Prevalence and Risk Factors for Malignant Nodal Involvement in Early esophago-gastric Adenocarcinoma: Results from the Multicenter Retrospective Congress Study (endosCopic resectiON, esophaGectomy or Gastrectomy For Early Esophagogastric Cancers).

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to quantify LNM risk and outcomes following treatment of early esophago-gastric (EG) adenocarcinoma. BACKGROUND: The standard of care for early T1N0 EG cancer is endoscopic resection (ER). Radical surgical resection is recommended for patients perceived to be at risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM). Current models to select organ-preserving vs. surgical treatment are inconsistent. METHODS: CONGRESS is a UK-based multicentre retrospective cohort study. Patients diagnosed with clinical or pathological T1N0 EG adenocarcinoma from 2015-2022 were included. Outcomes and rates of LNM were assessed. Cox regression was performed to assess the impact of prognostic and treatment factors on overall survival. RESULTS: 1,601 patients from 26 centres were included, with median follow-up 32 months(IQR 14-53). 1285/1612(80.3%) underwent ER, 497/1601(31.0%) underwent surgery. Overall rate of LNM was 13.5%. On ER staging, tumour depth (T1bsm2-3 17.6% vs. T1a 7.1%), lymphovascular invasion (17.2% vs. 12.6%), or signet cells (28.6% vs. 13.0%) were associated with LNM. In multivariable regression analysis, these were not significantly associated with LNM rates or survival. Adjusting for demographic and tumour variables, surgery after ER was associated with significant survival benefit, HR 0.33(0.15-0.77),P=0.010. CONCLUSION: This large multicentre dataset suggests that early EG adenocarcinoma is associated with significant risk of LNM. This data is representative of current real clinical practice with ER-based staging, and suggests previously held beliefs regarding reliability of predictive factors for LNM may need to be reconsidered. Further research to identify patients who may benefit from organ-preserving vs. surgical treatment is urgently required.

The Prognostic Impact of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy on Survival After Esophagectomy Following a Delayed Interval After Chemoradiotherapy: A Secondary Analysis of the DICE Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate prognostic differences between minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and open esophagectomy (OE) in patients with surgery after a prolonged interval (>12 wk) following chemoradiotherapy (CRT). BACKGROUND: Previously, we established that a prolonged interval after CRT before esophagectomy was associated with poorer long-term survival. METHODS: This was an international multicenter cohort study involving 17 tertiary centers, including patients who received CRT followed by surgery between 2010 and 2020. Patients undergoing MIE were defined as thoracoscopic and laparoscopic approaches. RESULTS: A total of 428 patients (145 MIE and 283 OE) had surgery between 12 weeks and 2 years after CRT. Significant differences were observed in American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, radiation dose, clinical T stage, and histologic subtype. There were no significant differences between the groups in age, sex, body mass index, pathologic T or N stage, resection margin status, tumor location, surgical technique, or 90-day mortality. Survival analysis showed MIE was associated with improved survival in univariate ( P =0.014), multivariate analysis after adjustment for smoking, T and N stage, and histology (HR=1.69; 95% CI: 1.14-2.5) and propensity-matched analysis ( P =0.02). Further subgroup analyses by radiation dose and interval after CRT showed survival advantage for MIE in 40 to 50 Gy dose groups (HR=1.9; 95% CI: 1.2-3.0) and in patients having surgery within 6 months of CRT (HR=1.6; 95% CI: 1.1-2.2). CONCLUSIONS: MIE was associated with improved overall survival compared with OE in patients with a prolonged interval from CRT to surgery. The mechanism for this observed improvement in survival remains unknown, with potential hypotheses including a reduction in complications and improved functional recovery after MIE.

Reconstruction Techniques and Associated Morbidity in Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy for Cancer - Insights from the GastroBenchmark and GASTRODATA databases.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Various anastomotic and reconstruction techniques are used for minimally invasive total (miTG) and distal gastrectomy (miDG). Their effects on postoperative morbidity have not been extensively studied. METHODS: MiTG and miDG patients were selected from 9356 oncological gastrectomies performed 2017-2021 in 44 centers. Endpoints included anastomotic leakage (AL) rate and postoperative morbidity tested by multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Three major anastomotic techniques (circular stapled (CS); linear stapled (LS); hand sewn (HS)), and three major bowel reconstruction types (Roux (RX); Billroth I (BI); Billroth II (BII)) were identified in miTG (n=878) and miDG (n=3334). Postoperative complications including AL (5.2% vs. 1.1%), overall (28.7% vs. 16.3%) and major morbidity (15.7% vs. 8.2%), as well as 90-day mortality (1.6% vs. 0.5%) were higher after miTG compared with miDG. After miTG, AL rate was higher after CS (4.3%) and HS (7.9%) compared with LS (3.4%). Similarly, major complications (LS: 9.7%, CS: 16.2%, HS: 12.7%) were lowest after LS. Multivariate analysis confirmed anastomotic technique as predictive factor for AL, overall and major complications. In miDG, AL rate (BI: 1.4%, BII 0.8%, RX 1.2%), overall (BI: 14.5%, BII: 15.0%, RX: 18.7%,) and major morbidity (BI: 7.9%, BII: 9.1%, RX: 7.2%), and mortality (BI: 0%, BII: 0.1%, RY: 1.1%%) were not affected by bowel reconstruction. CONCLUSION: In oncologically suitable situations, miDG should be preferred to miTG, as postoperative morbidity is significantly lower. LS should be a preferred anastomotic technique for miTG in Western Centers. Conversely, bowel reconstruction in DG may be chosen according to surgeon's preference.

A Systematic Review of Surgical and Pathological Outcomes in Patients With a CDH1 Mutation Undergoing Total Gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: CDH1 (E-cadherin) genetic mutations are associated with a 30%-70% increased lifetime risk of hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC). Although prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG) reduces long-term risk of gastric cancer, the associated morbidity and mortality remain unclear. This systematic review aims to characterise postoperative surgical outcomes in patients undergoing total gastrectomy. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed for studies reporting endoscopic surveillance, surgical and pathological outcomes for patients with CDH1 mutation undergoing a total gastrectomy. RESULTS: Thirty-nine studies included 1849 patients, of which 96% had a CDH1 (n = 1777) or CTNNA1 (n = 3) mutation. Endoscopy outcomes were reported for 1640 patients. Cancer foci were identified in 32% (n = 523/1640) and 71% of these patients went on to have a total gastrectomy (n = 369/523). The remaining 78% of patients did not have cancer foci detected on endoscopy (n = 1117/1640). Of these patients, 62% underwent a total gastrectomy (n = 688/1117) and 81% were found to have cancer on surgical histology (n = 556/688). Pathological staging was reported for 790 patients undergoing surgery, of which 68% had pT1 disease (n = 537). Postoperative complications were reported for 430 patients across 23 studies, with the most common complications being anastomotic strictures (25%), anastomotic leaks (13%), wound infections (12%) and pulmonary complications (11%). Only one postoperative death was reported within 30 days. CONCLUSION: Rates of early cancers are high in CDH1 patients undergoing PTG, highlighting the need for improvement in reliable endoscopic surveillance. Although postoperative mortality in this surgical cohort remains low, high rates of postoperative complications warrant careful patient counselling.

Predictors of textbook outcome following oesophagogastric cancer surgery.

Textbook outcome (TO) is a composite measure representing an ideal perioperative course, which has been utilized to assess the quality of care in oesophagogastric cancer (OGC) surgery. We aim to determine TO rates among OGC patients in a UK tertiary center, investigate predictors of TO attainment, and evaluate the relationship between TO and survival. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected departmental database between 2006 and 2021 was conducted. Patients that underwent radical OGC surgery with curative intent were included. TO attainment required margin-negative resection, adequate lymphadenectomy, uncomplicated postoperative course, and no hospital readmission. Predictors of TO were investigated using multivariable logistic regression. The association between TO and survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression modeling. In sum, 667 esophageal cancer and 312 gastric cancer patients were included. TO was achieved in 35.1% of esophagectomy patients and 51.3% of gastrectomy patients. Several factors were independently associated with a low likelihood of TO attainment: T3 stage (odds ratio (OR): 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.22-0.79], p = 0.008) and T4 stage (OR:0.26, 95% CI [0.08-0.72], p = 0.013) in the esophagectomy cohort and high BMI (OR:0.93, 95% CI [0.88-0.98], p = 0.011) in the gastrectomy cohort. TO attainment was associated with greater overall survival and recurrence-free survival in esophagectomy and gastrectomy cohorts. TO is a relevant quality metric that can be utilized to compare surgical performance between centers and investigate patients at risk of TO failure. Enhancement of preoperative care measures can improve TO rates and, subsequently, long-term survival.

International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus consensus on management of the failed fundoplication.

Fundoplication is a durable, effective, and well-accepted treatment for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Nonetheless, troublesome postoperative symptoms do occasionally occur with management varying widely among centers. In an attempt to standardize definition and management of postfundoplication symptoms, a panel of international experts convened by the Guidelines Committee of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus devised a list of 33 statements across 5 domains through a Delphi approach, with at least 80% agreement to establish consensus. Eight statements were endorsed for the domain of Definitions, four for the domain of Investigations, nine for Dysphagia, nine for Heartburn, and four for Revisional surgery. This consensus defined as the treatment goal of fundoplication the resolution of symptoms rather than normalization of physiology or anatomy. Required investigations of all symptomatic postfundoplication patients were outlined. Further management was standardized by patients' symptomatology. The appropriateness of revisional fundoplication and the techniques thereof were described and the role of revisional surgery for therapies other than fundoplication were assessed. Fundoplication remains a frequently-performed operation, and this is the first international consensus on the management of various postfundoplication problems.

Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study of Oesophageal Injuries and Related Clinical Outcomes (MUSOIC study).

OBJECTIVE: To identify prognostic factors associated with 90-day mortality in patients with oesophageal perforation (OP), and characterize the specific timeline from presentation to intervention, and its relation to mortality. BACKGROUND: OP is a rare gastro-intestinal surgical emergency with a high mortality rate. However, there is no updated evidence on its outcomes in the context of centralized esophago-gastric services; updated consensus guidelines; and novel non-surgical treatment strategies. METHODS: A multi-center, prospective cohort study involving eight high-volume esophago-gastric centers (January 2016 to December 2020) was undertaken. The primary outcome measure was 90-day mortality. Secondary measures included length of hospital and ICU stay, and complications requiring re-intervention or re-admission. Mortality model training was performed using random forest, support-vector machines, and logistic regression with and without elastic net regularisation. Chronological analysis was performed by examining each patient's journey timepoint with reference to symptom onset. RESULTS: The mortality rate for 369 patients included was 18.9%. Patients treated conservatively, endoscopically, surgically, or combined approaches had mortality rates of 24.1%, 23.7%, 8.7%, and 18.2%, respectively. The predictive variables for mortality were Charlson comorbidity index, haemoglobin count, leucocyte count, creatinine levels, cause of perforation, presence of cancer, hospital transfer, CT findings, whether a contrast swallow was performed, and intervention type. Stepwise interval model showed that time to diagnosis was the most significant contributor to mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Non-surgical strategies have better outcomes and may be preferred in selected cohorts to manage perforations. Outcomes can be significantly improved through better risk-stratification based on afore-mentioned modifiable risk factors.

Delayed Surgical Intervention After Chemoradiotherapy in Esophageal Cancer: (DICE) Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of delayed surgical intervention following chemoradiotherapy (CRT) on survival from esophageal cancer. BACKGROUND: CRT is a core component of multimodality treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. The timing of surgery following CRT may influence the probability of performing an oncological resection and the associated operative morbidity. METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, cohort study, including patients from 17 centers who received CRT followed by surgery between 2010 and 2020. In the main analysis, patients were divided into 4 groups based upon the interval between CRT and surgery (0-50, 51-100, 101-200, and >200 days) to assess the impact upon 90-day mortality and 5-year overall survival. Multivariable logistic and Cox regression provided hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs adjusted for relevant patient, oncological, and pathologic confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 2867 patients who underwent esophagectomy after CRT were included. After adjustment for relevant confounders, prolonged interval following CRT was associated with an increased 90-day mortality compared with 0 to 50 days (reference): 51 to 100 days (HR=1.54, 95% CI: 1.04-2.29), 101 to 200 days (HR=2.14, 95% CI: 1.37-3.35), and >200 days (HR=3.06, 95% CI: 1.64-5.69). Similarly, a poorer 5-year overall survival was also observed with prolonged interval following CRT compared with 0 to 50 days (reference): 101 to 200 days (HR=1.41, 95% CI: 1.17-1.70), and >200 days (HR=1.64, 95% CI: 1.24-2.17). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged interval following CRT before esophagectomy is associated with increased 90-day mortality and poorer long-term survival. Further investigation is needed to understand the mechanism that underpins these adverse outcomes observed with a prolonged interval to surgery.

Effect of Anastomotic Leak on Long-Term Survival After Esophagectomy: Multivariate Meta-analysis and Restricted Mean Survival Times Examination.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak (AL) is a serious complication after esophagectomy. It is associated with prolonged hospital stay, increased costs, and increased risk for 90-day mortality. Controversy exists concerning the impact of AL on survival. This study was designed to investigate the effect of AL on long-term survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched through October 30, 2022. The included studies evaluated the effect of AL on long-term survival. Primary outcome was long-term overall survival. Restricted mean survival time difference (RMSTD), hazard ratio (HR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as pooled effect size measures. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (7118 patients) were included. Overall, 727 (10.2%) patients experienced AL. The RMSTD analysis shows that at 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months, patients not experiencing AL live an average of 0.7 (95% CI 0.2-1.2; p < 0.001), 1.9 (95% CI 1.1-2.6; p < 0.001), 2.6 (95% CI 1.6-3.7; p < 0.001), 3.4 (95% CI 1.9-4.9; p < 0.001), and 4.2 (95% CI 2.1-6.4; p < 0.001) months longer compared with those with AL, respectively. The time-dependent HRs analysis for AL versus no AL shows a higher mortality hazard in patients with AL at 3 (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.54-2.34), 6 (HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.39-1.75), 12 (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.24-1.54), and 24 months (HR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02-1.31). CONCLUSIONS: This study seems to suggest a modest clinical impact of AL on long-term OS after esophagectomy. Patients who experience AL seem to have a higher mortality hazard during the first 2 years of follow-up.

Treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: large, collaborative, observational TENTACLE cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak is a severe complication after oesophagectomy. Anastomotic leak has diverse clinical manifestations and the optimal treatment strategy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of treatment strategies for different manifestations of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in 71 centres worldwide and included patients with anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy (2011-2019). Different primary treatment strategies were compared for three different anastomotic leak manifestations: interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (that is no intrathoracic collections; well perfused conduit); drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations; and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Of 1508 patients with anastomotic leak, 28.2 per cent (425 patients) had local manifestations, 36.3 per cent (548 patients) had intrathoracic manifestations, 9.6 per cent (145 patients) had conduit ischaemia/necrosis, 17.5 per cent (264 patients) were allocated after multiple imputation, and 8.4 per cent (126 patients) were excluded. After propensity score matching, no statistically significant differences in 90-day mortality were found regarding interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (risk difference 3.2 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.8 to 8.2 per cent), drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations (risk difference 5.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.2 to 12.8 per cent), and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis (risk difference 0.1 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -21.4 to 1.6 per cent). In general, less morbidity was found after less extensive primary treatment strategies. CONCLUSION: Less extensive primary treatment of anastomotic leak was associated with less morbidity. A less extensive primary treatment approach may potentially be considered for anastomotic leak. Future studies are needed to confirm current findings and guide optimal treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy.

Predicting mortality in patients with anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: development of a prediction model using data from the TENTACLE-Esophagus study.

Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after esophagectomy, and over 10% of patients with AL suffer mortality. Different prognostic factors in patients with AL are known, but a tool to predict mortality after AL is lacking. This study aimed to develop a prediction model for postoperative mortality in patients with AL after esophagectomy. TENTACLE-Esophagus is an international retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. The primary outcome was 90-day postoperative mortality. Previously identified prognostic factors for mortality were selected as predictors: patient-related (e.g. comorbidity, performance status) and leak-related predictors (e.g. leucocyte count, overall gastric conduit condition). The prediction model was developed using multivariable logistic regression and validated internally using bootstrapping. Among the 1509 patients with AL, 90-day mortality was 11.7%. Sixteen predictors were included in the prediction model. The model showed good performance after internal validation: the c-index was 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.75-0.83). Predictions for mortality by the internally validated model aligned well with observed 90-day mortality rates. The prediction model was incorporated in an online tool for individual use and can be found at: https://www.tentaclestudy.com/prediction-model. The developed prediction model combines patient-related and leak-related factors to accurately predict postoperative mortality in patients with AL after esophagectomy. The model is useful for clinicians during counselling of patients and their families and may aid identification of high-risk patients at diagnosis of AL. In the future, the tool may guide clinical decision-making; however, external validation of the tool is warranted.

Research protocol for the Paraesophageal hernia symptom tool, a prospective multi-center cohort study to identify the need and threshold for surgery and assess the symptom response to surgery.

Large hiatus hernias with a significant paraesophageal component (types II-IV) have a range of insidious symptoms. Management of symptomatic hernias includes conservative treatment or surgery. Currently, there is no paraesophageal hernia disease-specific symptom questionnaire. As a result, many clinicians rely on the health-related quality of life questionnaires designed for gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GORD) to assess patients with hiatal hernias pre- and postoperatively. In view of this, a paraesophageal hernia symptom tool (POST) was designed. This POST questionnaire now requires validation and assessment of clinical utility. Twenty-one international sites will recruit patients with paraesophageal hernias to complete a series of questionnaires over a five-year period. There will be two cohorts of patients-patients with paraesophageal hernias undergoing surgery and patients managed conservatively. Patients are required to complete a validated GORD-HRQL, POST questionnaire, and satisfaction questionnaire preoperatively. Surgical cohorts will also complete questionnaires postoperatively at 4-6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and then annually for a total of 5 years. Conservatively managed patients will repeat questionnaires at 1 year. The first set of results will be released after 1 year with complete data published after a 5-year follow-up. The main results of the study will be patient's acceptance of the POST tool, clinical utility of the tool, assessment of the threshold for surgery, and patient symptom response to surgery. The study will validate the POST questionnaire and identify the relevance of the questionnaire in routine management of paraesophageal hernias.

The single cell transcriptional landscape of esophageal adenocarcinoma and its modulation by neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Immune checkpoint blockade has recently proven effective in subsets of patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) but little is known regarding the EAC immune microenvironment. We determined the single cell transcriptional profile of EAC in 8 patients who were treatment-naive (n = 4) or had received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (n = 4). Analysis of 52,387 cells revealed 10 major cell subsets of tumor, immune and stromal cells. Prior to chemotherapy tumors were heavy infiltrated by T regulatory cells and exhausted effector T cells whilst plasmacytoid dendritic cells were markedly expanded. Two dominant cancer-associated fibroblast populations were also observed whilst endothelial populations were suppressed. Pathological remission following chemotherapy associated with broad reversal of immune abnormalities together with fibroblast transition and an increase in endothelial cells whilst a chemoresistant epithelial stem cell population correlated with poor response. These findings reveal features that underlie and limit the response to current immunotherapy and identify a range of novel opportunities for targeted therapy.

An International Cohort Study of Prognosis Associated With Pathologically Complete Response Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Chemoradiotherapy of Surgical Treated Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To compare overall (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in esophageal adenocarcinoma patients with a pathologically complete response (pCR) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (nCT) or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). BACKGROUND: In the absence of survival differences in several prior studies comparing nCT with nCRT, the higher rate of pCR after nCRT has been suggested as reason to prefer this modality over nCT. METHODS: An international cohort study included data from 8 high-volume centers. Inclusion criteria was patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma, between 2008 and 2018, who had a pCR after nCT or nCRT. Univariate analysis was used to compare demographic factors, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis used to compare 5-year OS and RFS between groups. RESULTS: In all, 465 patients with pCR following neoadjuvant treatment were included; 132 received nCT and 333 received nCRT. There was no statistically significant difference in 5-year OS between groups (78.8% (nCT) vs 65.5% (nCRT), P =0.099), with a similar result demonstrated in multivariate analysis (HR=1.19, 95% CI 0.77-1.84). 5-year RFS was significantly reduced in patients with a pCR following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (75.3% (nCRT) vs 87.1% (nCT), P =0.026). Multivariate analysis confirmed nCRT was associated with a poorer 5-year RFS (HR=1.70, 95% CI 1.22-2.99). nCRT associated with a significantly greater prevalence of 5-year distant recurrence (odds ratio=2.50, 95% CI 1.25-4.99). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this international cohort study show that the prognosis of pCR following different neoadjuvant regimes differs, bringing into question the validity of this measure as an oncological surrogate when comparing neoadjuvant treatment schemes for esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Acute Kidney Injury After Esophageal Cancer Surgery: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Impact on Oncologic Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence, risk factors, and consequences of AKI in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Esophageal cancer surgery is an exemplar of major operative trauma, with well-defined risks of respiratory, cardiac, anastomotic, and septic complications. However, there is a paucity of literature regarding AKI. METHODS: consecutive patients undergoing curative-intent surgery for esophageal cancer from 2011 to 2017 in 3 high-volume centers were studied. AKI was defined according to the AKI Network criteria. AKI occurred if, within 48 hours postoperatively, serum creatinine rose by 50% or by 0.3 mg/dL (26.5 µmol/L) from preoperative baseline. Complications were recorded prospectively. Multivariable logistic regression determined factors independently predictive of AKI. RESULTS: A total of 1135 patients (24.7%:75.3% female:male, with a mean age of 64, a baseline BMI of 27 kg m-2, and dyslipidemia in 10.2%), underwent esophageal cancer surgery, 85% having an open thoracotomy. Overall in-hospital mortality was 2.1%. Postoperative AKI was observed in 208 (18.3%) patients, with AKI Network 1, 2, and 3 in 173 (15.2%), 28 (2.5%), and 7 (0.6%), respectively. Of these, 70.3% experienced improved renal function within 48 hours. Preoperative factors independently predictive of AKI were age [P = 0.027, odds ratio (OR) 1.02 (1.00-1.04)], male sex [P = 0.015, OR 1.77 (1.10-2.81)], BMI at diagnosis [P < 0.001, OR 1.10 (1.07-1.14)], and dyslipidemia [P = 0.002, OR 2.14 (1.34-3.44)]. Postoperatively, AKI was associated with atrial fibrillation (P = 0.013) and pneumonia (P = 0.005). Postoperative AKI did not impact survival outcomes. CONCLUSION: AKI is common but mostly self-limiting after esophageal cancer surgery. It is associated with age, male sex, increased BMI, dyslipidemia, and postoperative morbidity.

Robotic Techniques in Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery: An Assessment of Short- and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Robotic esophagogastric cancer surgery is gaining widespread adoption. This population-based cohort study aimed to compare rates of textbook outcomes (TOs) and survival from robotic minimally invasive techniques for esophagogastric cancer. METHODS: Data from the United States National Cancer Database (NCDB) (2010-2017) were used to identify patients with non-metastatic esophageal or gastric cancer receiving open surgery (to the esophagus, n = 11,442; stomach, n = 22,183), laparoscopic surgery (to the esophagus [LAMIE], n = 4827; stomach [LAMIG], n = 6359), or robotic surgery (to the esophagus [RAMIE], n = 1657; stomach [RAMIG], n = 1718). The study defined TOs as 15 or more lymph nodes examined, margin-negative resections, hospital stay less than 21 days, no 30-day readmissions, and no 90-day mortalities. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox analyses were used to account for treatment selection bias. RESULTS: Patients receiving robotic surgery were more commonly treated in high-volume academic centers with advanced clinical T and N stage disease. From 2010 to 2017, TO rates increased for esophageal and gastric cancer treated via all surgical techniques. Compared with open surgery, significantly higher TO rates were associated with RAMIE (odds ratio [OR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.58) and RAMIG (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.17-1.45). For esophagectomy, long-term survival was associated with both TO (hazard ratio [HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.60-0.67) and RAMIE (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.84-1.00). For gastrectomy, long-term survival was associated with TO (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.56-0.60) and both LAMIG (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.85-0.94) and RAMIG (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.81-0.96). Subset analysis in high-volume centers confirmed similar findings. CONCLUSION: Despite potentially adverse learning curve effects and more advanced tumor stages captured during the study period, both RAMIE and RAMIG performed in mostly high-volume centers were associated with improved TO and long-term survival. Therefore, consideration for wider adoption but a well-designed phase 3 randomized controlled trial (RCT) is required for a full evaluation of the benefits conferred by robotic techniques for esophageal and gastric cancers.

Development of the ParaOesophageal hernia SympTom (POST) tool.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to develop a symptom severity instrument (ParaOesophageal hernia SympTom (POST) tool) specific to para-oesophageal hernia (POH). METHODS: The POST tool was developed in four stages. The first was establishment of a Steering Committee. In the second stage, items were generated through a systematic review and online scoping survey of international experts. In the third stage, a three-round modified Delphi consensus process was conducted with a group of international experts who were asked to rate the importance of candidate items. An a priori threshold for inclusion was set at 80 per cent. The modified Delphi process culminated in a consensus meeting to develop the first iteration of the tool. In the final stage, two international patient workshops were held to assess the content validity and acceptability of the POST tool. RESULTS: The systematic review and scoping survey generated 64 symptoms, refined to 20 for inclusion in the modified Delphi consensus process. Twenty-six global experts participated in the Delphi consensus process. Five symptoms reached consensus across two rounds: difficulty getting solid foods down, chest pain after meals, difficulty getting liquids down, shortness of breath only after meals, and an early feeling of fullness after eating. The subsequent patient workshops deemed these five symptoms to be relevant and suggested that reflux should be included; these were taken forward to create the final POST tool. CONCLUSION: The POST tool is the first instrument designed to capture POH-specific symptoms. It will allow clinicians to standardize reporting of symptoms of POH and evaluate the response to surgical intervention.

Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak in patients after oesophagectomy: the SEAL score.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after oesophagectomy. It is unknown how to determine the severity of AL objectively at diagnosis. Determining leak severity may guide treatment decisions and improve future research. This study aimed to identify leak-related prognostic factors for mortality, and to develop a Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score. METHODS: This international, retrospective cohort study in 71 centres worldwide included patients with AL after oesophagectomy between 2011 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Leak-related prognostic factors were identified after adjusting for confounders and were included in multivariable logistic regression to develop the SEAL score. Four classes of leak severity (mild, moderate, severe, and critical) were defined based on the risk of 90-day mortality, and the score was validated internally. RESULTS: Some 1509 patients with AL were included and the 90-day mortality rate was 11.7 per cent. Twelve leak-related prognostic factors were included in the SEAL score. The score showed good calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 0.81). Higher classes of leak severity graded by the SEAL score were associated with a significant increase in duration of ICU stay, healing time, Comprehensive Complication Index score, and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group classification. CONCLUSION: The SEAL score grades leak severity into four classes by combining 12 leak-related predictors and can be used to the assess severity of AL after oesophagectomy.

Adhesion-related readmissions after open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery in 16 524 patients.

AIM: Colorectal surgery is associated with a high risk of adhesion formation and subsequent complications. Laparoscopic colorectal surgery reduces adhesion formation by 50%; however, the effect on adhesion-related complications is still unknown. This study aims to compare differences in incidence rates of adhesion-related readmissions after laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery. METHOD: Population data from the Scottish National Health Service were used to identify patients who underwent colorectal surgery between June 2009 and June 2011. Readmissions were registered until December 2017 and categorized as being either directly or possibly related to adhesions, or as reoperations potentially complicated by adhesions. The primary outcome measure was the difference in incidence of directly adhesion-related readmissions between the open and laparoscopic cohort. RESULTS: Colorectal surgery was performed in 16 524 patients; 4455 (27%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were readmitted less frequently for directly adhesion-related complications, 2.4% (95% CI 2.0%-2.8%) versus 7.5% (95% CI 7.1%-7.9%) in the open cohort. Readmissions for possibly adhesion-related complications were less frequent in the laparoscopic cohort, 16.8% (95% CI 15.6%-18.0%) versus 21.7% (95% CI 20.9%-22.5%), as well as reoperations potentially complicated by adhesions, 9.7% (95% CI 8.9%-10.5%) versus 16.9% (95% CI 16.3%-17.5%). CONCLUSION: Overall, any adhesion-related readmissions occurred in over one in three patients after open colorectal surgery and one in four after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Compared with open surgery, incidence rates of adhesion-related complications decrease but remain substantial after laparoscopic surgery.

Identifying a core symptom set triggering radiological and endoscopic investigations for suspected recurrent esophago-gastric cancer: a modified Delphi consensus process.

BACKGROUND: There is currently a lack of evidence-based guidelines regarding surveillance for recurrence after esophageal and gastric (OG) cancer surgical resection, and which symptoms should prompt endoscopic or radiological investigations for recurrence. The aim of this study was to develop a core symptom set using a modified Delphi consensus process that should guide clinicians to carry out investigations to look for suspected recurrent OG cancer in previously asymptomatic patients. METHODS: A web-based survey of 42 questions was sent to surgeons performing OG cancer resections at high volume centers. The first section evaluated the structure of follow-up and the second, determinants of follow-up. Two rounds of a modified Delphi consensus process and a further consensus workshop were used to determine symptoms warranting further investigations. Symptoms with a 75% consensus agreement as suggestive of recurrent cancer were included in the core symptom set. RESULTS: 27 surgeons completed the questionnaires. A total of 70.3% of centers reported standardized surveillance protocols, whereas 3.7% of surgeons did not undertake any surveillance in asymptomatic patients after OG cancer resection. In asymptomatic patients, 40.1% and 25.9% of centers performed routine imaging and endoscopy, respectively. The core set that reached consensus, consisted of eight symptoms that warranted further investigations included; dysphagia to solid food, dysphagia to liquids, vomiting, abdominal pain, chest pain, regurgitation of foods, unexpected weight loss and progressive hoarseness of voice. CONCLUSION: There is global variation in monitoring patients after OG cancer resection. Eight symptoms were identified by the consensus process as important in prompting radiological or endoscopic investigation for suspected recurrent malignancy. Further randomized controlled trials are necessary to link surveillance strategies to survival outcomes and evaluate prognostic value.