Radiotherapy or Surgery of the Axilla After a Positive Sentinel Node in Breast Cancer: 10-Year Results of the Randomized Controlled EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS Trial.

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10981-22023 AMAROS trial evaluated axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) versus axillary radiotherapy (ART) in patients with cT1-2, node-negative breast cancer and a positive sentinel node (SN) biopsy. At 5 years, both modalities showed excellent and comparable axillary control, with significantly less morbidity after ART. We now report the preplanned 10-year analysis of the axillary recurrence rate (ARR), overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS), and an updated 5-year analysis of morbidity and quality of life. METHODS: In this open-label multicenter phase III noninferiority trial, 4,806 patients underwent SN biopsy; 1,425 were node-positive and randomly assigned to either ALND (n = 744) or ART (n = 681). RESULTS: Per intention-to-treat analysis, 10-year ARR cumulative incidence was 0.93% (95% CI, 0.18 to 1.68; seven events) after ALND and 1.82% (95% CI, 0.74 to 2.94; 11 events) after ART (hazard ratio [HR], 1.71; 95% CI, 0.67 to 4.39). There were no differences in OS (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.52) or DFS (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.46). ALND was associated with a higher lymphedema rate in updated 5-year analyses (24.5% v 11.9%; P < .001). Quality-of-life scales did not differ by treatment through 5 years. Exploratory analysis showed a 10-year cumulative incidence of second primary cancers of 12.1% (95% CI, 9.6 to 14.9) after ART and 8.3% (95% CI, 6.3 to 10.7) after ALND. CONCLUSION: This 10-year analysis confirms a low ARR after both ART and ALND with no difference in OS, DFS, and locoregional control. Considering less arm morbidity, ART is preferred over ALND for patients with SN-positive cT1-2 breast cancer.

Is a tailored work-related support intervention feasible in everyday clinical practice? The experience of healthcare professionals and patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Work is valued as an important feature in life, however patients diagnosed with cancer can experience work-related problems. We developed a work-related support intervention to support those in need. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of the performed tailored GIRONA (Gastro Intestinal cancer patients Receiving Occupational support Near and After diagnosis) intervention and to describe the experiences of those receiving the work-related support and of those providing it. METHODS: An online questionnaire was used to survey the feasibility of the intervention of the support recipients (patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer) and the support providers (healthcare professionals including: oncology nurses and oncological occupational physicians). Five themes were covered: acceptability, demand, implementation, practicality and integration of Bowen's feasibility model. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients, 14 oncology nurses and 4 oncological occupational physicians, shared their experiences about the tailored work-related support intervention. This intervention was generally perceived as positive and feasible by the participants. Some patients received work-related support despite not experiencing severe problems; others mentioned that they received no such support even though they did need it. Despite positive experiences, there are some barriers to tackle, such as length of consultation, timing of the initiation of work-related support and embedding the oncological occupational physician within the clinical setting. CONCLUSION: According to the healthcare professionals involved, GIRONA is feasible, however some practical barriers were mentioned. The intervention was perceived as positive by both patients and healthcare professionals, but the tailored component could be further improved to better support those in need of work-related support.

The Successful Return-To-Work Questionnaire for Cancer Survivors (I-RTW_CS): Development, Validity and Reproducibility.

BACKGROUND: Cancer survivors' perspectives on a successful return to work (RTW) may not be captured in the common measure of RTW, namely time until RTW. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was therefore to develop an RTW outcome measure that reflects employed cancer survivors' perspectives, with items that could be influenced by an employer, i.e. the Successful Return-To-Work questionnaire for Cancer Survivors (I-RTW_CS), and to assess its construct validity and reproducibility. METHODS: First, three focus groups with cancer survivors (n = 14) were organized to generate issues that may constitute successful RTW. Second, a two-round Delphi study among 108 cancer survivors was conducted to select the most important issues. Construct validity of the I-RTW_CS was assessed using correlations with a single-item measure of successful RTW and the Quality of Working Life Questionnaire for Cancer Survivors (QWLQ-CS; n = 57). Reproducibility (test-retest reliability) was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC; n = 50). RESULTS: Forty-eight issues were generated, of which seven were included: 'enjoyment in work'; 'work without affecting health'; 'confidence of employer without assumptions about work ability'; 'open communication with employer'; 'feeling welcome at work'; 'good work-life balance'; and 'joint satisfaction with the situation (employer and cancer survivor)'. Correlations with single-item successful RTW and QWLQ-CS were 0.58 and 0.85, respectively. The reproducibility showed an ICC of 0.72. CONCLUSIONS: The I-RTW_CS provides an RTW outcome measure that includes cancer survivors' perspectives and weights its items on an individual basis, allowing a more meaningful evaluation of cancer survivors' RTW. This study provides preliminary evidence for its construct validity and reproducibility.

Physiotherapy With Telerehabilitation in Patients With Complicated Postoperative Recovery After Esophageal Cancer Surgery: Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: Improvement of functional status with physiotherapy is an important goal for patients with postoperative complications and an increased length of hospital stay (LoS) after esophagectomy. Supervised physiotherapy with telerehabilitation instead of conventional face-to-face care could be an alternative to treat these patients in their home environment after hospital discharge (T0), but its feasibility has not yet been investigated in detail. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of a 12-week supervised postoperative physiotherapy intervention with telerehabilitation for patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy and had postoperative complications or who had an increased LoS. The secondary objective was to investigate the preliminary effectiveness of telerehabilitation on functional recovery compared with usual care. METHODS: A prospective feasibility study with a matched historical comparison group was performed. Feasibility outcomes included willingness and adherence to participate, refusal rate, treatment duration, occurrence of adverse events, and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcome measures were measurements of musculoskeletal and cardiovascular functions and activities according to the domains of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy and had postoperative complications or an increased LoS were included. The mean age at surgery was 64.55 (SD 6.72) years, and 77% (17/22) of patients were male. Moreover, 15 patients completed the intervention. Patient adherence was 99.8% in the first 6 weeks and dropped to 75.6% in the following 6 weeks, with a mean difference of -24.3% (95% CI 1.3 to 47.2; P=.04). At 3 months post operation, no differences in functional status were found between the intervention group and the matched historical comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that a postoperative physiotherapeutic intervention with telerehabilitation is feasible for patients with postoperative complications or an increased LoS after esophageal cancer surgery up to 6 weeks after T0.

[What do the results of the DENSE-trial tell?] / Wat zeggen de uitkomsten van de DENSE-studie?

The DENSE trial has demonstrated that offering an MRI scan to women with very dense glandular breast tissue and normal results on screening mammography reduces the number of interval cancers by 50%. In the women who agreed to undergo an MRI (59%), this reduction was 80% (from 5 per 1000 to 1 per 1000 participants). DENSE will continue in order to answer the only question that is relevant to patients: does additional MRI lead to less invasive treatment and, above all, to a decrease in mortality? Even in the event where additional MRI screening would lead to a decrease in mortality, we still need to have an open discussion on whether investing in additional MRI screening for women with very dense glandular tissue is the most effective way to improve the health of the Dutch female population. Thanks to the great effort of the DENSE research team, such a discussion can be pursued thoroughly, based on facts.

The pre- and postoperative course of functional status in patients undergoing esophageal cancer surgery.

INTRODUCTION: To optimally target physiotherapy treatment, knowledge of the pre- and postoperative course of functional status in patients undergoing esophagectomy is required. The aim of this prospective longitudinal study was to investigate the course of functional status in patients with esophageal cancer before and after esophagectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Functional status outcome measures of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent surgery between March 2012 and June 2016 were prospectively measured at 3 months and at 1 day before surgery and at 1 week and at 3 months after surgery. Analysis of repeated measurements with the mixed model approach was used to study changes over time. RESULTS: Hundred fifty-five patients were measured at 3 months and at 1 day before surgery, of which 109 (70.3%) at 1 week and 60 (38.7%) at 3 months after surgery. Mean (SD) age at surgery was 63.5 years (9.3), and 122 patients (78.7%) were male. The incidence of postoperative complications was 83 (53.5%). Three months postoperatively, functional status measures returned to baseline levels, except from handgrip strength (beta [95% CI] -6.2 [-11.3 to -1.1]; P = 0.02) and fatigue (4.7 [0.7to 8.7]; P = 0.02). No differences were observed in the course of functional status between patients with and without postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Functional status of patients undergoing esophagectomy returned to baseline values three months after surgery, despite the high incidence of postoperative complications. This requires rethinking the concept of prehabilitation, where clearly not all patients benefit from high functional status to prevent postoperative complications.

Process evaluation of a tailored work-related support intervention for patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer.

PURPOSE: To perform a process evaluation of a tailored work-related support intervention for patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer. METHODS: The intervention comprised three tailored psychosocial work-related support meetings. To outline the process evaluation of this intervention, we used six key components: recruitment, context, reach, dose delivered, dose received and fidelity. Data were collected using questionnaires, checklists and research logbooks and were analysed both quantitatively and qualitatively. RESULTS: In total, 16 hospitals, 33 nurses and 7 oncological occupational physicians (OOPs) participated. Analysis of the six key components revealed that the inclusion rate of eligible patients was 47%. Thirty-eight intervention patients were included: 35 actually had a first meeting, 32 had a second and 17 had a third. For 31 patients (89%), the first meeting was face to face, as per protocol. However, in only 32% of the cases referred to support type A (oncological nurse) and 13% of the cases referred to support type B (OOP), the first meeting was before the start of the treatment, as per protocol. The average duration of the support type A meetings was around the pre-established 30 min; for the OOPs, the average was 50 min. Protocol was easy to follow according to the healthcare professionals. Overall, the patients considered the intervention useful. CONCLUSIONS: This study has shown that the strategy of tailored work-related support is appreciated by both patients and healthcare professionals and applicable in clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The intervention was appreciated by patients; however, whether the timing of the work-related support was adequate (i.e. before treatment was started) requires further research. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR5022.

Development of a tailored work-related support intervention for gastrointestinal cancer patients.

Aim is the development of a work-related support intervention, tailored to the severity of work-related problems of patients diagnosed with gastrointestinal (GI) cancer treated with curative intent. Two methods were used: (1) Work-related problems were identified from the literature and submitted to an expert panel during a modified Delphi study. Experts allocated work-related problems into degrees of severity: mild, severe or complex. In addition, experts indicated which health care professional should provide the tailored support: (2) These outcomes were combined with existing interventions to design the tailored intervention. Semi-structured interviews with experts were conducted to assess whether the intervention was comprehensive, and feasible for daily practice. A decision diagram measuring severity of work-related problems was developed based on the modified Delphi study with 44 experts, encompassing social, disease and occupational problems. Based on the degree of severity, support was provided by: an oncological nurse (mild), oncological occupational physician (severe) or multidisciplinary team (complex). The intervention encompassed three individual meetings in the clinical setting and was considered comprehensive and feasible by 12 experts. The intervention is innovative in combining oncological and occupational care in the clinic and being tailored to the needs of GI cancer patients with specific work-related problems.

Design of a multicentre randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a tailored clinical support intervention to enhance return to work for gastrointestinal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer is frequently diagnosed in people of working age, and many GI cancer patients experience work-related problems. Although these patients often experience difficulties returning to work, supportive work-related interventions are lacking. We have therefore developed a tailored work-related support intervention for GI cancer patients, and we aim to evaluate its cost-effectiveness compared with the usual care provided. If this intervention proves effective, it can be implemented in practice to support GI cancer patients after diagnosis and to help them return to work. METHODS/DESIGN: We designed a multicentre randomized controlled trial with a follow-up of twelve months. The study population (N = 310) will include individuals aged 18-63 years diagnosed with a primary GI cancer and employed at the time of diagnosis. The participants will be randomized to the intervention or to usual care. 'Usual care' is defined as psychosocial care in which work-related issues are not discussed. The intervention group will receive tailored work-related support consisting of three face-to-face meetings of approximately 30 min each. Based on the severity of their work-related problems, the intervention group will be divided into groups receiving three types of support (A, B or C). A different supportive healthcare professional will be available for each group: an oncological nurse (A), an oncological occupational physician (B) and a multidisciplinary team (C) that includes an oncological nurse, oncological occupational physician and treating oncologist/physician. The primary outcome measure is return to work (RTW), defined as the time to a partial or full RTW. The secondary outcomes are work ability, work limitations, quality of life, and direct and indirect costs. DISCUSSION: The hypothesis is that tailored work-related support for GI cancer patients is more effective than usual care in terms of the RTW. The intervention is innovative in that it combines oncological and occupational care in a clinical setting, early in the cancer treatment process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: METC protocol number NL51444.018.14/Netherlands Trial Register number NTR5022 . Registered 6 March 2015.

Is there a Benefit of Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meetings for Patients with Gastrointestinal Malignancies?

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary cancer team meetings are intended to optimize the diagnosis of a patient with a malignancy. The aim of this study was to assess the number of correct diagnoses formulated by the multidisciplinary team (MDT) and whether MDT decisions were implemented. METHODS: In a prospective study, data of consecutive patients discussed at gastrointestinal oncology MDT meetings were studied, and MDT diagnoses were validated with pathology or follow-up. Factors of influence on the correct diagnosis were identified by use of a Poisson regression model. Electronic patient records were used to assess whether MDT decisions were implemented, and reasons to deviate from these decisions were hand-searched within these records. RESULTS: In 74 MDT meetings, 551 patients were discussed a total of 691 times. The MDTs formulated a correct diagnosis for 515/551 patients (93.4 %), and for 120/551 (21.8 %) patients the MDT changed the referral diagnosis. Of the MDT diagnoses, 451/515 (87.6 %) were validated with pathology. Patients presented to the MDT by their treating physician were 20 % more likely to receive a correct diagnosis [relative risk (RR) 1.2, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.1-1.5], while the number of patients discussed or the duration of the meeting had no influence on this (RR 1.0, 95 % CI 0.99-1.0; RR 1.0, 95 % CI 0.9-1.1; resp.). MDT decisions were implemented in 94.4 % of cases. Deviations of MDT decisions occurred when a patient's wishes or physical condition were not taken into account. CONCLUSIONS: MDTs rectify 20 % of the referral diagnoses. The presence of the treating physician is the most important factor to ensure a correct diagnosis and adherence to the treatment plan.

Decreasing the dispatch time of medical reports sent from hospital to primary care with Lean Six Sigma.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Timely communication is important to ensure high-quality health care. To facilitate this, the Gastro Intestinal Oncology Center Amsterdam (GIOCA) stipulated to dispatch medical reports on the day of the patient's visit. However, with the increasing number of patients, administrative processes at GIOCA were under pressure, and this standard was not met for the majority of patients. The aim and objective of this study was to dispatch 90% of medical reports on the day of the patient's visit by improving the logistic process. METHODS: To assess the main causes for a prolonged dispatch time and to design improvements actions, the roadmap offered by Lean Six Sigma (LSS) was used, consisting of five phases: Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control (DMAIC roadmap). RESULTS: Initially, 12.3% of the reports were dispatched on the day of the patient's visit. Three causes for a prolonged dispatch time were identified: (1) determining which doctors involved with treatment would compose the report; (2) the reports composed by a senior resident had to be reviewed by a medical specialist; and (3) a medical specialist had to authorize the administration to dispatch the reports. To circumvent these causes, a digital form was implemented in the electronic medical record that could be completed during the multidisciplinary team meeting. After implementation, 90.6% of the reports were dispatched on the day of the visit. CONCLUSION: The dispatch time of reports sent from hospital to primary care can be significantly reduced using Lean Six Sigma, improving the communication between hospital and primary care.

18F-FDG PET-CT after Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Esophageal Cancer Patients to Optimize Surgical Decision Making.

BACKGROUND: Prognosis of esophageal cancer patients can be significantly improved by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). Given the aggressive nature of esophageal tumors, it is conceivable that in a significant portion of patients treated with nCRT, dissemination already becomes manifest during the period of nCRT. The aim of this retrospective study was to determine the value and diagnostic accuracy of PET-CT after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to identify patients with metastases preoperatively in order to prevent non-curative surgery. METHODS: From January 2011 until February 2013 esophageal cancer patients deemed eligible for a curative approach with nCRT and surgical resection underwent a PET-CT after completion of nCRT. If abnormalities on PET-CT were suspected metastases, histological proof was acquired. A clinical decision model was designed to assess the cost-effectiveness of this diagnostic strategy. RESULTS: 156 patients underwent a PET-CT after nCRT. In 31 patients (19.9%) PET-CT showed abnormalities suspicious for dissemination, resulting in 17 cases of proven metastases (10.9%). Of the patients without proven metastases 133 patients were operated. In 6 of these 133 cases distant metastases were detected intraoperatively, corresponding to 4.5% false-negative results. The standard introduction of a post-neoadjuvant therapy PET-CT led to a reduction of overall health care costs per patient compared to a scenario without restaging with PET-CT ($34,088 vs. $36,490). CONCLUSION: In 10.9% of esophageal cancer patients distant metastases were detected by standard PET-CT after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. To avoid non-curative resections we advocate post-neoadjuvant therapy PET-CT as a cost-effective step in the standard work-up of candidates for surgery.

Immunohistochemical analysis of steroid hormone receptors in hidradenitis suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is an inflammatory follicular skin disease. In women and men, the condition starts after puberty, has a peak in the third decade, and is rare after the menopause in women. This age distribution suggests a hormonal influence in the pathogenesis of the disease. We therefore hypothesized that apocrine glands in HS patients have a different expression of androgen receptor (AR) and estrogen receptor (ER) compared with healthy skin. METHODS: Axillary, inguinal, and perianal skin biopsies from female and male patients with HS were immunohistochemically stained for AR and ER activities. Expression of both receptors in apocrine glands of HS patients was compared with expression in apocrine glands in normal axillary or inguinal skin of a control group of women. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients with HS were included (16 women), with 10 women in the control group. In the HS group, apocrine glands were present in 11 out of 22 skin biopsies and in the control group in 4 out of 10 biopsies. Expression of ER in the apocrine gland was weak and observed in 2 out of 4 patients in the control group and in none of the HS patients. Expression of the AR was strong and observed in all apocrine glands in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: We could not demonstrate a significant difference in the expression of ER and AR in apocrine glands in skin biopsies of patients with HS, compared with healthy skin biopsies. The exact relation between sex hormones and occurrence of HS therefore remains unclear.

Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer (EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: If treatment of the axilla is indicated in patients with breast cancer who have a positive sentinel node, axillary lymph node dissection is the present standard. Although axillary lymph node dissection provides excellent regional control, it is associated with harmful side-effects. We aimed to assess whether axillary radiotherapy provides comparable regional control with fewer side-effects. METHODS: Patients with T1-2 primary breast cancer and no palpable lymphadenopathy were enrolled in the randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS trial. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated allocation schedule to receive either axillary lymph node dissection or axillary radiotherapy in case of a positive sentinel node, stratified by institution. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of 5-year axillary recurrence, considered to be not more than 4% for the axillary radiotherapy group compared with an expected 2% in the axillary lymph node dissection group. Analyses were by intention to treat and per protocol. The AMAROS trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00014612. FINDINGS: Between Feb 19, 2001, and April 29, 2010, 4823 patients were enrolled at 34 centres from nine European countries, of whom 4806 were eligible for randomisation. 2402 patients were randomly assigned to receive axillary lymph node dissection and 2404 to receive axillary radiotherapy. Of the 1425 patients with a positive sentinel node, 744 had been randomly assigned to axillary lymph node dissection and 681 to axillary radiotherapy; these patients constituted the intention-to-treat population. Median follow-up was 6·1 years (IQR 4·1-8·0) for the patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes. In the axillary lymph node dissection group, 220 (33%) of 672 patients who underwent axillary lymph node dissection had additional positive nodes. Axillary recurrence occurred in four of 744 patients in the axillary lymph node dissection group and seven of 681 in the axillary radiotherapy group. 5-year axillary recurrence was 0·43% (95% CI 0·00-0·92) after axillary lymph node dissection versus 1·19% (0·31-2·08) after axillary radiotherapy. The planned non-inferiority test was underpowered because of the low number of events. The one-sided 95% CI for the underpowered non-inferiority test on the hazard ratio was 0·00-5·27, with a non-inferiority margin of 2. Lymphoedema in the ipsilateral arm was noted significantly more often after axillary lymph node dissection than after axillary radiotherapy at 1 year, 3 years, and 5 years. INTERPRETATION: Axillary lymph node dissection and axillary radiotherapy after a positive sentinel node provide excellent and comparable axillary control for patients with T1-2 primary breast cancer and no palpable lymphadenopathy. Axillary radiotherapy results in significantly less morbidity. FUNDING: EORTC Charitable Trust.

Preoperative chemoradiation therapy in combination with panitumumab for patients with resectable esophageal cancer: the PACT study.

PURPOSE: Preoperative chemoradiation therapy (CRT) has become the standard treatment strategy for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. This multicenter phase 2 study investigated the efficacy of the addition of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor panitumumab to a preoperative CRT regimen with carboplatin, paclitaxel, and radiation therapy in patients with resectable esophageal cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with resectable cT1N1M0 or cT2-3N0 to -2M0 tumors received preoperative CRT consisting of panitumumab (6 mg/kg) on days 1, 15, and 29, weekly administrations of carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] = 2), and paclitaxel (50 mg/m(2)) for 5 weeks and concurrent radiation therapy (41.4 Gy in 23 fractions, 5 days per week), followed by surgery. Primary endpoint was pathologic complete response (pCR) rate. We aimed at a pCR rate of more than 40%. Furthermore, we explored the predictive value of biomarkers (EGFR, HER 2, and P53) for pCR. RESULTS: From January 2010 until December 2011, 90 patients were enrolled. Patients were diagnosed predominantly with adenocarcinoma (AC) (80%), T3 disease (89%), and were node positive (81%). Three patients were not resected due to progressive disease. The primary aim was unmet, with a pCR rate of 22%. Patients with AC and squamous cell carcinoma reached a pCR of 14% and 47%, respectively. R0 resection was achieved in 95% of the patients. Main grade 3 toxicities were rash (12%), fatigue (11%), and nonfebrile neutropenia (11%). None of the biomarkers was predictive for response. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of panitumumab to CRT with carboplatin and paclitaxel was safe and well tolerated but could not improve pCR rate to the preset criterion of 40%.

Gynaecomastia surgery in the Netherlands: what, why, who, where .

Gynaecomastia, breast enlargement in men, is common in all age groups. It is operated on by plastic surgeons, general surgeons and paediatric surgeons. It is therefore possible that there is a difference in the populations treated, the indications for surgery and the management used by the different practitioners. We performed a survey in order to assess the approach to treatment of gynaecomastia by the different disciplines. An electronic survey questionnaire was sent to members of the Dutch societies of surgery, paediatric surgery and plastic surgery. We received 105 responses from plastic surgeons, 95 from general surgeons and 15 from paediatric surgeons, representing respective response rates of 38.7%, 23.8% and 42.8%. Plastic surgeons operated on gynaecomastia most frequently. The diagnostic criteria and workup were similar for all disciplines, although general surgeons used more imaging. There was a difference in the side operated on. General surgeons and paediatric surgeons operated mainly on unilateral cases (74% and 52%), while plastic surgeons operated mainly on bilateral cases (85%). Pharmaceutical treatment with Tamoxifen was reported only by general surgeons (13%). All disciplines used mainly the periareolar incision. Plastic surgeons reported more often the use of other surgical approaches as well as adjunctive liposuction and they did not always submit tissue for pathological examination. Perioperative antibiotics, drains and pressure garments were not always used. All disciplines agreed that the most common complication was bleeding, followed by seroma, infection, insufficient results, inverted nipple and nipple necrosis. This survey highlights some differences in the practice of gynaecomastia surgery. The findings appear to point to the fact that the indications are different, being more aesthetic in the case of plastic surgeons. The results of this survey are important in establishing the standard of care and may be helpful for setting guidelines.

How attachment style and locus of control influence patients' trust in their oncologist.

OBJECTIVE: Cancer patients need to trust their oncologist. How the oncologist communicates probably contributes to patients' trust. Yet, patient characteristics such as their attachment style and health locus of control may influence how such communication is perceived. We examined how these personality characteristics influence trust as well as moderate the relation between oncologist communication and trust. METHODS: Eight videotaped scenarios of an oncologic consultation were created. Oncologist communication was systematically varied regarding their expressed competence, honesty and caring. Cancer patients (n = 345) were randomly assigned to view the videos and report their trust in the observed oncologist. Patients' self-reported attachment style, health locus of control and trust in their own oncologist were assessed. RESULTS: Patients with a stronger external health locus of control trusted the observed oncologist more (p < .001). Neither attachment avoidance nor attachment anxiety was related to trust in the observed oncologist. However, attachment avoidance moderated the positive effect of the oncologists' communication of caring and honesty on trust: avoidant attachment significantly diminished the effect (p < .011 and p < .044, respectively). High attachment avoidance (p = .003) and attachment anxiety (p < .001) were related to weaker trust in patients' own oncologist. DISCUSSION: Patients' attachment avoidance may hamper their trust in their own, but not necessarily in a newly observed, oncologist. As expected, patients' attachment style influences how oncologist communication influences trust, underscoring the importance of oncologists tailoring their communication to individual patients. We confirmed observational findings that patients convinced that others control their health trust their oncologist more than others.

Initial experiences of an enhanced recovery protocol in esophageal surgery.

BACKGROUND: A recent development in gastrointestinal surgery is the implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs. Evidence regarding the benefit of these programs in patients undergoing esophageal surgery is scarce. We investigated the feasibility and possible benefit of a perioperative ERAS program in patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignant disease. METHODS: The ERAS program was initiated in 2009. Patients who underwent esophagectomy and were treated according to the ERAS program were included. Items of ERAS included preoperative nutrition, early extubation, early removal of nasogastric tube, and early mobilization. Primary outcome parameters were hospital stay and the incidence of postoperative complications. Outcome parameters in the ERAS cohort were compared to a cohort of patients who underwent surgical resection in the year prior to the implementation of the ERAS protocol. A feasibility analysis was performed among a sample of ERAS patients to determine the number of achieved items per patient. RESULTS: Between 2008 and August 2010, 181 patients in our department underwent esophagectomy. Of these, 103 patients were included in the ERAS program (ERAS+ group) and were compared to 78 patients who had undergone an esophagectomy in 2008 (ERAS- group). Overall hospital stay was 14 days versus 15 days (ERAS+ and ERAS-, respectively; p = 0.013). There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative complications in either group. The percentage of achieved items varied between 42 and 93 % per item. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of an ERAS program in esophageal surgery was feasible and resulted in a small but significant reduction in overall hospital stay, whereas overall morbidity was not affected.

Survival after recurrent esophageal carcinoma has not improved over the past 18 years.

BACKGROUND: Numerous patients will develop recurrent disease after esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma (EC). In literature, survival after recurrent EC is poor with 6-8 months. In these studies, diagnostic imaging during follow-up (FU) is routinely performed. In the Netherlands, routine imaging is not part of FU and only performed on indication. The aim of this study was to determine survival after diagnosis of recurrent disease in patients after esophagectomy without routine imaging during FU. METHODS: All EC patients who underwent esophagectomy between 1993 and 2010 were included and followed for clinical evidence of recurrent EC. Location, symptoms, diagnosis, and treatment of recurrent disease were registered. Pattern of recurrence was compared between patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy and patients who underwent surgery alone. Survival after detection of recurrence was determined in all patients and related to the year of surgery. RESULTS: A total of 493 of 1,088 patients (45 %) who underwent esophagectomy between 1993 and 2010 developed recurrent disease. Median interval between esophagectomy and recurrence was 10.5 months. Within the first 2 years after surgery, 33 % of patients developed recurrent EC. The majority of patients (51 %) were diagnosed with distant metastases. Locoregional recurrence occurred significantly less often among patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy (6 vs 16 %, p = .017). Median survival after diagnosis of recurrent disease was 3 months. No relation was observed between the year of surgery and survival after recurrent disease (p = .931). CONCLUSIONS: Survival after recurrent EC in patients who undergo FU without routine imaging after esophagectomy is approximately 3 months and has not improved over the past 18 years.

Results of the introduction of a minimally invasive esophagectomy program in a tertiary referral center.

BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy is accompanied by a high postoperative complication rate. Minimally invasive esophageal surgery appears to be a promising technique that might be associated with a lower pulmonary morbidity rate. The objective of this study was to describe the implementation of minimally invasive esophageal surgery in a tertiary referral center and to compare the results of our first series of minimally invasive esophagectomies (MIE) to conventional open esophagectomies. METHODS: MIE was implemented after several procedures had been proctored by a surgeon with extensive experience with MIE. Preoperative characteristics and the postoperative course of patients who underwent a transthoracic esophagectomy were prospectively registered. Morbidity and overall hospital stay were compared between minimally invasive and open resections performed in the same period. RESULTS: A total of 90 consecutive esophageal cancer patients underwent a transthoracic resection, 41 patients by means of a minimally invasive approach. Preoperative characteristics were comparable for both groups. The duration of surgery was longer in the MIE group (6.0 vs. 5.2 hours, P<0.001) and median blood loss was lower [100 vs. 500 mL (P<0.001)]. There was only a trend towards a shorter hospital stay in the MIE group (11 vs. 13 days, P=0.072), pulmonary complications occurred in 20% of patients in the MIE group vs. 31% in the open group (P=0.229). The overall complication rate was 51% in the MIE group vs. 63% in the open group, P=0.249. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of MIE in our center was successful and it appears to be a safe technique for patients with potentially curable esophageal carcinoma.