Comparisons of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted, video-assisted, and open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment: a retrospective study.

Background: Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE), video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE), and open esophagectomy (OE) all have significant roles in the management of esophageal cancer (EC). Few studies have compared efficacy and safety between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the short-term outcomes between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: Ninety-eight patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent esophagectomy. A retrospective study was performed including 98 consecutive patients treated from January 2021 to August 2022 who received neoadjuvant treatment (including immunochemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) followed by RAE, VAMIE or OE. Evaluated endpoints in the present study consisted of pathological outcomes, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as postoperative complications. Results: No significant differences were seen in the operating time, blood loss, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, R0 resection, and number of dissected lymph nodes between the three RAE, VAMIE, or OE groups. The achievement rate of right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node removal (P=0.01) and the total cost (P<0.001) were higher in RAE. The postoperative hospital stay of OE was longer than the other two groups (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications. Conclusions: Compared to VAMIE, no clear benefit exists for RAE in the treatment of resectable EC after neoadjuvant therapy. OE resulted in a longer hospital stay. Although the rate of successful right RLN node removal was higher with RAE, the clinical relevance for this is yet unclear.

The Safety and Efficacy of Preoperative Immunotherapy Combined with Chemotherapy in Patients with Stage IIIA-IIIB Lung Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Data on preoperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy in potentially resectable lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC) remain scarce. This study was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of preoperative immunotherapy and chemotherapy for stage IIIA-IIIB LUSC. METHODS: This study consecutively enrolled stage IIIA-IIIB LUSC who received preoperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy between January 2019 and July 2021. Patients received two to four cycles of immunotherapy combined with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (platinum + paclitaxel) before surgery. Patients were assessed radiographically every one to two cycles until surgery. Postoperative pathological evaluation was also performed. Follow-up was performed until at least 3 months after surgery. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients with stage IIIA-IIIB LUSC were enrolled. The objective response rate was 78.46% (51/65), and no patients had progressive disease. Fifty-seven patients underwent surgery, and 55 patients achieved R0 resection. There were no perioperative deaths. The rate of pathological complete response (pCR) was 31.58% (18/57) and major pathological response was 68.42% (39/57). The incidence of grade 3 and 4 adverse reactions was 21.21 and 1.54%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Perioperative immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy followed by surgical resection for male patients with stage IIIA-IIIB LUSC was effective with a tolerable toxicity profile.

Safety and effectiveness of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy followed by surgical resection in patients with stage I-IIIA small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective single-arm clinical trial.

Background: Immunotherapy, chemotherapy and surgery all have significant roles in the management of small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). Neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy followed by surgery has shown encouraging efficacy for resectable SCLC with a good tolerability and considerable survival benefit. However, there are still few data on whether surgery for stage I-IIIA SCLC can be performed after immunotherapy with chemotherapy. Therefore, we investigated the safety and effectiveness of neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy followed by surgery in patients with stage I-IIIA SCLC in the hope of adding new ideas to the treatment of SCLC. Methods: The study group comprised 19 patients with stage I-IIIA SCLC who received neoadjuvant immunotherapy and chemotherapy between 2019 and 2021. Patients received 2-4 cycles of immunotherapy combined with platinum-containing dual-drug chemotherapy (platinum + paclitaxel) before surgery. Imaging evaluation was performed every two cycles until surgery. Tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy, neoadjuvant treatment related adverse events, perioperative and postoperative complications, surgical resection rate, and degree of tumor regression were evaluated. We obtained follow-up data from the patients' regular examination or treatment in hospital. If we can't complete it, contacting patients by telephone or WeChat would be adopted by us. The follow-up was not terminated until 3 months after surgery. Results: The objective response rate (ORR) was 84.2% (16/19), and no patients had progressive disease (PD). Of the 10 patients who underwent surgery, and approximately 9 (90.0%) had R0 resection. There were no perioperative deaths, and 1 case of pyothorax. The rate of pathological complete remission (pCR) and major pathological response (MPR) was 30.0% (3/10), and 40.0% (4/10) respectively. Grade 3-4 adverse reactions comprised 1 case of anemia and 1 case of constipation. Conclusions: Neoadjuvant immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy followed by surgical resection for patients with stage I-IIIA SCLC is effective and safe with a high ORR and MPR rate, as well as a high R0 resection rate and a tolerable toxicity profile. Whether this regimen gives a survival benefit should be confirmed by further follow-up and larger, randomized controlled trials are required to confirm our findings.

Prevalence of ground glass nodules in preschool children: a cross-sectional study.

Background: Following increased screening efforts and the use of thin-slice computed tomography (CT), there has been a considerable increase in the incidence of ground-glass nodules (GGNs) in adults. As a result, we have more and more treatments for ground-glass nodules in adults, but few in children. Most think development pattern of pulmonary GGNs is lung inflammation, tumor, or tuberculosis that are more related to acquired or environmental factors. By studying the incidence of pulmonary GGNs in preschool children, we sought to determine whether we had ground glass nodules in the lung before we were teenagers, but we didn't pay attention to them until later. If the hypothesis holds, we may change the cognition and treatment strategies of ground glass nodules. Even not, there are few epidemiological studies with big data that can fill this gap. Methods: We retrospectively collected the data of all preschool children who had undergone CT at the Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine from 2013 to 2020. These data were filtered according to the following exclusion criteria: severe artifacts, data with identical names to the original data; and patients without follow-up records (≥3 months). Inclusion criteria: must have undergone thin-slice CT (≤1.25 mm) at the first and last follow-up. Two thoracic radiologists with 5 years of experience and another senior one assessed the images. Results: There were a total of 13,361 cases after relevant exclusions, 311 patients were finally enrolled. Clinical features: age at diagnosis (year): 3.56±1.84, female: 147, male: 164, follow-up interval (month): 6.90±4.74, leukemia: 99, pneumonia: 21, lung cyst: 8, space-occupying lesions outside the lungs: 69, foreign body in respiratory tract: 6. After manual screening and reading, only 1 patient meets all requirements. The results showed that between 2013 and 2020, the incidence of GGNs that could be basically determined in the Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine was 0.32%. Conclusions: There have been few previous studies of GGNs in children, and based on our study, we found that there is still some associated morbidity for preschool children, it is rarely found when they are young.

Aortic injury caused by esophageal foreign body-case reports of 3 patients and literature review.

OBJECTIVES: Ingestion of a foreign body can cause different degrees of damage to esophagus, and several complications are potentially life-threatening if not properly handled. The aortic injury caused by a perforating esophageal foreign body is rare but lethal. The optimal management still remains controversial. The purpose of this report is to describe our experience in the management of the aortic injury caused by esophageal foreign body ingestion. METHODS: Between January 2015 and December 2015, we retrospectively enrolled cases of esophageal perforation involving the aorta by foreign body. The general parameters, esophageal foreign body, types of aortic injury, treatment, and outcome were analyzed. Additionally, we reviewed the literature of the management of esophageal perforation involving the aorta caused by foreign bodies. The study was approved by the ethics committee of the First Affiliated Hospital, College of Medicine, Zhejiang University, and the need for informed consent was waived (Quick review 2019, No. 609). RESULTS: Three cases of esophageal perforation involving the aorta by foreign body was selected in the study. Two male and 1 female patients (range, 51-58 years old) with the aorta involvement caused by a perforating foreign body in the esophagus in 3 forms were identified, including 1 patient with mycotic aortic pseudoaneurysm, 1 patient with aortoesophageal fistula and 1 patient with the aortic intramural hematoma. One patient died of the rupture of the pseudoaneurysm during the preparation of the surgery. The other 2 patients were cured with a multidisciplinary approach, which is an urgent thoracic endovascular aortic repair followed by mediastinal debridement/drainage or endoscopic retrieval. Two of 3 patients were survived until now. CONCLUSION: The management of the aortic injury caused by esophageal foreign body injury is challenging. Early diagnosis and multidisciplinary management is crucial.