Development of a Reliable Surgical Quality Assurance System for 2-stage Esophagectomy in Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to develop a reliable surgical quality assurance system for 2-stage esophagectomy. This development was conducted during the pilot phase of the multicenter ROMIO trial, collaborating with international experts. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is evidence that the quality of surgical performance in randomized controlled trials influences clinical outcomes, quality of lymphadenectomy and loco-regional recurrence. METHODS: Standardization of 2-stage esophagectomy was based on structured observations, semi-structured interviews, hierarchical task analysis, and a Delphi consensus process. This standardization provided the structure for the operation manual and video and photographic assessment tools. Reliability was examined using generalizability theory. RESULTS: Hierarchical task analysis for 2-stage esophagectomy comprised fifty-four steps. Consensus (75%) agreement was reached on thirty-nine steps, whereas fifteen steps had a majority decision. An operation manual and record were created. A thirty five-item video assessment tool was developed that assessed the process (safety and efficiency) and quality of the end product (anatomy exposed and lymphadenectomy performed) of the operation. The quality of the end product section was used as a twenty seven-item photographic assessment tool. Thirty-one videos and fifty-three photographic series were submitted from the ROMIO pilot phase for assessment. The overall G-coefficient for the video assessment tool was 0.744, and for the photographic assessment tool was 0.700. CONCLUSIONS: A reliable surgical quality assurance system for 2-stage esophagectomy has been developed for surgical oncology randomized controlled trials. ETHICAL APPROVAL: 11/NW/0895 and confirmed locally as appropriate, 12/SW/0161, 16/SW/0098.Trial registration number: ISRCTN59036820, ISRCTN10386621.

Variation in histopathological assessment and association with surgical quality indicators following oesophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Histopathological outcomes, such as lymph node yield and margin positivity, are used to benchmark and assess surgical centre quality, and are reported annually by the National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit (NOGCA) in England and Wales. The variation in pathological specimen assessment and how this affects these outcomes is not known. METHODS: A survey of practice was circulated to all tertiary oesophagogastric cancer centres across England and Wales. Questions captured demographic data, and information on how specimens were prepared and analysed. National performance data were retrieved from the NOGCA. Survey results were compared for tertiles of lymph node yield, and circumferential and longitudinal margins. RESULTS: Survey responses were received from 32 of 37 units (86 per cent response rate), accounting for 93.1 per cent of the total oesophagectomy volume in England and Wales. Only 5 of 32 units met or exceeded current guidelines on specimen preparation according to the Royal College of Pathologists guidelines. There was wide variation in how centres defined positive (R1) margins, and how margins and lymph nodes were assessed. Centres with the highest nodal yield were more likely to use systematic fat blocking, and to re-examine specimens when the initial load was low. Systematic blocking of lesser curve fat resulted in significantly higher rates of patients with at least 15 lymph nodes examined (91.4 versus 86.5 per cent; P = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Preparation and histopathological assessment of specimens varies significantly across institutions. This challenges the validity of currently used surgical quality metrics for oesophageal and other tumours.

Does robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy have superiority over thoraco-laparoscopic minimally invasive oesophagectomy in lymph node dissection?

Although robotic techniques have been used for oesophagectomy for many years, whether robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy (RAMIE) can actually improve outcomes and surpass thoraco-laparoscopic minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIE) in the success rate of lymph node dissection remains to be empirically demonstrated. Therefore, we performed this systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies to systematically compare the effect of lymph node dissection and the incidence of vocal cord palsy between RAMIE and MIE. The PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to December 1, 2019, for case-control studies that compared RAMIE with MIE. Thirteen articles were included, with a total of 1,749 patients with esophageal cancer, including 866 patients in the RAMIE group and 883 patients in the MIE group. RAMIE yielded significantly larger numbers of total dissected lymph nodes (WMD = 1.985; 95% CI, 0.448-3.523; P = 0.011) and abdominal lymph nodes (WMD = 1.686; 95% CI, 0.420-2.951; P = 0.009) as well as lymph nodes along RLN (WMD = 0.729; 95% CI, 0.348-1.109; P < 0.001) than MIE. Additionally, RAMIE could significantly decrease estimated blood loss (WMD = -11.208; 95% CI, -19.358 to -3.058; P = 0.007) and the incidence of vocal cord palsy (OR = 0.624; 95% CI, 0.411-0.947; P = 0.027) compared to MIE. Compared with MIE, RAMIE resulted in a higher total lymph node yield and a higher lymph node yield in the abdomen and along RLN, along with reduced blood loss during surgery and the incidence of vocal cord palsy. Therefore, RAMIE could be considered to be a standard treatment, with less blood loss, lower incidence of vocal cord palsy, and more radical lymph node dissection, exhibiting superiority over MIE.

The Impact of Hospital Size on National Trends and Outcomes Following Open Esophagectomy.

Background and Objectives: Previous studies have demonstrated superior patient outcomes for thoracic oncology patients treated at high-volume surgery centers compared to low-volume centers. However, the specific role of overall hospital size in open esophagectomy morbidity and mortality remains unclear. Materials and Methods: Patients aged >18 years who underwent open esophagectomy for primary malignant neoplasia of the esophagus between 2002 and 2014 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Minimally invasive procedures were excluded. Discharges were stratified by hospital size (large, medium, and small) and analyzed using trend and multivariable regression analyses. Results: Over a 13-year period, a total of 69,840 open esophagectomy procedures were performed nationally. While the proportion of total esophagectomies performed did not vary by hospital size, in-hospital mortality trends decreased for all hospitals (large (7.2% to 3.7%), medium (12.8% vs. 4.9%), and small (12.8% vs. 4.9%)), although this was only significant for large hospitals (P < 0.01). After controlling for patient demographics, comorbidities, admission, and hospital-level factors, hospital length of stay (LOS), total inflation-adjusted costs, in-hospital mortality, and complications (cardiac, respiratory, vascular, and bleeding) did not vary by hospital size (all P > 0.05). Conclusions: After risk adjustment, patient morbidity and in-hospital mortality appear to be comparable across all institutions, including small hospitals. While there appears to be an increased push for referring patients to large hospitals, our findings suggest that there may be other factors (such as surgeon type, hospital volume, or board status) that are more likely to impact the results; these need to be further explored in the current era of episode-based care.

Significance of the board-certified surgeon systems and clinical practice guideline adherence to surgical treatment of esophageal cancer in Japan: a questionnaire survey of departments registered in the National Clinical Database.

BACKGROUND: It remains unknown how much institutional medical structure and process of implementation of clinical practice guidelines for esophageal cancers can improve quality of surgical outcome in Japan. METHODS: A web-based questionnaire survey was performed for departments registered in the National Clinical Database in Japan from October 2014 to January 2015. Quality indicators (QIs) including structure and process indicators (clinical practice guideline adherence) were evaluated on the risk-adjusted odds ratio for operative mortality (AOR) of the patients using registered cases in the database who underwent esophagectomy and reconstruction in 2013 and 2014. RESULTS: Among 916 departments which registered at least one esophagectomy case during the study period, 454 departments (49.6%) responded to the questionnaire. Analyses of 6661 cases revealed that two structure QIs (certification of training hospitals by Japan Esophageal Society and presence of board-certified esophageal surgeons) were associated with significantly lower AOR (p < 0.001 and p = 0.005, respectively). One highly recommended process QI regarding preoperative chemotherapy had strong tendency to associate with lower AOR (p = 0.053). In two process QIs, the answer "performed at the doctor's discretion" showed a significant negative impact on prognosis, suggesting importance of institutional uniformity. CONCLUSIONS: The medical institutional structure of board-certified training sites for esophageal surgeons and of participation of board-certified esophageal surgeons improves surgical outcome in Japan. Establishment of appropriate QIs and their uniform implementation would be crucial for future quality improvement of medical care in esophagectomy.

Appropriateness of the institute certification system for esophageal surgeries by the Japan Esophageal Society: evaluation of survival outcomes using data from the National Database of Hospital-Based Cancer Registries in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Since 2013, The Japan Esophageal Society has been certifying "Authorized Institute for Board Certified Esophageal Surgeon (AIBCES)" to contribute to improving national medical care by enhancing the professional knowledge and skills of esophageal surgeons. However, the appropriateness on this certification system has not yet been verified. Our aim was to assess the appropriateness of the institute certification system for esophageal surgeries used by the medical society. METHODS: Using data from the National Database of Hospital-based Cancer Registries, we analyzed the 5-year overall survival rates among 2135 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent an esophagectomy at 53 AIBCES or 141 non-AIBCES. RESULTS: There were 1343 (63%) patients who underwent surgery at an AIBCES and 792 (37%) who underwent surgery at a non-AIBCES. Registered patients were followed up for a median of 53 (range 1-88) months. Over the followed-up period examined, 670 (50%) patients treated at an AIBCES died and 455 (57%) treated at a non-AIBCES died. Comparison of the Kaplan-Meier survival curves indicated that patients with cStage II or cStage III disease treated at an AIBCES had significantly better 5-year survival rates than those treated at a non-AIBCES (55.4% vs. 44.9% and 38.0% vs. 30.3%, respectively). Univariate and multivariate analyses stratified based on stages and adjuvant therapies revealed that institute certification (AIBCES vs. non-AIBCES) is a significant independent factor for 5-year survival. CONCLUSIONS: The institute certification system used by the Japan Esophageal Society may be appropriate, as indicated by improved 5-year survival outcomes. The institute certification system has the potential to contribute to a more appropriate medical delivery system in the future.

Using textbook outcome as a measure of quality of care in oesophagogastric cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Textbook outcome is a multidimensional measure representing an ideal course after oesophagogastric cancer surgery. It comprises ten perioperative quality-of-care parameters and has been developed recently using population-based data. Its association with long-term outcome is unknown. The objectives of this study were to validate the clinical relevance of textbook outcome at a hospital level, and to assess its relation with long-term survival after treatment for oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: All patients with oesophageal or gastric cancer scheduled for surgery with curative intent between January 2009 and June 2015 were selected from an institutional database. A Cox model was used to study the association between textbook outcome and survival. RESULTS: A textbook outcome was achieved in 58 of 144 patients (40·3 per cent) with oesophageal cancer and in 48 of 105 (45·7 per cent) with gastric cancer. Factors associated with not achieving a textbook outcome were failure to achieve a lymph node yield of at least 15 (after oesophagectomy) and postoperative complications of grade II or more. After oesophagectomy, median overall survival was longer for patients with a textbook outcome than for patients without (median not reached versus 33 months; P = 0·012). After gastrectomy, median survival was 54 versus 33 months respectively (P = 0·018). In multivariable analysis, textbook outcome was associated with overall survival after oesophagectomy (hazard ratio 2·38, 95 per cent c.i. 1·29 to 4·42) and gastrectomy (hazard ratio 2·58, 1·25 to 5·32). CONCLUSION: Textbook outcome is a clinically relevant measure in patients undergoing oesophagogastric cancer surgery as it can identify underperforming parameters in a hospital setting. Overall survival in patients with a textbook outcome is better than in patients without a textbook outcome.

Optimized thoracoport design for the thoracoscopic procedure during minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy has several benefits as an effective alternative treatment for esophageal cancer. The three-phase esophageal resection may be the most popular approach to esophagectomy. Numerous thoracoport designs are available for the thoracoscopic procedure. The present study aims to contribute a distinctive three-port technique that is designed to minimize surgical trauma and facilitate operation during the thoracoscopic procedure. In this paper, we describe and demonstrate the details of the port design and each operation step. Based on our practical experience, the rational combination of the port design and instrument usage of the three-port technique makes the thorascopic procedure more convenient.

Two-Stage Indicators to Assess Learning Curves for Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) Ivor Lewis has been increasingly performed over the last two decades. To guide the implementation of this technically demanding procedure, a comprehensive assessment of MIE-Ivor Lewis learning curves should include both the general competence to accomplish the procedure and the ability to generate oncological benefits. These objectives are believed to be associated with different phases of the learning curve. METHODS: A retrospective review of the first 109 patients who underwent MIE-Ivor Lewis by a single qualified surgeon was conducted. Relevant variables were collected and assessed by regression analysis to identify suitable indicators for patient stratification and learning curve assessment. Thereafter, the differential analysis was performed among groups to validate the learning curve model. RESULTS: Two variables, intrathoracic gastroesophageal anastomosis time and bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymphadenectomy number, which plateaued, respectively, after the 26th and 88th cases, were selected as meaningful indicators to identify different competence levels. Therefore, 109 patients were chronologically subcategorized into three groups (the first 26 MIEs as the early group, the next 62 cases as the middle group, and 21 most recent cases as the late group). Perioperative data were compared between groups with positive results to indicate a three-phase model for a learning curve for MIE-Ivor Lewis. CONCLUSIONS: An MIE-Ivor Lewis learning curve should include three discrete phases that indicate, successively, unskilled operation (general competence to accomplish, less proficiency), surgical proficiency, and oncological efficacy. Intrathoracic anastomosis time and bilateral RLN lymphadenectomy were identified as suitable indicators delineate the different stages of an MIE-Ivor Lewis learning curve.

A structured training program for minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer- a Delphi consensus study in Europe.

Evidence suggests that structured training programs for laparoscopic procedures can ensure a safe standard of skill acquisition prior to independent practice. Although minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIO) is technically demanding, no consensus on requirements for training for the MIO procedure exists. The aim of this study is to determine essential steps required for a structured training program in MIO using the Delphi consensus methodology. Eighteen MIO experts from 13 European hospitals were asked to participate in this study. The consensus process consisted of two structured meetings with the expert panel, and two Delphi questionnaire rounds. A list of items required for training MIO were constructed for three key domains of MIO, including (1) requisite criteria for units wishing to be trained and (2) to proctor MIO, and (3) a framework of a MIO training program. Items were rated by the experts on a scale 1-5, where 1 signified 'not important' and 5 represented 'very important.' Consensus for each domain was defined as achieving Cronbach alpha ≥0.70. Items were considered as fundamental when ≥75% of experts rated it important (4) or very important (5). Both Delphi rounds were completed by 16 (89%) of the 18 invited experts, with a median experience of 18 years with minimally invasive surgery. Consensus was achieved for all three key domains. Following two rounds of a 107-item questionnaire, 50 items were rated as essential for training MIO. A consensus among European MIO experts on essential items required for training MIO is presented. The identified items can serve as directive principles and core standards for creating a comprehensive training program for MIO.

Surgical team proficiency in minimally invasive esophagectomy is related to case volume and improves patient outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is being increasingly performed; however, it is still associated with high morbidity and mortality. The correlation between surgical team proficiency and patient load lacks clarity. This study evaluates surgical outcomes during the first 3-year period after establishment of a new surgical team. METHODS: A new surgical team was established in September 2013 by two expert surgeons having experience of performing more than 100 MIEs. We assessed 237 consecutive patients who underwent MIE for esophageal cancer and evaluated the impact of surgical team proficiency on postoperative outcomes, as well as the team learning curve. RESULTS: In the cumulative sum analysis, a point of downward inflection for operative time and blood loss was observed in case 175. After 175 cases, both operative time and blood loss significantly decreased (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively), and postoperative incidence of pneumonia significantly decreased from 18.9 to 6.5% (P = 0.024). Median postoperative hospital stay also decreased from 20 to 18 days (P = 0.022). Additionally, serum CRP levels on postoperative day 1 showed a significant, but weak inverse association with the number of cases (P = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: After 175 cases, both operative time and blood loss significantly decreased. In addition, the incidence of pneumonia decreased significantly. Additionally, surgical team proficiency may decrease serum CRP levels immediately after MIE. Surgical team proficiency based on team experience had beneficial effects on patients undergoing MIE.

Defining Benchmarks for Transthoracic Esophagectomy: A Multicenter Analysis of Total Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Low Risk Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To define "best possible" outcomes in total minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy (ttMIE). BACKGROUND: TtMIE, performed by experts in patients with low comorbidity, may serve as a benchmark procedure for esophagectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a cohort of 1057 ttMIE, performed over a 5-year period in 13 high-volume centers for esophageal surgery, we selected a study group of 334 patients (31.6%) that fulfilled criteria of low comorbidity (American Society of Anesthesiologists score ≤2, WHO/ECOG score ≤1, age ≤65 years, body mass index 19-29 kg/m). Endpoints included postoperative morbidity measured by the Clavien-Dindo classification and the comprehensive complication index. Benchmark values were defined as the 75th percentile of the median outcome parameters of the participating centers to represent best achievable results. RESULTS: Benchmark patients were predominantly male (82.9%) with a median age of 58 years (53-62). High intrathoracic (Ivor Lewis) and cervical esophagogastrostomy (McKeown) were performed in 188 (56.3%) and 146 (43.7%) patients, respectively. Median (IQR) ICU and hospital stay was 0 (0-2) and 12 (9-18) days, respectively. 56.0% of patients developed at least 1 complication, and 26.9% experienced major morbidity (≥grade III), mostly related to pulmonary complications (25.7%), anastomotic leakage (15.9%), and cardiac events (13.5%). Benchmark values at 30 days after hospital discharge were ≤55.7% and ≤30.8% for overall and major complications, ≤18.0% for readmission, ≤3.1% for positive resection margins, and ≥23 for lymph node yield. Benchmarks at 30 and 90 days were ≤1.0% and ≤4.6% for mortality, and ≤40.8 and ≤42.8 for the comprehensive complication index, respectively. CONCLUSION: This outcome analysis of patients with low comorbidity undergoing ttMIE may serve as a reference to evaluate surgical performance in major esophageal resection.

Textbook outcome as a composite measure in oesophagogastric cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Quality assurance is acknowledged as a crucial factor in the assessment of oncological surgical care. The aim of this study was to develop a composite measure of multiple outcome parameters defined as 'textbook outcome', to assess quality of care for patients undergoing oesophagogastric cancer surgery. METHODS: Patients with oesophagogastric cancer, operated on with the intent of curative resection between 2011 and 2014, were identified from a national database (Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit). Textbook outcome was defined as the percentage of patients who underwent a complete tumour resection with at least 15 lymph nodes in the resected specimen and an uneventful postoperative course, without hospital readmission. Hospital variation in textbook outcome was analysed after adjustment for case-mix factors. RESULTS: In total, 2748 patients with oesophageal cancer and 1772 with gastric cancer were included in this study. A textbook outcome was achieved in 29·7 per cent of patients with oesophageal cancer and 32·1 per cent of those with gastric cancer. Adjusted textbook outcome rates varied from 8·5 to 52·4 per cent between hospitals. The outcome parameter 'at least 15 lymph nodes examined' had the greatest negative impact on a textbook outcome both for patients with oesophageal cancer and for those with gastric cancer. CONCLUSION: Most patients did not achieve a textbook outcome and there was wide variation between hospitals.

Quality and outcomes of synchronous two-team Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy: Revisiting a variant technique.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In 1975, a modification of popular two-stage Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy was published with synchronous resection in chest and abdomen. As data on this technique are rare and inconsistent, we aimed to investigate safety, feasibility, and outcome of this approach. METHODS: Outcome of 201 patients undergoing synchronous oesophagectomy from 2000 to 2013 was analysed retrospectively. Two groups (early: 2000-2006; late: 2007-2013) were analysed to allow comparison of outcome over time. RESULTS: Patients in the later period had fewer respiratory comorbidities (P = 0.010), median blood loss decreased significantly over time while lymph node yield increased (P < 0.001). Overall complications occurred in 58.9 (early) versus 51.7% (late) of patients (P = 0.320), anastomotic leaks in 14.3 versus 6.7% (P = 0.112), respiratory complications in 48.2 versus 34.8% (P = 0.063). Thirty-day/90-day mortality was 2.7% versus 3.4, respectively, 8.1% versus 6.8% (P ≤ 0.793). Long-term survival was better in the later cohort (P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Our data of 201 patients over a period of 14 years suggests that this technique is a quick, feasible, safe, and reasonable alternative to standard two-stage Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy. Quality of this approach and ultimate outcomes have improved over time, with similar complication rates/outcomes to literature accepted standards for two-stage approach, especially in the later time period. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:719-724. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Assessment of the quality of surgery within randomised controlled trials for the treatment of gastro-oesophageal cancer: a systematic review.

Multicentre, randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) provide level 1 evidence for surgery in the treatment of gastro-oesophageal cancer. This systematic review investigated whether standardisation of surgical techniques in RCTs reduces the variation in lymph-node harvest, in-hospital mortality, and locoregional cancer recurrence. The range in the coefficients of variation for lymph-node harvest (0.07-0.61), proportion of patients with locoregional cancer recurrence (1.1-46.2%), and in-hospital mortality (0-10%) was wide. Credentialing of surgeons through assessment of operative reports and monitoring of their performance through data collection were important factors that reduced the variation in lymph-node harvest. Factors that reduced adjusted in-hospital mortality included credentialing surgeons through procedural volume and operative reports, and standardisation of surgical techniques. Future RCTs should include an assessment of surgical performance as an important aspect of study design to reduce variation in clinical outcomes.

The 30-day versus in-hospital and 90-day mortality after esophagectomy as indicators for quality of care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe causes of death in the first year after esophagectomy and determine the time frame that should be used for measurement of quality of surgery. A case-mix adjustment model was developed for the comparison between hospitals. BACKGROUND: The time period in which postoperative mortality should be measured as a performance indicator is debated. METHODS: Cause of death was identified for patients in a tertiary referral hospital who died within 1 year after surgery and classified as surgery related or not surgery related. Sensitivity and specificity for detecting deaths related to surgery were calculated for different periods of follow-up. Case-mix adjustment models for 30-day mortality (30DM), in-hospital mortality, and 90-day mortality (90DM) were developed. RESULTS: In total, 1282 patients underwent esophagectomy. 30DM was 2.9%, the in-hospital mortality rate was 5.1% and 90DM was 7%. Beyond 30 days, a substantial number of deaths were related to the operation, especially due to anastomotic leakage. Postdischarge nononcological mortality was most frequently caused by sudden death. One in 5 patients died because of recurrent disease, being the most important threat in the first year after surgery. The 30DM had a sensitivity for detecting surgery-related deaths of 33% and a specificity of 100%. The 90DM had a sensitivity of 74% and a specificity of 96%. CONCLUSIONS: A period of postoperative follow-up longer than 30 days needs to be considered when comparing surgical performance between institutes. In the case-mix adjustment model for 90DM, no other variables have to be taken into account compared to those involved in 30DM.

What should be the gold standard for the surgical component in the treatment of locally advanced esophageal cancer: transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze survival differences between transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) and limited transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) in clinically (cT3) and pathologically (pT3) staged advanced tumors without neoadjuvant treatment. BACKGROUND: Debate exists whether in the type of resection in locally advanced cancer plays a role in prognosis and whether THE is a valuable alternative to TTE regarding oncological doctrine and overall survival. METHODS: In a retrospective study of 2 high-volume centers, 468 patients with cT3NXM0 esophageal cancer, including 242 (51.7%) squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) and 226 (48.3%) adenocarcinomas (ACs), were analyzed. A total of 341 (72.9%) TTE and 127 (27.1%) THE were performed. We used the propensity score matching to build comparable groups. Primary endpoint was the overall survival; secondary endpoints included resection status and lymph node yield. RESULTS: TTE achieved a higher rate of R0 resections (86.2% vs 73.2%; P = 0.001) and a higher median lymph node yield (27.0 ± 12.4 vs 17.0 ± 6.4; P < 0.001) than THE. Thirty-day mortality rate was 6.6% (8/121) for TTE and 7.4% (9/121) for THE (P = 0.600). In the matched groups, TTE was beneficial for pT3 SCC (P = 0.004), pT3 AC (P = 0.029), cT3 SCC (P = 0.018), and cT3 AC (P = 0.028) patients. TTE was either beneficial in pN2 disease for cT3 AC + SCC or pT3 SCC but not for pT3 AC patients, without nodal stratification in pT3 and cT3 SCC node-positive patients. On multivariable analysis, TTE remained an independent factor for survival. CONCLUSIONS: Extended TTE achieved a higher rate of R0 resections, a higher lymph node yield, and resulted in a prolonged survival than THE in pT3, cT3, and node-positive patients.

Assistant-based standardization of prone position thoracoscopic esophagectomy.

Thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position (TEPP) might enable solo-surgery in cases requiring resection of the esophagus and the surrounding lymph nodes due to the associated advantages of good exposure of the surgical field and ergonomic considerations for the surgeon. However, no one approach can be for all patients requiring extensive lymphadenectomy. We recently developed an assistant-based procedure to standardize exposure of the surgical field. Patients were divided into 1 of 2 groups:a pre-standardization group (n=37) and a post-standardization group (n=28). The thoracoscopic operative time was significantly shorter (p=0.0037) in the post-standardization group (n=28; 267 ± 31 min) than in the pre-standardization group (n=37;301 ± 53 min). Further, learning curve analysis using the moving average method showed stabilization of the thoracoscopic operative time after the standardization. No significant differences were found in the number of mediastinal lymph nodes dissected or intraoperative blood loss between the 2 groups. There were also no significant differences in the complication rate. Assistant-based surgery and standardization of the procedure resulted in a well-exposed and safe surgical field. TEPP decreased the operative time, even in patients requiring extensive lymphadenectomy.

The influence of circumferential resection margin status on loco-regional recurrence in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: To analyze treatment outcomes and patterns of recurrence, and to examine the impact of adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy (PORT) after esophagectomy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) regarding the status of circumferential resection margin (CRM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of esophageal cancer patients operated in Seoul National University Hospital between 2003 and 2010. Pathologically proven T3 SqCC patients with written reports mentioning the status of CRM were selected. Fifty-nine out of 71 patients (83.1%) had CRM+. Twenty-eight patients had radiotherapy in CRM+ and CRM-, respectively. The median follow-up period was 17.1 months (range: 5.2-63.1). RESULTS: Median survival and 2-year overall survival were 13.8 months and 41.9% in CRM+, and 27.3 months and 74.1% in CRM-, respectively. Loco-regional relapse-free survival (LRRFS) rate at 2 years was 33.6% and 74.1% in each groups (P = 0.029). Loco-regional recurrence was the major pattern of failure in CRM+. PORT did not improve LRRFS. CONCLUSION: The esophageal SqCC patients with CRM+ after resection showed worse LRRFS. This finding validated the prognostic value of CRM status. Nevertheless, we failed to demonstrate the benefits of adjuvant PORT in CRM+. This might suggest the necessity of neoadjuvant therapy to decrease the CRM+ rate after esophagectomy.