Current treatment and outcome of esophageal perforation: A single-center experience and a pooled analysis.

BACKGROUND: Esophageal perforation has been one of the serious clinical emergencies, because of the high mortality and complication rates. However, the current prognosis of esophageal perforation and the outcomes of available treatment methods are not well defined. This study attempted to pool the immediate outcomes of esophageal perforation in the past 2 decades. METHODS: The clinical data of 22 consecutive adult patients with esophageal perforation in our center were analyzed. A pooled analysis was also conducted to summarize results from the literatures published between 1999 and 2020. Studies that met the inclusion criteria were assessed, and their methodological quality was examined. RESULTS: The mortality and complication rates in our center were 4.55% and 31.82%, separately. The pooled analysis included 45 studies published between 1999 and 2019, which highlighted an overall immediate mortality rate of 9.86%. Surgical treatments were associated with a pooled immediate mortality of 10.01%, and for conservative treatments of 6.49%. Besides, in the past decade, the mortality and complication rates decreased by 27.12% and 46.75%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the past 2 decades, the overall immediate mortality rate of esophageal perforation was about 10% in the worldwide, and the outcomes of esophageal perforation treatment are getting better in the last 10 years. ETHICS REGISTRATION INFORMATION: LW2020011.

The effect of age on survival after endoscopic resection versus surgery for T1a esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic resection has emerged as a treatment option for T1a esophageal cancer, but the impact of age on patient selection for surgery versus endoscopic resection has not been well studied. We hypothesized that endoscopic resection would be associated with improved survival compared with surgery in older patients with early esophageal cancer and worse survival in younger patients. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with cT1aN0M0 esophageal cancer (2010-2015) treated with endoscopic resection or esophagectomy. The relationship between age and treatment effect on survival was modeled with an interaction term in a Cox proportional hazards regression. The primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 831 patients met study criteria: A total of 448 patients (54%) underwent endoscopic resection, and 383 patients (46%) underwent esophagectomy. In a multivariable Cox model, the interaction term between patient age and type of treatment was nonsignificant (P = .11), suggesting that age did not influence the effect of endoscopic resection compared with surgery on survival. In 285 propensity score-matched patients receiving endoscopic resection or surgery, surgery was associated with similar survival compared with endoscopic resection (hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.97-2.03). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic resection was associated with similar survival compared with surgery in patients with cT1a esophageal cancer regardless of age. Endoscopic resection can be considered for patients at low risk of nodal involvement across all age groups as an alternative to surgery for T1a esophageal cancer.

Comparison of long-term outcomes between esophagectomy and chemoradiotherapy after endoscopic resection of submucosal esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Esophagectomy represents the standard treatment strategy for superficial esophageal cancer diagnosed pathologically as submucosal disease (pT1b) following an endoscopic resection (ER). However, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is expected to become an alternative treatment option. This study retrospectively compared the outcomes of patients who underwent ER of submucosal esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, and who received additional treatment in the form of surgery and CRT. Data were collected from 83 patients who underwent ER and were diagnosed as pT1b (sm) between January 2002 and December 2013. Of them, 52 patients underwent additional treatment (19 surgery, 33 CRT). The long-term outcomes, recurrent patterns, and recurrence risk factor were analyzed retrospectively. No significant differences were identified between the two groups regarding the following aspects: sex, Charlson comorbidity index, tumor size, macroscopic type, cut end positivity, and en bloc resection rate. On the contrary, significant differences were observed in age (P = 0.042) and lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.003) between the two groups. There were more patients with positive lymphovascular invasion, which was one of the strongest risk factors, in the surgery group. The 3-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) rates were both 100% in the surgery group and 90.4% and 87.4%, respectively, in the CRT group. The 5-year OS and RFS rates both decreased to 89.5% in the surgery group and to 80.3% and 70.4%, respectively, in the CRT group. The surgery group achieved a superior OS and RFS compared to the CRT group, though not significant (P = 0.172, P = 0.127). Tumor recurrence was observed in 6 patients. All these patients were in the CRT group (P = 0.075). They included 3 patients with hematogenous metastases (of the lung, bone, and adrenal gland) and 3 patients with regional lymph node metastasis. The patient with hematogenous adrenal gland metastasis had simultaneous extended lymph node metastasis. Through a univariate analysis, it was observed that tumor size (≥ 40 mm) and positive lymphatic invasion represented the significant risk factors for recurrence in the CRT group (P = 0.048 and P = 0.035, respectively). To achieve a better long-term survival, surgery is recommended as the additional treatment for ER-pT1b esophageal cancer. While CRT represents an acceptable alternative, the indication should be carefully decided, especially in high-risk patients for recurrence with large tumor size (≥ 40 mm) or positive lymphatic invasion.

Primary and Rescue Endoluminal Vacuum Therapy in the Management of Esophageal Perforations and Leaks.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the efficacy of primary and rescue endoluminal vacuum (EVAC) therapy in the treatment of esophageal perforations and leaks. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively gathered, Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved database of EVAC therapy patients at our center from July 2013 to September 2016. RESULTS: In all, 13 patients were treated for esophageal perforations or leaks. Etiologies included iatrogenic injury (n = 8), anastomotic leak (n = 2), Boerhaave syndrome (n = 1), and bronchoesophageal fistula (n = 2). In total, 10 patients underwent primary treatment and three were treated with rescue therapy. Mean Perforation Severity Scores (PSSs) in the primary and rescue treatment groups were 7 and 10, respectively. Average defect size was 2.4 (range: 0.5-6) cm. The rescue group had a shorter mean time to defect closure (25 vs. 33 days). In all, 12 of 13 defects healed. One death occurred following the implementation of comfort care. One therapy-specific complication occurred. Hospital length of stay (LOS) was longer in the rescue group (72 vs. 53 days); however, the intensive care unit (ICU) duration was similar between groups. Totally, 10 patients (83%) resumed an oral diet after successful defect closure. CONCLUSION: Utilized as either a primary or rescue therapy, EVAC therapy appears to be beneficial in the management of esophageal perforations or leaks.

Curative Criteria After Endoscopic Resection for Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinomas.

BACKGROUND: According to the Japanese Esophageal Society (JES) guidelines, risk factors for lymph node (LN) metastasis in the muscularis mucosa (MM)/submucosa to a depth of up to 200 µm (SM1) in cases of esophageal squamous cell carcinomas (ESCCs) include the presence of lymphatic invasion (ly), venous invasion (v), infiltration pattern (INF)c, and SM1. The long-term prognoses of these patients are unclear, and there are very few reports on the validation of the curative criteria for MM/SM1 ESCCs. AIMS: To examine the long-term prognoses of these patients and the risk factors for LN metastasis of MM/SM1 ESCCs after endoscopic resection (ER). METHODS: This study included patients with MM/SM1 ESCCs who underwent ER at Hiroshima University Hospital from December 1990 to November 2016. We evaluated the clinicopathological characteristics of 98 patients and overall survival, disease-specific survival, recurrence-free survival, and recurrence rates in the e-curative and non-e-curative groups. RESULTS: The mean observation period was 75 months. There was no significant difference in disease-specific survival rate between the e-curative and non-e-curative groups (100 vs. 98%). There was no significant difference in disease-specific survival rates between the groups (100 vs. 98%). In contrast, the LN recurrence-free survival rate in patients with INFa, ly(-), and v(-) was significantly higher than that in patients with INFb/c, ly(+), or v(+) (100 and 87%, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Contrary to the JES guidelines, our findings suggest that new criteria (MM/SM1, INFa, negative vertical margin (VM0), ly[-], and v[-]) may be associated with curative ER without additional treatment.

Esophagectomy versus endoscopic resection for patients with early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma: A National Cancer Database propensity-matched study.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic resection has been rapidly adopted in the treatment of early-stage esophageal tumors. We compared the outcomes after esophagectomy or endoscopic resection for stage T1a adenocarcinoma. METHODS: We queried the National Cancer Database for patients with T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent esophagectomy or endoscopic resection and generated a balanced cohort with 735 matched pairs using propensity-score matching. We then performed a multivariable Cox regression analysis on the matched and unmatched cohorts. RESULTS: We identified 2173 patients; 1317 (60.6%) underwent esophagectomy, and 856 (39.4%) underwent endoscopic resection. In the unmatched cohort, patients who underwent esophagectomy were younger, more often not treated in academic settings, and more likely to have comorbidities (30.4% vs 22.5%, P = .002). They had longer hospital stays and more readmissions than patients who underwent endoscopic resection. Factors positively affecting overall survival were younger age, resection at an academic medical center, and lower Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score. In the matched cohort, patients who underwent esophagectomy had longer hospital stays and were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (7.0% vs 0.6%, P < .001). When a time period-specific partition was applied, endoscopic resection had a lower death hazard 0 to 90 days after resection (hazard ratio, 0.15; P = .003), but this was reversed for survival greater than 90 days (hazard ratio, 1.34; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, survival appears equivalent after endoscopic resection or esophagectomy, but endoscopic resection is associated with shorter hospital stays, fewer readmissions, and less 90-day mortality. In patients surviving more than 90 days, esophagectomy may provide better overall survival.

A bridging stent to surgery in patients with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer has a dramatic negative impact on patient survival: A retrospective cohort study through data acquired from a prospectively maintained national database.

This study aimed to assess the impact of esophageal stenting on postoperative complications and survival in patients with obstructing esophageal and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. All patients treated without neoadjuvant therapy that had an R0-resection performed for esophageal and GEJ cancer between January 2003 and December 2010 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Data on stenting, postoperative mortality, morbidity, recurrence-free survival, complications, and length of hospital stay were collected. Kaplan-Meier plots for survival and recurrence-free survival curves were constructed for R0 resected patients. Data were compared between the stent and no-stent group by nonparametric tests. Two hundred seventy three consecutive R0 resected patients with esophageal or GEJ cancer were identified. Of these patients, 63 had a stent as a bridge to surgery. The male/female ratio was 2.64 (198/75) with a median age in the stent group (SG) of 65.1 versus 64.3 in the no stent group (NSG). Patients were comparable with respect to gender, age, smoking, TNM-classification, oncological treatment, hospital stay, tumor location, and histology. The median survival in the SG was 11.6 months compared with 21.3 months for patients treated without a bridging stent (P < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day mortality between the two groups, but NSG patients exhibited a significantly better two-year survival (P = 0.017). The median recurrence-free survival was 9.1 months for the SG compared with 15.2 months for the NSG. The use of a stent as a bridging procedure to surgery in patients treated without neaoadjuvant therapy for an esophageal or GEJ cancer that later underwent R0 resection decreased the two year survival and the recurrence-free survival.

Management and outcome of esophageal stenting for spontaneous esophageal perforations.

Treatment of spontaneous esophageal perforation (SEP) consists of different conservative, surgical and endoscopic treatment modalities. In this study, we evaluated the clinical efficacy and the outcome of covered self-expanding stent (CSES) treatment of SEP. All patients with SEP treated by CSES at our institution between 2005 and 2014 were included in this prospective single-center study. The data were collected from a prospective database based on clinical, endoscopic and operative reports. Follow-up data were procured by contacting the patients or their family doctors. The patient data were analyzed concerning course of treatment, leakage sealing rate, complications, and mortality. Patients with iatrogenic or malignant perforations were excluded. In total, 16 patients underwent endoscopic CSES placement for SEP between 2005 and 2014. Sealing of the leakage was immediately successful in 50% (8 patients). A second stent was placed in 5 patients, but did not achieve sealing of the perforation in any case, requiring a switch in treatment to a surgical procedure (n=4) or drainage of the persisting leakage (n=4). In-hospital mortality was 13%. Only delayed treatment was identified as a risk factor for inferior outcome. Patients with successful CSES treatment had a shorter ICU- and hospital stay and had a reduced risk of developing esophageal stenosis (RR: 0.4) or persisting dysphagia despite treatment (RR: 0.33). Endoscopic treatment of SEP is beneficial to the patient if immediately successful, but in our experience, failure rates are higher than described in the literature. Secondary placement of CSES was not successful when initial stent treatment failed, while both surgical intervention and drainage of the perforation showed good results in sealing the leakage.

Ten-year experience of esophageal endoscopic submucosal dissection of superficial esophageal neoplasms in a single center.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) of a superficial esophageal neoplasm (SEN) is a technically difficult procedure. We investigated the clinical outcomes of ESD to determine its feasibility and effectiveness for the treatment of SEN. METHODS: Patients who underwent ESD for SEN between August 2005 and June 2014 were eligible for this study. The clinical features of patients and tumors, histopathologic characteristics, adverse events, results of endoscopic resection, and survival were investigated. RESULTS: ESD was performed in 225 patients with 261 lesions, including 70 cases (26.8%) of dysplasias and 191 cases (73.2%) of squamous cell carcinomas. The median age was 65 years (range, 44 to 86), and the male to female ratio was 21.5:1. Median tumor size was 37 mm (range, 5 to 85) and median procedure time was 45 minutes (range, 9 to 160). En bloc resection was performed in 245 of 261 lesions (93.9%), with complete resection in 234 lesions (89.7%) and curative resection in 201 lesions (77.0%). Adverse events occurred in 33 cases (12.6%), including bleeding (1.5%), perforation (4.6%), and stricture (6.5%). During a median follow-up period of 35.0 months (interquartile range, 18 to 62), none of the patients showed local recurrence. The 5-year overall and disease-specific survival rates were 89.7% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ESD is a feasible and effective procedure for the treatment of SEN based on our 10-year experience, which showed favorable outcomes.

Early Esophageal Cancer Specific Survival Is Unaffected by Anatomical Location of Tumor: A Population-Based Study.

Background. Approximately one-fifth of all esophageal cancer cases are defined as early esophageal cancer (EEC). Although endoscopic therapy (ET) has been shown to be equally effective as esophagectomy (EST) in patients with EEC, there is little information comparing the survival outcomes of the two therapies based on anatomical location. Methods. A population-based study was conducted and the data was obtained from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program. Patients with EEC (i.e., stages Tis and T1a) and treated with either ET or EST were analyzed to compare EEC-related survival for three different locations of tumor. Results. The overall EEC-specific 1-year and 5-year mean (±SE) survival rates were 11.66 ± 0.05 and 52.80 ± 0.58 months, respectively. Tumors located in lower third had better 5-year survival compared to those located in middle third (83.50% versus 73.10%, p < 0.01). However, when adjusted for age, race, gender, marital status, grade, stage of tumor, histological type, and treatment modality, there was no significant difference. Conclusion. The EEC-specific 1-year or 5-year adjusted survival did not differ by anatomic location of the tumor. Therefore, ET might serve as a minimally invasive yet effective alternative to EST to treat EEC.

Risk factors for complications associated with upper gastrointestinal foreign bodies.

AIM: To investigate predictive risk factors associated with complications in the endoscopic removal of foreign bodies from the upper gastrointestinal tract. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 194 patients with a diagnosis of foreign body impaction in the upper gastrointestinal tract, confirmed by endoscopy, at two university hospital in South Korea. Patient demographic data, including age, gender, intention to ingestion, symptoms at admission, and comorbidities, were collected. Clinical features of the foreign bodies, such as type, size, sharpness of edges, number, and location, were analyzed. Endoscopic data those were analyzed included duration of foreign body impaction, duration of endoscopic performance, endoscopic device, days of hospitalization, complication rate, 30-d mortality rate, and the number of operations related to foreign body removal. RESULTS: The types of upper gastrointestinal foreign bodies included fish bones, drugs, shells, meat, metal, and animal bones. The locations of impacted foreign bodies were the upper esophagus (57.2%), mid esophagus (28.4%), stomach (10.8%), and lower esophagus (3.6%). The median size of the foreign bodies was 26.2 ± 16.7 mm. Among 194 patients, endoscopic removal was achieved in 189, and complications developed in 51 patients (26.9%). Significant complications associated with foreign body impaction and removal included deep lacerations with minor bleeding (n = 31, 16%), ulcer (n = 11, 5.7%), perforation (n = 3, 1.5%), and abscess (n = 1, 0.5%). Four patients underwent operations because of incomplete endoscopic foreign body extraction. In multivariate analyses, risk factors for endoscopic complications and failure were sharpness (HR = 2.48, 95%CI: 1.07-5.72; P = 0.034) and a greater than 12-h duration of impaction (HR = 2.42, 95%CI: 1.12-5.25, P = 0.025). CONCLUSION: In cases of longer than 12 h since foreign body ingestion or sharp-pointed objects, rapid endoscopic intervention should be provided in patients with ingested foreign bodies.

[Mechanical damage and spontaneous esophageal perforation].

The article presents the results of treatment of 95 patients with iatrogenic damages and perforations caused by other reasons and spontaneous rupture of the esophagus. A defect of the esophagus was formed in thoracic part in 67.4% cases. Combined suppurative complications such as a neck phlegmon, mediastinitis, pleural empyema, pericarditis, pneumonia and lung abscess occurred in prevalent majority of patients. Surgical interventions were performed through cervical, thoracotomical and laparoscopical accesses. Different plastic methods of covering sutures of the esophagus were used in conditions of suppurative inflammation in 33 patients. An inconsistency of sutures was noted in 6 (18.2%) cases. Postoperative lethality consisted of 34.6% in spontaneous rupture of the esophagus and it was 11.9% in case of other damages.

Endoscopic versus surgical therapy for Barrett's esophagus neoplasia.

Esophagectomy has been the traditional therapy for high-grade dysplasia and intramucosal cancer. Though surgery can completely resect the cancer and the affected lymph nodes, it carries significant morbidity and mortality (often exceeds 2%). New developments in endoscopy have provided less-invasive therapies that can also be used to stage tissue invasion of cancer; they include esophageal mucosal resection (EMR) and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Additional endoscopic therapies include photodynamic therapy, radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and argon plasma coagulation. Combining EMR that targets the cancer and RFA that targets the surrounding Barrett's esophagus offers an alternative to the operative approach when there is no lymph node metastasis. Arguments for surgical esophagectomy include concern for missed lymph node metastasis and incomplete endoscopic resection. Based on EMR's high neoplasia eradication rate and its fewer and more manageable complications, EMR, especially when combined with RFA, appears to be a viable alternative to surgery in early submucosal cancers, that is, sm1.

Limitations of endoscopic ablation in Barrett's esophagus.

In the last 5-10 years, endoscopic ablative therapies have been gaining ground as treatment for Barrett's esophagus associated with high-grade dysplasia and early cancer, and they are becoming the most preferred technique over surgery as the standard of care. These therapies are associated with a lower rate of complications and mortality than surgery; studies have found them to be safe, effective and tolerable. Endoscopic ablative therapies are not, however, without their drawbacks. There is a paucity of data on long-term efficacy, and direct comparisons of the different modalities are lacking. Unlike surgery, current data suggest that endoscopic ablation treatments may not be curative in all patients, so patients require ongoing surveillance and acid suppression. Questions remain regarding durability as well as factors promoting recurrence after endoscopic therapy. The authors conducted a systematic review of the literature on ablative therapies in Barrett's esophagus to describe the modalities currently available and to provide an understanding of their limitations.

[Perforations near the cardia in benign diseases]. / Kardianahe Perforation bei gutartigen Erkrankungen.

Esophageal perforations nearby the cardia are a clinical disorder of various causes. Perforations occur most often following diagnostic or interventional endoscopy but spontaneous perforations (Boerhaave syndrome) are less frequent. Due to the heterogeneous etiology there is a broad range of therapeutic options. In most cases the esophageal perforation site can be covered by an endoscopic stent. Recent endoscopic procedures are the intraluminal application of an endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure system (endo-VAC) or clipping of the esophageal defect. Surgical procedures include direct suturing with external coverage of the defect or transhiatal blunt dissection of the esophagus without primary reconstruction. All endoscopic and surgical procedures often require an additional drainage of the mediastinum and if necessary of the thoracic and abdominal cavities. The clinical presentation ranges from a simple perforation without concomitant esophageal pathology to a defect of considerable length with pleural perforation and associated septic multiple organ failure. The severity of the septic course is the crucial parameter for the choice of the procedure. An early multiple organ failure indicates an insufficient drainage of the septic focus and is indicative for surgical resection. The overall mortality is given as 12 % in the current literature and primarily depends on the localization and the etiology of the perforation. The highest mortality rates are observed with Boerhaave syndrome. The most important prognostic variable is the time interval between perforation and initiation of therapy whereby the mortality rises up to 20 % if the interval exceeds 24 h. Due to the complex therapy and the poor prognosis esophageal perforations should be treated in specialized centers.

The clinical research of the endoscopic sequential treatment for patients with intermediate-advanced esophageal cancer: a randomized clinical trial.

We tried to find an ideal therapeutic regimen for patients with advanced esophageal cancer. Totally 240 patients with advanced esophageal cancer were randomly divided into experimental group (endoscopic sequential treatment, 126 cases) and control group (traditional treatment, 114 cases) with a 2-year follow-up period. The experimental group was randomly divided into three subgroups: group A: local chemotherapeutic drug injection with ordinary metal stent implantation; group B: local chemotherapeutic drug injection with iodine-125 particle implantation; and group C: radiofrequency (RF) therapy with ordinary metal stent group. The control group was also randomly divided into three subgroups: group D: local chemotherapeutic drug injection group; group E: RF therapy group; and group F: common metal stent implantation group. The survival rate, survival quality, adverse reactions, and complications were compared among these groups. A significant improvement of curative effect was found in the experimental group. Group A and B had higher survival rate and survival quality, and lower esophagotracheal fistula incidence and metastasis rate, compared with group C. There was no significant difference in survival rate between group A and group B, while the quality of life was higher in group B than in group A. While patients in group B had lower esophagotracheal fistula incidence and metastasis rate comparing with group A. Local chemotherapeutic drug injection combined with iodine-125 particle stent might be an effective sequential treatment to improve the life quality of advanced esophageal cancer patients.

Endoscopic treatment of esophageal varices in patients with liver cirrhosis.

Variceal bleeding is a life-threatening complication of portal hypertension with a six-week mortality rate of approximately 20%. Patients with medium- or large-sized varices can be treated for primary prophylaxis of variceal bleeding using two strategies: non-selective beta-blockers (NSBBs) or endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL). Both treatments are equally effective. Patients with acute variceal bleeding are critically ill patients. The available data suggest that vasoactive drugs, combined with endoscopic therapy and antibiotics, are the best treatment strategy with EVL being the endoscopic procedure of choice. In cases of uncontrolled bleeding, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE)-covered stents are recommended. Approximately 60% of the patients experience rebleeding, with a mortality rate of 30%. Secondary prophylaxis should start on day six following the initial bleeding episode. The combination of NSBBs and EVL is the recommended management, whereas TIPS with PTFE-covered stents are the preferred option in patients who fail endoscopic and pharmacologic treatment. Apart from injection sclerotherapy and EVL, other endoscopic procedures, including tissue adhesives, endoloops, endoscopic clipping and argon plasma coagulation, have been used in the management of esophageal varices. However, their efficacy and safety, compared to standard endoscopic treatment, remain to be further elucidated. There are safety issues accompanying endoscopic techniques with aspiration pneumonia occurring at a rate of approximately 2.5%. In conclusion, future research is needed to improve treatment strategies, including novel endoscopic techniques with better efficacy, lower cost, and fewer adverse events.

Comparison of the long-term outcomes of endoscopic resection for superficial squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus in Japan.

OBJECTIVES: Few studies have simultaneously evaluated the long-term outcomes of endoscopic resection (ER) for squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and adenocarcinoma (AC) of the esophagus in Japan. The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of ER for superficial esophageal cancer in consecutive patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective study from a single institution. From April 2001 to June 2012, 204 patients with SCC and 26 patients with AC were included from a total of 355 consecutive patients who were treated by esophageal ER at the Tohoku University Hospital. Patients with submucosal invasion deeper than 200 µm and lymphovascular involvement were excluded. The intervention followed was endoscopic therapy. RESULTS: Overall survival, disease-free survival, and recurrence rates were evaluated as long-term outcomes. In the SCC group, during the median observation time of 36.5 months (range, 6-120 months), 22 (10.8%) patients experienced metachronous recurrence, 4 (2.0%) patients experienced local recurrence, and 27 (13.2%) patients died from causes unrelated to SCC. In the AC group, during the median observation time of 45.5 months (range, 6-131 months), one patient (3.8%) experienced metachronous recurrence and two (7.7%) died from causes unrelated to AC. The cumulative 5-year overall survival rates were not significantly different between SCC (75.9%) and AC (88.9%) (P=0.120). The cumulative 5-year disease-free survival rates of SCC (57.1%) were significantly lower than those of AC (85.2%; P=0.017). The cumulative 5-year recurrence rates of SCC (32.0%) were significantly higher than those of AC (4.2%; P=0.023). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of recurrence after ER was higher in patients with SCC than that in patients with AC. These findings suggest that, by detecting AC of the esophagus earlier, a satisfactory prognosis without recurrence can be expected after ER in Japan, and more rigorous endoscopic follow-up is necessary after ER in patients with SCC than in those with AC.

Recurrent oesophageal cancer complicated by tracheo-oesophageal fistula: improved palliation by means of parallel tracheal and oesophageal stenting.

OBJECTIVES: Recurrent oesophageal carcinoma complicated by the development of a tracheo-oesophageal fistula is a crushing condition. In this situation, endoscopic double stenting may provide a quick and safe option for palliation. METHODS: The outcomes of patients who received endoscopic parallel stent implantation for tracheo-oesophageal fistula due to recurrent oesophageal cancer at a German tertiary referral hospital between 2006 and 2013 were reviewed in a retrospective case study. RESULTS: A total of 9 patients were identified (mean age 59.9 years). Tumour entity was squamous cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma and neuroendocrine cancer of the oesophagus in 5, 3 and 1 case, respectively. The mean interval between primary treatment and recurrence was 19.2 months. Successful double-stent placement was always feasible. Complete closure of the communication between oesophagus and respiratory system was accomplished in all cases by stent implantation. There were no stent-associated complications. The mean survival following stent insertion was 64 days (6-121 days). After successful double stenting, 5 patients were fit enough to receive palliative chemo- or radiotherapy. Seven patients were finally discharged home after adequate oral intake had been achieved. Fatal aspiration pneumonia with respiratory failure occurred in 2 cases. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic parallel stent implantation provides an easy and ubiquitous available technique for closure and palliation of tracheo-oesophageal fistula caused by recurrent oesophageal cancer. Immediate sealing of the fistula and relief of symptoms related to aspiration is achieved while hazardous operations are avoided. Therefore, we recommend endoscopic parallel stent insertion as the treatment of choice in case of tracheo-oesophageal fistula caused by recurrent oesophageal cancer.