen are unknown. In this cohort study, data from patients undergoing minimal invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy between 04-2012 and 09-2015 in three centers in Netherlands were collected. Patients in the oral feeding group were retrieved from a previous prospective study and compared with a cohort of patients with early enteral jejunostomy feeding but delayed oral intake. Body mass index (BMI) measurements, complications, and nutritional re-interventions (re- or start of artificial feeding, start of total parenteral nutrition) were gathered over the course of one year after surgery. One year after surgery the median BMI was 22.8 kg/m2 and weight loss was 7.0 kg (9.5%) in 114 patients. Patients in the early oral feeding group lost more weight during the first postoperative month (P = 0.004). However, in the months thereafter this difference was not observed anymore. In the early oral feeding group, 28 patients (56%) required a nutritional re-intervention, compared to 46 patients (72%) in the delayed oral feeding group (P = 0.078). During admission, more re-interventions were performed in the delayed oral feeding group (17 vs. 46 patients P < 0.001). Esophagectomy reduces BMI in the first year after surgery regardless of the feeding regimen. Direct start of oral intake following esophagectomy has no impact on early nutritional re-interventions and long-term weight loss., (© The Authors 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Complex surgical procedures such as esophagectomy and gastrectomy for cancer are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in postoperative morbidity, mortality, and associated failure-to-rescue (FTR), in patients who underwent a potentially curative resection for esophageal or gastric cancer in the Netherlands, and to investigate differences between the two groups., Methods: All patients with esophageal or gastric cancer who underwent a potentially curative resection, registered in the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (DUCA) between 2011 and 2014, were included. Primary outcomes were (major) postoperative complications, postoperative mortality and FTR. To investigate groups' effect on the outcomes of interest a mixed model was used., Results: Overall, 2644 patients with esophageal cancer and 1584 patients with gastric cancer were included in this study. In patients with gastric cancer, postoperative mortality (7.7% in 2011 vs. 3.8% in 2014) and FTR (38% in 2011 and 19% in 2014) decreased significantly over the years. The adjusted risk of developing a major postoperative complication was lower (OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.42-0.70), but the risk of FTR was higher (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.05-3.27) in patients with gastric cancer compared to patients with esophageal cancer., Conclusion: Once a postoperative complication occurred, patients with gastric cancer were more likely to die compared to patients with esophageal cancer. Underlying mechanisms like patient selection, and differences in structure and organization of care should be investigated. Next to morbidity and mortality, failure-to-rescue should be considered as an important outcome measure after esophagogastric cancer resections., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate 3-year survival following a randomized controlled trial comparing minimally invasive with open esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer., Background: Research on minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has shown faster postoperative recovery and a marked decrease in pulmonary complications. Debate is ongoing as to whether the procedure is equivalent to open resection regarding oncologic outcomes. The study is a follow-up study of the TIME-trial (traditional invasive vs minimally invasive esophagectomy, a multicenter, randomized trial)., Methods: Between June 2009 and March 2011, patients with a resectable intrathoracic esophageal carcinoma, including the gastroesophageal junction tumors (Siewert I), were randomized between open and MI esophagectomy with curative intent. Primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, lymph node yield, short-term morbidity, mortality, complications, radicality, local recurrence, and metastasis. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR TC 2452. Both trial protocol and short-term results have been published previously., Results: One hundred fifteen patients were included from 5 European hospitals and randomly assigned to open (n = 56) or MI esophagectomy (n = 59). Combined overall 3-year survival was 40.4% (SD 7.7%) in the open group versus 50.5% (SD 8%) in the minimally invasive group (P = 0.207). The hazard ratio (HR) is 0.883 (0.540 to 1.441) for MIE compared with open surgery. Disease-free 3-year survival was 35.9% (SD 6.8%) in the open versus 40.2% (SD 6.9%) in the MI group [HR 0.691 (0.389 to 1.239)., Conclusions: The study presented here depicted no differences in disease-free and overall 3-year survival for open and MI esophagectomy. These results, together with short-term results, further support the use of minimally invasive surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

Introduction: Esophagectomy for cancer can be performed in a two-stage procedure with an intrathoracic anastomosis: the Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. A growing incidence of distal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas and increasing use of minimally invasive techniques have prompted interest in this procedure. The aim of this study was to assess short-term results of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL)., Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed from June 2007 until September 2014, including patients that underwent MIE-IL for distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer in six different hospitals in the Netherlands and Spain. Data were collected with regard to operative techniques, pathology and postoperative complications., Results: In total, 282 patients underwent MIE-IL, of which 90.2 % received neoadjuvant therapy. Anastomotic leakage was observed in 43 patients (15.2 %), of whom 13 patients (4.6 %) had empyema, necessitating thoracotomy for decortication. With an aggressive treatment of complications, the 30-day and in-hospital mortality rate was 2.1 %. An R0-resection was obtained in 92.5 % of the patients. After neoadjuvant therapy, 20.1 % of patients had a complete response., Conclusions: Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas is an upcoming approach for reducing morbidity caused by laparotomy and thoracotomy. Anastomotic leakage rate is still high possibly due to technical diversity of anastomotic techniques, and a high percentage of patients treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. An aggressive approach to complications leads to a low mortality of 2.1 %. Further improvement and standardization in the anastomotic technique are needed in order to perform a safe intrathoracic anastomosis., Competing Interests: Compliance with ethical standards Disclosures Jennifer Straatman, Nicole van der Wielen, Grard A. P. Nieuwenhuijzen, Camiel Rosman, Josep Roig, Joris J. G. Scheepers, Miguel A. Cuesta, Misha D. P. Luyer, Mark I. van Berge Henegouwen, Frans van Workum, Suzanne S. Gisbertz and Donald L. van der Peet have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Background: Both cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEA) and intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis (IEA) are used to restore gastrointestinal integrity following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). No prospective randomized data on functional outcome, postoperative morbidity, and mortality between these techniques are currently available., Methods: A comparison was conducted including all consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction undergoing MIE with CEA or MIE with IEA from October 2009 to July 2014 in 3 high-volume esophageal cancer centers. Functional outcome, postoperative morbidity, and mortality were analyzed., Results: MIE with CEA was performed in 146 patients and MIE with IEA in 210 patients. The incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was 14.4% after CEA and 0% after IEA (p < 0.001). Dysphagia, dumping, and regurgitation were reported less frequently after IEA compared with CEA (p < 0.05). Dilatation of benign strictures occurred in 43.8% after CEA and this was 6.2% after IEA (p < 0.001). If a benign stricture was identified, it was dilated a median of 4 times in the CEA group and only once in the IEA group (p < 0.001). Anastomotic leakage for which reoperation was required occurred in 8.2% after CEA and in 11.4% after IEA (not significant). Median ICU stay, hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and 90-day mortality were similar between the groups (not significant)., Conclusions: MIE with IEA was associated with better functional results than MIE with CEA with less dysphagia, less benign anastomotic strictures requiring fewer dilatations, and a lower incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. Other postoperative morbidity and mortality did not differ between the groups., (Copyright © 2017 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Currently, a cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEA) is often performed after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). However, the CEA is associated with a considerable incidence of anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation and moderate functional results. An intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis (IEA) might reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage, improve functional results and reduce costs. The objective of the ICAN trial is to compare anastomotic leakage and postoperative morbidity, mortality, quality of life and cost-effectiveness between CEA and IEA after MIE., Methods/design: The ICAN trial is an open randomized controlled multicentre superiority trial, comparing CEA (control group) with IEA (intervention group) after MIE. All patients with esophageal cancer planning to undergo curative MIE are considered for inclusion. A total of 200 patients will be included in the study and randomized between the groups in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation, and secondary outcomes are (amongst others) other postoperative complications, new onset of organ failure, length of stay, mortality, benign strictures requiring dilatation, quality of life and cost-effectiveness., Discussion: We hypothesize that an IEA after MIE is associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation than a CEA. The trial is also designed to give answers to additional research questions regarding a possible difference in functional outcome, quality of life and cost-effectiveness., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register: NTR4333 . Registered on 23 December 2013.

Background: Immediate start of oral intake is beneficial following colorectal surgery. However, following esophagectomy the safety and feasibility of immediate oral intake is unclear, thus these patients are still kept nil by mouth. This study therefore aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of oral nutrition immediately after esophagectomy., Methods: A multicenter, prospective trial was conducted in 3 referral centers between August 2013 and May 2014, including 50 patients undergoing a minimally invasive esophagectomy. Oral nutrition was started postoperatively immediately (clear liquids on postoperative day [POD] 0, liquid nutrition on POD 1 to 6, solid food from POD 7). Nonoral enteral nutrition was started when <50% of caloric need was met on postoperative day POD 5 or when oral intake was impossible. A comparison was made with a retrospective cohort (n = 50) with a per-protocol delayed start of oral intake until POD 4 to 7., Results: The median caloric intake at POD 5 was 58% of required. In 38% of the patients nonoral nutrition was started, mainly due to complications (36%). The pneumonia rate was 28% following immediate oral intake and 40% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The aspiration pneumonia rate was 4% in both groups. The anastomotic leakage rate was 14% after immediate oral intake versus 24% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The 90-day mortality rate was 2% in both groups. Hospital stay and intensive care unit stay were significantly shorter following immediate oral intake., Conclusions: Immediate start of oral nutrition following esophagectomy seems to be feasible and does not increase complications compared to a retrospective cohort and literature. However, if complications arise an alternative nutritional route is required. This explorative study shows that a randomized controlled trial is needed., (Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is widely being implemented for esophageal cancer in order to reduce morbidity and improve quality of life. Non-randomized studies investigating the mid-term quality of life after MIE show conflicting results at 1-year follow-up. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine whether MIE has a continuing better mid-term 1-year quality of life than open esophagectomy (OE) indicating both a faster recovery and less procedure-related symptoms., Methods: A one-year follow-up analysis of the quality of life was conducted for patients participating in the randomized trial in which MIE was compared with OE. Late complications as symptomatic stenosis of anastomosis are also reported., Results: Quality of life at 1 year was better in the MIE group than in the OE group for the physical component summary SF36 [50 (6; 48-53) versus 45 (9; 42-48) p .003]; global health C30 [79 (10; 76-83) versus 67 (21; 60-75) p .004]; and pain OES18 module [6 (9; 2-8) versus 16 (16; 10-22) p .001], respectively. Twenty six patients (44%) in the MIE and 22 patients (39%) in the OE group were diagnosed and treated for symptomatic stenosis of the anastomosis., Conclusions: This first randomized trial shows that MIE is associated with a better mid-term one-year quality of life compared to OE.

Background: Survival after oesophagectomy for cancer seems to be improving. This study aimed to identify the most important contributors to this change., Methods: Patients who underwent oesophagectomy from 1999 to 2010 were extracted from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Four time periods were compared: 1999-2001 (period 1), 2002-2004 (period 2), 2005-2007 (period 3) and 2008-2010 (period 4). Hospital type, tumour location, tumour type, tumour differentiation, neoadjuvant therapy, operation type, (y)pT category, involvement of surgical resection margins, number of removed lymph nodes and number of involved lymph nodes were investigated in relation to trends in survival using multivariable analysis., Results: A total of 4382 patients were identified. Two-year overall survival rates improved from 49·3 per cent in period 1 to 58·4, 56·2 and 61·0 per cent in periods 2, 3 and 4 respectively (P < 0·001). Multivariable survival analysis revealed that the improvement in survival between periods 3 and 4 was related to the introduction of neoadjuvant therapy. The improvement in survival between periods 1 and 2 could not be explained completely by the factors studied. The number of examined lymph nodes increased, especially between periods 2 and 3, but this increase was not associated with the improvement in survival., Conclusion: The observed increase in long-term survival after surgery for oesophageal cancer between 1999 and 2010 in the Netherlands is difficult to explain fully, although the recent increase seems to be partly attributable to the introduction of neoadjuvant therapy., (© 2015 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: The best route of feeding for patients undergoing an oesophagectomy is unclear. Concerns exist that early oral intake would increase the incidence and severity of pneumonia and anastomotic leakage. However, in studies including patients after many other types of gastrointestinal surgery and in animal experiments, early oral intake has been shown to be beneficial and enhance recovery. Therefore, we aim to determine the feasibility of early oral intake after oesophagectomy., Methods and Analysis: This study is a feasibility trial in which 50 consecutive patients will start oral intake directly following oesophagectomy. Primary outcomes will be the frequency and severity of anastomotic leakage and (aspiration) pneumonia. Clinical parameters will be registered prospectively and nutritional requirements and intake will be assessed by a dietician. Surgical complications will be registered., Ethics and Dissemination: Approval for this study has been obtained from the Medical Ethical Committee of the Catharina Hospital Eindhoven and the study has been registered at the Dutch Trial Register, NTR4136. Results will be published and presented at international congresses., Discussion: We hypothesise that the oral route of feeding is safe and feasible following oesophagectomy, as has been shown previously for other types of gastrointestinal surgery. It is expected that early oral nutrition will result in enhanced recovery. Furthermore, complications related to artificial feeding, such as jejunostomy tube feeding, are believed to be reduced. However, (aspiration) pneumonia and anastomotic leakage are potential risks that are carefully monitored., Trial Registration Number: NTR4136., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Background: Esophageal resection is associated with a high incidence of postoperative pneumonia. Respiratory complications account for almost half of the readmissions to the critical care unit. Postoperative complications can result in prolonged hospital stay and consequently increase healthcare costs. In cardiac surgery a preoperative inspiratory muscle training program has shown to prevent postoperative pneumonia and reduce length of hospital stay. While in some surgical centers inspiratory muscle training is already used in the preoperative phase in patients undergoing esophageal resection, the added value of this intervention on the reduction of pulmonary complications has not yet been investigated in large surgical populations other than cardiac surgery in a randomized and controlled study design., Methods/design: The effect of a preoperative inspiratory muscle training program on the incidence of postoperative pneumonia in patients undergoing esophageal resection will be studied in a single blind multicenter randomized controlled trial (the PREPARE study). In total 248 patients (age >18 years) undergoing esophageal resection for esophageal cancer will be included in this study. They are randomized to either usual care or usual care with an additional inspiratory muscle training intervention according to a high-intensity protocol which is performed with a tapered flow resistive inspiratory loading device. Patients have to complete 30 dynamic inspiratory efforts twice daily for 7 days a week until surgery with a minimum of 2 weeks. The starting training load will be aimed to be 60% of maximal inspiratory pressure and will be increased based on the rate of perceived exertion.The main study endpoint is the incidence of postoperative pneumonia. Secondary objectives are to evaluate the effect of preoperative inspiratory muscle training on length of hospital stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, incidence of other postoperative (pulmonary) complications, quality of life, and on postoperative respiratory muscle function and lung function., Discussion: The PREPARE study is the first multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the hypothesis that preoperative inspiratory muscle training leads to decreased pulmonary complications in patients undergoing esophageal resection., Trial Registration: NCT01893008.

Background: Intrathoracic anastomosis after oesophagectomy has recently been associated with reduced functional morbidity compared to a cervical anastomosis., Methods: From January 2011 until August 2012, all operable patients were scheduled to undergo minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIE) with intrathoracic anastomosis. Patient characteristics, complications, morbidity and mortality were prospectively registered and analysed., Results: Forty-five patients underwent MIE with intrathoracic stapled end-to-side anastomosis. Major changes in operative technique were made 2 times due to non-satisfactory results, dividing the patients into 3 groups. One patient in group 1 died. The anastomotic leakage rate decreased from 44% in group 1 to 0% in groups 2 and 3 (p = 0.007). The pulmonary complication rate decreased from 67% in group 1 to 44% in group 2 (not significant, NS) and 22% in group 3 (p = 0.04). The median hospital stay decreased from 17 days in group 1 to 14 days in group 2 (NS) and 8 days in group 3 (p < 0.001). There were no stenoses, no dilatations and no patients with recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy., Conclusions: The introduction of the intrathoracic anastomosis led to favourable functional results but was initially associated with considerable morbidity. RESULTS improved after changing operative techniques, but the learning curve may also be responsible., (© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Surgical resection is regarded as the only curative option for resectable oesophageal cancer, but pulmonary complications occurring in more than half of patients after open oesophagectomy are a great concern. We assessed whether minimally invasive oesophagectomy reduces morbidity compared with open oesophagectomy., Methods: We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial at five study centres in three countries between June 1, 2009, and March 31, 2011. Patients aged 18-75 years with resectable cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction were randomly assigned via a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive either open transthoracic or minimally invasive transthoracic oesophagectomy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, and investigators undertaking interventions, assessing outcomes, and analysing data, were not masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was pulmonary infection within the first 2 weeks after surgery and during the whole stay in hospital. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR TC 2452., Findings: We randomly assigned 56 patients to the open oesophagectomy group and 59 to the minimally invasive oesophagectomy group. 16 (29%) patients in the open oesophagectomy group had pulmonary infection in the first 2 weeks compared with five (9%) in the minimally invasive group (relative risk [RR] 0·30, 95% CI 0·12-0·76; p=0·005). 19 (34%) patients in the open oesophagectomy group had pulmonary infection in-hospital compared with seven (12%) in the minimally invasive group (0·35, 0·16-0·78; p=0·005). For in-hospital mortality, one patient in the open oesophagectomy group died from anastomotic leakage and two in the minimally invasive group from aspiration and mediastinitis after anastomotic leakage., Interpretation: These findings provide evidence for the short-term benefits of minimally invasive oesophagectomy for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer., Funding: Digestive Surgery Foundation of the Unit of Digestive Surgery of the VU University Medical Centre., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: There is a rise in incidence of esophageal carcinoma due to increasing incidence of adenocarcinoma. Probably the only curative option to date is the use of neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgical resection. Traditional open esophageal resection is associated with a high morbidity and mortality rate. Furthermore, this approach involves long intensive care unit stay, in-hospital stay and long recovery period. Minimally invasive esophagectomy could reduce the morbidity and accelerate the post-operative recovery., Methods/design: Comparison between traditional open and minimally invasive esophagectomy in a multi-center, randomized trial. Patients with a resectable intrathoracic esophageal carcinoma, including the gastro-esophageal junction tumors (Siewert I) are eligible for inclusion. Prior thoracic surgery and cervical esophageal carcinoma are indications for exclusion. The surgical technique involves a right thoracotomy with lung blockade and laparotomy either with a cervical or thoracic anastomosis for the traditional group. The minimally invasive procedure involves a right thoracoscopy in prone position with a single lumen tube and laparoscopy either with a cervical or thoracic anastomosis. All patients in both groups will undergo identical pre-operative and post-operative protocol. Primary endpoint of this study are post-operative respiratory complications within the first two post-operative weeks confirmed by clinical, radiological and sputum culture data. Secondary endpoints are the operative data, the post-operative data and oncological data such as quality of the specimen and survival. Operative data include duration of the operation, blood loss and conversion to open procedure. Post-operative data include morbidity (major and minor), quality of life tests and hospital stay.Based on current literature and the experience of all participating centers, an incidence of pulmonary complications for 57% in the traditional arm and 29% in the minimally invasive arm, it is estimated that per arm 48 patients are needed. This is based on a two-sided significance level (alpha) of 0.05 and a power of 0.80. Knowing that approximately 20% of the patients will be excluded, we will randomize 60 patients per arm., Discussion: The TIME-trial is a prospective, multi-center, randomized study to define the role of minimally invasive esophageal resection in patients with resectable intrathoracic and junction esophageal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION (NETHERLANDS TRIAL REGISTER): NTR2452.