Impact of Thoracic Duct Resection on Long-Term Survival After Esophagectomy: Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Radical esophagectomy, including thoracic duct resection (TDR), has been proposed to improve regional lymphadenectomy and possibly reduce the risk of locoregional recurrence. However, because of its impact on immunoregulation, some authors have expressed concerns about its possible detrimental effect on long-term survival. The purpose of this review was to assess the influence of TDR on long-term survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched through 15 March 2024. Overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS) were primary outcomes. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), risk ratio (RR), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology was employed to evaluate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: The analysis included six studies with 5756 patients undergoing transthoracic esophagectomy. TDR was reported in 49.1%. Patients' ages ranged from 27 to 79 years and 86% were males. At 4-year follow-up, the multivariate meta-analysis showed similar results for the comparison noTDR versus TDR in term of OS [- 0.8 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 3.1, 1.3], CSS (0.1 months, 95% CI - 0.9, 1.2), and DFS (1.5 months, 95% CI - 2.6, 5.5). TDR was associated with a significantly higher number of harvested mediastinal lymph nodes (SMD 0.57, 95% CI 0.01-1.13) and higher risk of postoperative chylothorax (RR = 1.32; 95% CI 1.04-2.23). Anastomotic leak and pulmonary complications were comparable. CONCLUSIONS: TDR seems not to improve long-term OS, CSS, and DFS regardless of tumor stage. Routine TDR should not be routinely recommended during esophagectomy.

Short-Term Outcomes Analysis Comparing Open, Laparoscopic, Laparoscopic-Assisted, and Robotic Distal Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Randomized Trials Network Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery for the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) is debated. The aim of this study was to execute a comprehensive assessment of principal surgical treatments for resectable distal gastric cancer. METHODS: Systematic review and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) network meta-analysis. Open (Op-DG), laparoscopic-assisted (LapAs-DG), totally laparoscopic (Lap-DG), and robotic distal gastrectomy (Rob-DG) were compared. Pooled effect-size measures were the risk ratio (RR), the weighted mean difference (WMD), and the 95% credible intervals (CrIs). RESULTS: Ten RCTs (3823 patients) were included. Overall, 1012 (26.5%) underwent Lap-DG, 902 (23.6%) LapAs-DG, 1768 (46.2%) Op-DG, and 141 (3.7%) Rob-DG. Anastomotic leak, severe complications (Clavien-Dindo > 3), and in-hospital mortality were comparable. No differences were observed for reoperation rate, pulmonary complications, postoperative bleeding requiring transfusion, surgical-site infection, cardiovascular complications, number of harvested lymph nodes, and tumor-free resection margins. Compared to Op-DG, Lap-DG and LapAs-DG showed a significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss with a trend toward shorter time to first flatus and reduced length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: LapAs-DG, Lap-DG, and Rob-DG performed in referral centers by dedicated surgeons have comparable short-term outcomes to Op-DG for locally AGC.

Does Thoracic Duct Ligation at the Time of Esophagectomy Impact Long-Term Survival? An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis.

Background: Thoracic duct ligation (TDL) during esophagectomy has been proposed to reduce the risk of postoperative chylothorax. Because of its role in immunoregulation, some authors argued that it had an unfavorable TDL effect on survival. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of TDL on overall survival (OS). Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through December 2023. The primary outcome was 5-year OS. The restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), hazard ratios (HRs), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. The GRADE methodology was used to summarize the certainty of the evidence. Results: Five studies (3291 patients) were included. TDL was reported in 54% patients. The patients' age ranged from 49 to 69, 76% were males, and BMI ranged from 18 to 26. At the 5-year follow-up, the combined effect from the multivariate meta-analysis is -3.5 months (95% CI -6.1, -0.8) indicating that patients undergoing TDL lived 3.5 months less compared to those without TDL. TDL was associated with a significantly higher hazard for mortality at 12 months (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.38-1.73), 24 months (HR 1.21, 95% CI 1.12-1.35), and 28 months (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.28). TDL and noTDL seem comparable in terms of the postoperative risk for chylothorax (RR = 0.66; p = 0.35). Conclusions: In this study, concurrent TDL was associated with reduced 5-year OS after esophagectomy. This may suggest the need of a rigorous follow-up within the first two years of follow-up.

Is previous radical prostatectomy a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair? A contemporary meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Traditionally, radical prostatectomy (RP) has been considered a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair. Purpose of this systematic review was to examine the current evidence and outcomes of minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair after RP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Web of Science, PubMed, and EMBASE data sets were consulted. Laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal repair (TAPP), robotic TAPP (r-TAPP), and totally extraperitoneal (TEP) repair were included. RESULTS: Overall, 4655 patients (16 studies) undergoing TAPP, r-TAPP, and TEP inguinal hernia repair after RP were included. The age of the patients ranged from 35 to 85 years. Open (49.1%), laparoscopic (7.4%), and robotic (43.5%) RP were described. Primary unilateral hernia repair was detailed in 96.3% of patients while 2.8% of patients were operated for recurrence. The pooled prevalence of intraoperative complication was 0.7% (95% CI 0.2-3.4%). Bladder injury and epigastric vessels bleeding were reported. The pooled prevalence of conversion to open was 0.8% (95% CI 0.3-1.7%). The estimated pooled prevalence of seroma, hematoma, and surgical site infection was 3.2% (95% CI 1.9-5.9%), 1.7% (95% CI 0.9-3.1%), and 0.3% (95% CI = 0.1-0.9%), respectively. The median follow-up was 18 months (range 8-48). The pooled prevalence of hernia recurrence and chronic pain were 1.1% (95% CI 0.1-3.1%) and 1.9% (95% CI 0.9-4.1%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair seems feasible, safe, and effective for the treatment of inguinal hernia after RP. Prostatectomy should not be necessarily considered a contraindication to minimally invasive inguinal hernia repair.