Impact of Early Jejunostomy Tube Feeding on Clinical Outcome and Parameters of Body Composition in Esophageal Cancer Patients Receiving Multimodal Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition commonly affects patients with esophageal cancer and has the potential to negatively influence treatment outcomes. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of early (preoperative) jejunostomy tube feeding (JTF) in nutritionally 'high risk' patients receiving multimodal therapy for esophageal cancer. METHODS: Patients were selected to undergo early JTF during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in accordance with European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS®) Society guidelines. Clinical outcomes were compared with patients who received routine JTF from the time of esophagectomy. Body composition was determined from computed tomography (CT) images acquired at diagnosis, after nCRT, and ≥ 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: In total, 81 patients received early JTF and 91 patients received routine JTF. Patients who received early JTF had lower body mass index (BMI; 26.1 ± 4.6 vs. 28.4 ± 4.9; p = 0.002), greater weight loss, and worse performance status at diagnosis. Groups were otherwise well-matched for baseline characteristics. Rate of re-intubation (8.8% vs. 1.1%; p = 0.027), pulmonary embolism (5.0% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.046), and 90-day mortality (10.0% vs. 1.1%; p = 0.010) were worse in the early JTF group; however, overall survival was equivalent for both the early and routine JTF groups (p = 0.053). Wide variation in the degree of preoperative muscle loss and total adipose tissue loss was observed across the entire study cohort. Relative preoperative muscle and adipose tissue loss in patients with early and routine JTF was equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: In patients determined to be at 'high risk' of malnutrition, early JTF may prevent excess morbidity after esophagectomy with an associated relative preservation of parameters of body composition.

Liver Resection for Hepatic Metastases from Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A Nationwide Study.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and safety of resection of sarcoma liver metastases, and to identify possible prognostic factors for long-term survival. METHODS: All patients who underwent resection of liver metastases of sarcoma in the Netherlands from 1998 to 2014 were included. Study data was retrospectively collected from patient files. Survival rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: Some 38 patients treated in 16 hospitals were included (15 male, 23 female). The median age was 57 years (37-80 years). The most common histological subtype was leiomyosarcoma (63%). The predominant site of primary tumour was the abdomen (59%). R0 resection was achieved in 16 patients. Mortality was 3 and 16% of included patients had 1 or more complications. The median follow-up period was 18 months (range 1-161). After liver resection, 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival were 88, 54, and 42% respectively. Median overall survival was 46 months (1-161 months). One- and three-year progression-free survival (PFS) after liver resection were 54 and 19% respectively. Median PFS was 16 months (1-61 months). CONCLUSIONS: Liver surgery for sarcoma metastases is safe and leads to a relatively good survival. The choice for surgical treatment should always be discussed in a multidisciplinary sarcoma and liver team.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis of semiprone versus prone position.

BACKGROUND: The preferred surgical approach for esophageal cancer is a minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy with a two-field lymph node dissection. The thoracoscopic phase may be performed either in prone- or in left lateral decubitus (LLD) position. Prone positioning has been associated with better pulmonary outcomes compared to LLD positioning; however, conversion to a classic thoracotomy is more difficult. The semiprone position has been proposed as an alternative approach. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database (2008-2014) was performed to compare postoperative complications, surgical radicality, and lymph node yield between patients who underwent three-stage minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy in either the prone or semiprone position. Comparative analyses were conducted before and after propensity score matching. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-one patients were included. In total, 82 patients underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in semiprone position and 39 patients in prone position. After propensity score matching, both groups consisted of 39 patients. The operative time in the semiprone group was longer (368 vs. 225 min, P < 0.001) and in this group the lymph node yield was significantly higher (16 (range 6-80) vs. 13 (range 3-33), P = 0.019). There were no statistically significant differences regarding radical resections, postoperative complications, and hospital stay. CONCLUSION: The use of semiprone positioning in MIE is safe, feasible, and at least comparable to MIE in prone position in terms of oncological clearance and postoperative complications.

A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of Open Versus Minimally Invasive Transthoracic Esophagectomy in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare open esophagectomy (OE) with minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in a population-based setting. BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies have shown that MIE is associated with reduced pulmonary complications and shorter hospital stay as compared to OE. METHODS: Patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer between 2011 and 2015 were selected from the national Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit. Hybrid, transhiatal, and emergency procedures were excluded. Patients who underwent OE were compared with those treated by MIE. Propensity score matching was used to correct for differences in baseline characteristics. The primary endpoint was postoperative pulmonary complications; secondary endpoints were morbidity, mortality, convalescence, and pathology. RESULTS: Some 1727 patients were included. After propensity score matching the percentage of patients with 1 or more complications was 62.6% after OE (N = 433) and 60.2% after MIE (N = 433) (P = 0.468). Pulmonary complication rate did not differ between groups: 34.2% (OE) versus 35.6% (MIE) (P = 0.669). Anastomotic leak (15.5% vs 21.2%, P = 0.028) and reintervention rates (21.1% vs 28.2%, P = 0.017) were higher after MIE. Mortality was 3.0% in the OE group and 4.7% in the MIE group (P = 0.209). Median hospital stay was shorter after MIE (14 vs 13 days, P = 0.001). Percentages of R0 resections (93%) did not differ between groups. The median (range) lymph node count was 18 (2-53) (OE) versus 20 (2-52) (MIE) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This population-based study showed that mortality and pulmonary complications were similar for OE and MIE. Anastomotic leaks and reinterventions were more frequently observed after MIE. MIE was associated with a shorter hospital stay.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer, a multicenter prospectively randomized controlled trial (LOGICA-trial).

BACKGROUND: For gastric cancer patients, surgical resection with en-bloc lymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of curative treatment. Open gastrectomy has long been the preferred surgical approach worldwide. However, this procedure is associated with considerable morbidity. Several meta-analyses have shown an advantage in short-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy compared to open procedures, with similar oncologic outcomes. However, it remains unclear whether the results of these Asian studies can be extrapolated to the Western population. In this trial from the Netherlands, patients with resectable gastric cancer will be randomized to laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. METHODS: The study is a non-blinded, multicenter, prospectively randomized controlled superiority trial. Patients (≥18 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0-3b, M0) gastric adenocarcinoma and European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 are eligible to participate in the study after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 210) will be included in one of the ten participating Dutch centers and are randomized to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. The primary outcome is postoperative hospital stay (days). Secondary outcome parameters include postoperative morbidity and mortality, oncologic outcomes, readmissions, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: In this randomized controlled trial laparoscopic and open gastrectomy are compared in patients with resectable gastric cancer. It is expected that laparoscopic gastrectomy will result in a faster recovery of the patient and a shorter hospital stay. Secondly, it is expected that laparoscopic gastrectomy will be associated with a lower postoperative morbidity, less readmissions, higher cost-effectiveness, better postoperative quality of life, but with similar mortality and oncologic outcomes, compared to open gastrectomy. The study started on 1 December 2014. Inclusion and follow-up will take 3 and 5 years respectively. Short-term results will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02248519.

Exploring the Modulatory Effect of High-Fat Nutrition on Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Acute Lung Injury in Vagotomized Rats and the Role of the Vagus Nerve.

During esophagectomy, the vagus nerve is transected, which may add to the development of postoperative complications. The vagus nerve has been shown to attenuate inflammation and can be activated by a high-fat nutrition via the release of acetylcholine. This binds to α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (α7nAChR) and inhibits α7nAChR-expressing inflammatory cells. This study investigates the role of the vagus nerve and the effect of high-fat nutrition on lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced lung injury in rats. Firstly, 48 rats were randomized in 4 groups as follows: sham (sparing vagus nerve), abdominal (selective) vagotomy, cervical vagotomy and cervical vagotomy with an α7nAChR-agonist. Secondly, 24 rats were randomized in 3 groups as follows: sham, sham with an α7nAChR-antagonist and cervical vagotomy with an α7nAChR-antagonist. Finally, 24 rats were randomized in 3 groups as follows: fasting, high-fat nutrition before sham and high-fat nutrition before selective vagotomy. Abdominal (selective) vagotomy did not impact histopathological lung injury (LIS) compared with the control (sham) group (p > 0.999). There was a trend in aggravation of LIS after cervical vagotomy (p = 0.051), even after an α7nAChR-agonist (p = 0.090). Cervical vagotomy with an α7nAChR-antagonist aggravated lung injury (p = 0.004). Furthermore, cervical vagotomy increased macrophages in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid and negatively impacted pulmonary function. Other inflammatory cells, TNF-α and IL-6, in the BALF and serum were unaffected. High-fat nutrition reduced LIS after sham (p = 0.012) and selective vagotomy (p = 0.002) compared to fasting. vagotomy. This study underlines the role of the vagus nerve in lung injury and shows that vagus nerve stimulation using high-fat nutrition is effective in reducing lung injury, even after selective vagotomy.

Pain and Opioid Consumption After Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Secondary Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial (LOGICA-Trial).

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic gastrectomy could reduce pain and opioid consumption, compared to open gastrectomy. However, it is difficult to judge the clinical relevance of this reduction, since these outcomes are reported in few randomized trials and in limited detail. METHODS: This secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial compared laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0). Postoperative pain was analyzed by opioid consumption in oral morphine equivalents (OME, mg/day) at postoperative day (POD) 1-5, WHO analgesic steps, and Numeric Rating Scales (NRS, 0-10) at POD 1-10 and discharge. Regression and mixed model analyses were performed, with and without correction for epidural analgesia. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2018, 115 patients in the laparoscopic group and 110 in the open group underwent surgery. Some 16 patients (14%) in the laparoscopic group and 73 patients (66%) in the open group received epidural analgesia. At POD 1-3, mean opioid consumption was 131, 118, and 53 mg OME lower in the laparoscopic group, compared to the open group, respectively (all p < 0.001). After correcting for epidural analgesia, these differences remained significant at POD 1-2 (47 mg OME, p = 0.002 and 69 mg OME, p < 0.001, respectively). At discharge, 27% of patients in the laparoscopic group and 43% patients in the open group used oral opioids (p = 0.006). Mean highest daily pain scores were between 2 and 4 at all PODs, < 2 at discharge, and did not relevantly differ between treatment arms. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter randomized trial, postoperative pain was comparable between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. After laparoscopic gastrectomy, this was generally achieved without epidural analgesia and with fewer opioids. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02248519.

Cost-effectiveness of Laparoscopic vs Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: An Economic Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Laparoscopic gastrectomy is rapidly being adopted worldwide as an alternative to open gastrectomy to treat gastric cancer. However, laparoscopic gastrectomy might be more expensive as a result of longer operating times and more expensive surgical materials. To date, the cost-effectiveness of both procedures has not been prospectively evaluated in a randomized clinical trial. Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic compared with open gastrectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter randomized clinical trial of patients undergoing total or distal gastrectomy in 10 Dutch tertiary referral centers, cost-effectiveness data were collected alongside a multicenter randomized clinical trial on laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0). A modified societal perspective and 1-year time horizon were used. Costs were calculated on the individual patient level by using hospital registry data and medical consumption and productivity loss questionnaires. The unit costs of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy were calculated bottom-up. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated with the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire, in which a value of 0 indicates death and 1 indicates perfect health. Missing questionnaire data were imputed with multiple imputation. Bootstrapping was performed to estimate the uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness. The study was conducted from March 17, 2015, to August 20, 2018. Data analyses were performed between September 1, 2020, and November 17, 2021. Interventions: Laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Evaluations in this cost-effectiveness analysis included total costs and QALYs. Results: Between 2015 and 2018, 227 patients were included. Mean (SD) age was 67.5 (11.7) years, and 140 were male (61.7%). Unit costs for initial surgery were calculated to be €8124 (US $8087) for laparoscopic total gastrectomy, €7353 (US $7320) for laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, €6584 (US $6554) for open total gastrectomy, and €5893 (US $5866) for open distal gastrectomy. Mean total costs after 1-year follow-up were €26 084 (US $25 965) in the laparoscopic group and €25 332 (US $25 216) in the open group (difference, €752 [US $749; 3.0%]). Mean (SD) QALY contributions during 1 year were 0.665 (0.298) in the laparoscopic group and 0.686 (0.288) in the open group (difference, -0.021). Bootstrapping showed that these differences between treatment groups were relatively small compared with the uncertainty of the analysis. Conclusions and Relevance: Although the laparoscopic gastrectomy itself was more expensive, after 1-year follow-up, results suggest that differences in both total costs and effectiveness were limited between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. These results support centers' choosing, based on their own preference, whether to (de)implement laparoscopic gastrectomy as an alternative to open gastrectomy.

Body Composition Is a Predictor for Postoperative Complications After Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: a Prospective Side Study of the LOGICA Trial.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of prospective studies evaluating the effects of body composition on postoperative complications after gastrectomy in a Western population with predominantly advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: This is a prospective side study of the LOGICA trial, a multicenter randomized trial on laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Trial patients who received preoperative chemotherapy followed by gastrectomy with an available preoperative restaging abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan were included. The CT scan was used to calculate the mass (M) and radiation attenuation (RA) of skeletal muscle (SM), visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT). These variables were expressed as Z-scores, depicting how many standard deviations each patient's CT value differs from the sex-specific study sample mean. Primary outcome was the association of each Z-score with the occurrence of a major postoperative complication (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3b). RESULTS: From 2015 to 2018, a total of 112 patients were included. A major postoperative complication occurred in 9 patients (8%). A high SM-M Z-score was associated with a lower risk of major postoperative complications (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.28-0.78, p = 0.004). Furthermore, high VAT-RA Z-scores and SAT-RA Z-scores were associated with a higher risk of major postoperative complications (RR 2.82, 95% CI 1.52-5.23, p = 0.001 and RR 1.95, 95% CI 1.14-3.34, p = 0.015, respectively). VAT-M, SAT-M, and SM-RA Z-scores showed no significant associations. CONCLUSION: Preoperative low skeletal muscle mass and high visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue radiation attenuation (indicating fat depleted of triglycerides) were associated with a higher risk of developing a major postoperative complication in patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy followed by gastrectomy.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer (LOGICA): A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The oncological efficacy and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy are under debate for the Western population with predominantly advanced gastric cancer undergoing multimodality treatment. METHODS: In 10 experienced upper GI centers in the Netherlands, patients with resectable (cT1-4aN0-3bM0) gastric adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. No masking was performed. The primary outcome was hospital stay. Analyses were performed by intention to treat. It was hypothesized that laparoscopic gastrectomy leads to shorter hospital stay, less postoperative complications, and equal oncological outcomes. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2018, a total of 227 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopic (n = 115) or open gastrectomy (n = 112). Preoperative chemotherapy was administered to 77 patients (67%) in the laparoscopic group and 87 patients (78%) in the open group. Median hospital stay was 7 days (interquartile range, 5-9) in both groups (P = .34). Median blood loss was less in the laparoscopic group (150 v 300 mL, P < .001), whereas mean operating time was longer (216 v 182 minutes, P < .001). Both groups did not differ regarding postoperative complications (44% v 42%, P = .91), in-hospital mortality (4% v 7%, P = .40), 30-day readmission rate (9.6% v 9.1%, P = 1.00), R0 resection rate (95% v 95%, P = 1.00), median lymph node yield (29 v 29 nodes, P = .49), 1-year overall survival (76% v 78%, P = .74), and global health-related quality of life up to 1 year postoperatively (mean differences between + 1.5 and + 3.6 on a 1-100 scale; 95% CIs include zero). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic gastrectomy did not lead to a shorter hospital stay in this Western multicenter randomized trial of patients with predominantly advanced gastric cancer. Postoperative complications and oncological efficacy did not differ between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy.

New-onset atrial fibrillation after esophagectomy for cancer.

Esophagectomy with en-bloc lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy is the standard of care for resectable locally advanced esophageal cancer. Postoperative complications may have a significant impact on the duration of hospital stay and quality of life. Early recognition and treatment of complications may reduce failure to rescue rates and improve postoperative outcomes. New-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) after esophagectomy for cancer is frequently observed, and may be related to other postoperative complications. AF could function as an early warning sign for other complications in the postoperative course after esophagectomy and may thus be of clinical value. This review discusses the pathophysiology and possible risk factors of AF, the association between AF and other postoperative complications, and the influence of AF on postoperative outcomes after esophagectomy for cancer. Furthermore, clinical recommendations for the management of new-onset AF after esophagectomy for cancer are provided.

Reducing pulmonary complications after esophagectomy for cancer.

The cornerstone of curative care for esophageal cancer is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by esophagectomy with a radical lymphadenectomy. An esophagectomy is a major and complex surgical procedure and is often followed by postoperative morbidity, especially pulmonary complications. These complications may lead to an increase in hospital stay, intensive care unit admission rate and mortality. Therefore, perioperative strategies to reduce these complications have been investigated and implemented in clinical practice. In this review we highlight the influence of minimally invasive surgery, postoperative pain management, early identification of complications and the usage of uniform definitions on (pulmonary) complications after esophagectomy. Finally, we will discuss some future perspectives.

Recurrent laryngeal nerve injury after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: incidence, management, and impact on short- and long-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) injury caused by esophagectomy may lead to postoperative morbidity, however data on long-term recovery are scarce. The aim of this study was to evaluate the consequences of RLN palsy (RLNP) in terms of pulmonary morbidity and long-term functional recovery. METHODS: Patients who underwent a 3-stage transthoracic (McKeown) or a transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma in the University Medical Center Utrecht (UMCU) between January 2004 and March 2016 were included from a prospective database. Multivariable analyses were conducted to assess the association between RLNP and pulmonary complications and hospital stay. Data regarding long-term recovery were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Out of the 451 included patients, 47 (10%) were diagnosed with RLNP. Of the patients with RLNP, 34 (7%) had a unilateral lesion, 8 (2%) had a bilateral lesion, and in 5 (1%) the location of the lesion was unknown. The incidence of RLNP was 3/127 (2%) in the transhiatal group, and 44/324 (14%) in the McKeown group. RLNP after McKeown esophagectomy was associated with a higher incidence of pulmonary complications (OR 2.391; 95% CI 1.222-4.679; P=0.011), as well as a longer hospital stay (+4 days) (P=0.001). Of the RLNP patients with more than 6 months follow up almost half recovered fully {median follow-up of 17.5 [7-135] months}. Of the remainder, six required a surgical intervention and the others had residual symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: RLNP after McKeown esophagectomy is associated with an increased pulmonary complication rate, longer hospital stay, and a moderate long-term recovery. Further studies are necessary that examine technologies, which may reduce RLNP incidence and contribute to the early detection and treatment of RLNP.

Internal and External Validation of a multivariable Model to Define Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia After Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Pneumonia is an important complication following esophagectomy; however, a wide range of pneumonia incidence is reported. The lack of one generally accepted definition prevents valid inter-study comparisons. We aimed to simplify and validate an existing scoring model to define pneumonia following esophagectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The Utrecht Pneumonia Score, comprising of pulmonary radiography findings, leucocyte count, and temperature, was simplified and internally validated using bootstrapping in the dataset (n = 185) in which it was developed. Subsequently, the intercept and (shrunk) coefficients of the developed multivariable logistic regression model were applied to an external dataset (n = 201) RESULTS: In the revised Uniform Pneumonia Score, points are assigned based on the temperature, the leucocyte, and the findings of pulmonary radiography. The model discrimination was excellent in the internal validation set and in the external validation set (C-statistics 0.93 and 0.91, respectively); furthermore, the model calibrated well in both cohorts. CONCLUSION: The revised Uniform Pneumonia Score (rUPS) can serve as a means to define post-esophagectomy pneumonia. Utilization of a uniform definition for pneumonia will improve inter-study comparability and improve the evaluations of new therapeutic strategies to reduce the pneumonia incidence.