Perioperative Esophagectomy Outcomes in Older Esophageal Cancer Patients in Two Different Time Eras.

To investigate perioperative outcomes of esophagectomies by age groups. Retrospective analysis of esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy from 2005 to 2020 at a single academic institution. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were analyzed by 3 age groups: <70, 70-79, and ≥80 years-old. Sub-analysis was done for 2 time periods: 2005-2012 and 2013-2020. Of 1135 patients, 789 patients were <70, 294 were 70-79, and 52 were ≥80 years-old. Tumor characteristics, and operative technique were similar, except positive longitudinal margins rates (all <3%) (P = 0.008). Older adults experienced increased complications (53.6% vs 69.7% vs 65.4% respectively; P < 0.001) attributable to grade II complications (41.4% vs 62.2% vs 63.5% respectively; P < 0.001). Hospital length of stay (LOS) and rehabilitation requirements were higher in older adults (both P < 0.05). 30-day readmissions, reoperation, and 30-day mortality rates (all <2%) showed no association with age group. Overall complications, LOS, discharge disposition and re-operative rates improved from 2005 to 2012 to 2013-2020 for all (P < 0.05). Increasing age was an independent risk factor for cardiovascular complications (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.23-2.46 for ages 70-79 and OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.37-5.10 for ages ≥80 ), inpatient rehabilitation (OR 3.3, 95% CI 2.26-5.05 for ages 70-79 and OR 12.1 95% CI 5.83-25.04 for ages ≥80), and prolonged LOS (OR 1.64 95% CI 1.16-2.31 for ages 70-79 and OR 3.6 95% CI 1.71-7.67 for ≥80. After adjusting for time period, older age remained associated with complications (P < 0.05). Highly selected older adults at a large volume esophagectomy center can undergoesophagectomy with increased minor complication and rehabilitation needs.

Hyperthermic intraoperative chemotherapy (HIOC) for Stage IVa thymic malignancy may improve 5-year disease-free survival.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Stage IVa thymic malignancy has limited treatments. This study evaluated whether hyperthermic intraoperative chemotherapy (HIOC) after radical resection of Stage IVa thymic malignancy improves survival. METHODS: All patients who underwent resection, with or without HIOC, for Stage IVa thymic malignancy at a single center from 1990 to 2021 were reviewed. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients were identified; 22 surgery-only versus 12 surgery and HIOC (60 min cisplatin regimen 175 mg/m2 ). Demographics and comorbidities were similar between groups. Three patients in each group were carcinomas; remainder were thymomas. Thirty-two patients underwent attempted macroscopic complete resection; 22 operations succeeded, 68.8%. Significant complications were similar between groups, 18.2% surgery-only versus 25.0% HIOC, p = 0.68. Median time to recurrence trended longer for HIOC patients (42.9 vs. 32.9 months in surgery-only, p = 0.77). Overall survival, 5-year, was similar (75.8% HIOC vs. 76.2% surgery-only, p = 0.91). On stratified analysis, thymoma patients with macroscopic complete resection and HIOC experienced similar 5-year Overall (80.0% vs. 100.0% surgery-only, p = 0.157) but longer trending 5-year disease-free (85.7% vs. 40.0%, p = 0.18) and 5-year locoregional recurrence-free survival (85.7% vs. 68.6%, p = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective cohort study treating Stage IVa thymic malignancy with radical pleurectomy, with or without HIOC, found addition of HIOC-signaled delayed recurrence and improved disease-free survival.

Report on lung cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic at a high volume US institution.

Background: The impact of COVID-19 has been felt in every field of medicine. We sought to understand how lung cancer surgery was affected at a high volume institution. We hypothesized that patients would wait longer for surgery, have more advanced tumors, and experience more complications during the COVID-19 crisis. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted, comparing pathologically confirmed non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgical cases performed in 2019 to cases performed from March to May 2020, during the height of the COVID-19 crisis. Clinical and pathologic stage, tumor size, time to surgery, follow up time, and complications were evaluated. Results: A total of 375 cases were performed in 2019 vs. 58 cases in March to May 2020. Overall, there were no differences in the distribution of clinical stages or in the distribution of median wait times to surgery between groups (COVID-19 16.5 days vs. pre-COVID-19 17 days, P=0.54), nor were there differences when subdivided into Stage I-II and Stage III-IV. Case volume was lowest in April 2020 with 6 cases vs. 37 in April 2019, P<0.01. Tumor size was clinically larger in the COVID-19 group (median 2.1 vs. 1.9 cm, P=0.05) but not at final pathology. No differences in complications were observed between groups (COVID-19 31.0% vs. pre-COVID-19 30.9%, P=1.00). No patients from the COVID-19 group tested positive for the disease during their hospital stay or by the median 15 days to first follow-up. Conclusions: Surgical wait time, pathologic tumor size, and complications were not different among patients undergoing surgery before vs. during the pandemic. Importantly, no patients became infected as a result of their hospital stay. The significant decrease in surgical cases is concerning for untreated cancers that may progress without proper treatment.

Bilateral Bronchoscopic Lung Volume Reduction After Surgical Fissure Completion.

Although bilateral lung volume reduction surgery has been shown to be safe and effective in carefully selected patients with upper lobe-predominant emphysema and hyperinflation, bronchoscopic lung volume reduction via placement of endobronchial valves is conventionally performed only unilaterally. Furthermore, it is not offered to patients with interlobar collateral ventilation because of the lack of clinical efficacy. We describe two novel management approaches including (1) bilateral bronchoscopic lung volume reduction, and (2) a combined thoracic surgical and interventional pulmonary procedure involving surgical fissure completion followed by endobronchial valve placement, which culminated in safe and effective lung volume reduction of both lungs along with an excellent patient outcome.

Long-term Outcomes Following Esophagectomy in Older and Younger Adults with Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patterns of overall and disease-free survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in older adults have not been carefully studied. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of all patients with esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy from 2005 to 2020 at our institution was performed. Differences in outcomes were stratified by age groups, < 75 and ≥ 75 years old, and two time periods, 2005-2012 and 2013-2020. RESULTS: A total of 1135 patients were included: 979 (86.3%) patients were < 75 (86.3%), and 156 (13.7%) were ≥ 75 years old. Younger patients had fewer comorbidities, better nutritional status, and were more likely to receive neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy (all p < 0.05). However, tumor stage and operative approach were similar, except for increased performance of the McKeown technique in younger patients (p = 0.02). Perioperatively, younger patients experienced fewer overall and grade II complications (both p < 0.05). They had better overall survival (log-rank p-value < 0.001) and median survival, 62.2 vs. 21.5 months (p < 0.05). When stratified by pathologic stage, survival was similar for yp0 and pathologic stage II disease (both log-rank p-value > 0.05). Multivariable Cox models showed older age (≥ 75 years old) had increased hazard for reduced overall survival (HR 2.04 95% CI 1.5-2.8; p < 0.001) but not disease-free survival (HR 1.1 95% CI 0.78-1.6; p = 0.54). Over time, baseline characteristics remained largely similar, while stage became more advanced with a rise in neoadjuvant use and increased performance of minimally invasive esophagectomy (all p < 0.05). While overall complication rates improved (p < 0.05), overall and recurrence-free survival did not. Overall survival was better in younger patients during both time periods (both log-rank p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar disease-free survival rates, long-term survival was decreased in older adults as compared to younger patients. This may be related to unmeasured factors including frailty, long-term complications after surgery, and competing causes of death. However, our results suggest that survival is similar in those with complete pathologic responses.

Manubrium Reconstruction.

To date, there is no standard approach for manubrial reconstruction. We had previously utilized mesh; however, this resulted in breakage, infection, and poor cosmesis. In this case series, we describe our transition to iliac wing autograft reconstruction. We examined 7 patients who underwent manubrial resection and reconstruction: 2 with mesh and methyl methacrylate and 5 with an iliac wing autograft. The outcomes of the autograft patients were overall favorable with no short-term complications or instances of breakage. We conclude that an iliac wing autograft for manubrial reconstruction is feasible and effective alternative to methyl methacrylate mesh.

Survival and Recurrence Following Wedge Resection Versus Lobectomy for Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

To determine if wedge resection is equivalent to lobectomy for Stage I Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) and to evaluate the impact of radiologic and pathologic variables not available in large national databases. Records were reviewed from 2010-2016 for patients with pathologic Stage I NSCLC who underwent wedge resection or lobectomy. Propensity score matching was performed on pre-operative variables and patients with ≥1 lymph node removed. Clinical variables were compared. Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazard models for 5-year overall survival (OS), disease-free (DFS), and locoregional-recurrence-free survival (LRFS) were created. A total of 1086 patients met inclusion criteria; 391 lobectomies and 695 wedge resections. Propensity score matching yielded 167 pairs of lobectomy and wedge resection patients. Complications were fewer for wedge resections than lobectomies, 19.2% for wedge resection patients vs 34.1% for lobectomy patients, p < 0.01. OS was equivalent between groups, 86.2% for lobectomy patients vs 83.4% for wedge resection patients p = 0.47. DFS was similar, 79.0% for lobectomy patients vs 72.5% for wedge resection patients p = 0.10. Overall LRFS was worse in wedge resection patients vs lobectomy patients, 82.0% vs 93.4% p < 0.01. However, in the matched wedge resection patients with a margin >10 mm the LRFS was equal to that of lobectomy patients, 86.4% for wedge resection patients vs 91.8% for lobectomy patients p = 0.140. Patients with Stage I NSCLC can experience similar OS, DFS, and LRFS with wedge resection as compared to lobectomy, when wedge resection margins are >10 mm and appropriate lymph node dissection is performed.

Short and Long-term Outcomes Among High-Volume vs Low-Volume Esophagectomy Surgeons at a High-Volume Center.

To determine associations between surgeon volume and esophagectomy outcomes at a high-volume institution. All esophagectomies for esophageal cancer at our institution from August 2005 to August 2019 were reviewed. Cases were divided by surgeon into low, <7 cases/year, vs high volume, ≥7 cases/year, based on Leapfrog Group recommendations. Surgeons remained 'high-volume' after one year of ≥7 cases. Demographics, comorbidities, course of care, and long-term outcomes were compared. In total, 1029 cases were evaluated; 120 performed by low-volume surgeons vs 909 by high-volume surgeons. Never-smokers, atrial fibrillation, and clinical Stage IVa patients were associated with high-volume surgeons. Other demographics were similar. Low-volume surgeons did more open cases, 45.8% vs 14.5%, P < 0.01. Low-volume surgeons had more complications than high-volume surgeons (71.7% vs 57.6%, P < 0.01), specifically Grade II and III (59.2% vs 46.8%, P = 0.01, and 44.2% vs 27.0%, P <0.01). No differences were seen in anastomotic leak rate, 90-day mortality, recurrences, 5-year overall survival (46.7% low-volume vs 49.3% high-volume, P = 0.64), or 5-year disease-free survival (35.7% low-volume vs 42.2% high-volume, P = 0.27). In multivariable logistic regression for Grade III or higher complications, high-volume surgeons had an odds ratio of 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.36-0.87) for complications. Our study found higher rates of open esophagectomies and complications in low-volume esophagectomy surgeons compared to high-volume surgeons at the same, high-volume institution. However, low-volume surgeons were not associated with worse survival outcomes compared to high-volume surgeons. Low-volume esophagectomy surgeons may benefit from mentoring and support to improve perioperative outcomes; these efforts are underway at our institution.

Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Performed During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Delay in time to esophagectomy for esophageal cancer has been shown to have worse peri-operative and long-term outcomes. We hypothesized that COVID-19 would cause a delay to surgery, with worse perioperative outcomes, compared to standard operations. All esophagectomies for esophageal cancer at a single institution from March-June 2020, COVID-19 group, and from 2019 were reviewed and peri-operative details were compared between groups. Ninety-six esophagectomies were performed in 2019 vs 37 during March-June 2020 (COVID-19 group). No differences between groups were found for preoperative comorbidities. Wait-time to surgery from final neoadjuvant treatment was similar, median 50 days in 2019 vs 53 days during COVID-19 p = 0.601. There was no increased upstaging, from clinical stage to pathologic stage, 9.4% in 2019 vs 7.5% in COVID-19 p = 0.841. Fewer overall complications occurred during COVID-19 vs 2019, 43.2% vs 64.6% p = 0.031, but complications were similar by specific grades. Readmission rates were not statistically different during COVID-19 than 2019, 16.2% vs 10.4% p = 0.38. No peri-operative mortalities or COVID-19 infections were seen in the COVID-19 group. Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer was not associated with worse outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic with minimal risk of infection when careful COVID-19 guidelines are followed. Prioritization is recommended to ensure no delays to surgery.

Pleurabrade: A Spiral Brush for Mechanical Pleurodesis and a Review of the Literature.

Background While the optimal treatment for primary spontaneous pneumothorax remains unclear, mechanical pleurodesis is a well-established treatment. The Pleurabrade is a spiral brush designed for mechanical pleurodesis during thoracoscopy. We present two patients who underwent mechanical pleurodesis with the Pleurabrade. Case Description Two patients with spontaneous pneumothorax underwent operative intervention including mechanical pleurodesis with the Pleurabrade. Chest tubes were removed within 48 hours postoperatively and they were discharged home. Both patients remain recurrence free at 11 and 22 months, respectively. Conclusion While further testing is needed, these case reports and operative video highlight the Pleurabrade as an efficient device for thoracoscopic mechanical pleurodesis.

Adjuvant therapy following induction therapy and surgery improves survival in N2-positive non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate treatment strategies and factors influencing overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in resectable, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with mediastinal (N2) lymph node metastasis. METHODS: All patients undergoing surgery for NSCLC with N2 disease between 2006 and 2016 were included. Treatment approaches included surgery only, neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery, surgery followed by adjuvant therapy, and neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery and adjuvant therapy (triple therapy). Patient clinical and pathologic data were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: A total of 281 patients were included in the study. In total, 209 patients had neoadjuvant therapy, 47.4% of which went on to received additional adjuvant therapy. The pathologic complete response rate was 12.9%. The treatment strategy which included triple therapy was isolated as a significant contributor to improved OS and DFS. Nodal downstaging (N0) after induction therapy conferred an OS benefit (38.3% vs. 15.6%, p = .03). Patients with single-station N2 disease experienced higher DFS. Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) lobectomy completion rates were higher at the end of the study period compared to the beginning (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo neoadjuvant therapy for N2-positive NSCLC may benefit from additional adjuvant therapy. Single-station N2 disease confers higher DFS. VATS completion rates for lobectomy increase as experience increases.