Recurrence and Survival After Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Ensure Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of operative approach [open (OE), hybrid minimally invasive (HMIE), and total minimally invasive (TMIE) esophagectomy] on operative and oncologic outcomes for patients treated with curative intent for esophageal and junctional cancer. BACKGROUND: The optimum oncologic surgical approach to esophageal and junctional cancer is unclear. METHODS: This secondary analysis of the European multicenter ENSURE study includes patients undergoing curative-intent esophagectomy for cancer between 2009 and 2015 across 20 high-volume centers. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and the incidence and location of disease recurrence. Secondary endpoints included among others R0 resection rate, lymph node yield, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: In total, 3199 patients were included. Of these, 55% underwent OE, 17% HMIE, and 29% TMIE. DFS was independently increased post-TMIE [hazard ratio (HR): 0.86 (95% CI: 0.76-0.98), P = 0.022] compared with OE. Multivariable regression demonstrated no difference in absolute locoregional recurrence risk according to the operative approach [HMIE vs OE, odds ratio (OR): 0.79, P = 0.257; TMIE vs OE, OR: 0.84, P = 0.243]. The probability of systemic recurrence was independently increased post-HMIE (OR: 2.07, P = 0.031), but not TMIE (OR: 0.86, P = 0.508). R0 resection rates ( P = 0.005) and nodal yield ( P < 0.001) were independently increased after TMIE, but not HMIE ( P = 0.424; P = 0.512) compared with OE. OS was independently improved following both HMIE (HR: 0.79, P = 0.009) and TMIE (HR: 0.82, P = 0.003) as compared with OE. CONCLUSION: In this European multicenter study, TMIE was associated with improved surgical quality and DFS, whereas both TMIE and HMIE were associated with improved OS as compared with OE for esophageal cancer.

Evolution in Laparoscopic Gastrectomy From a Randomized Controlled Trial Through National Clinical Practice.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of the LOGICA RCT (randomized controlled trial) upon the practice and outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy within the Netherlands. BACKGROUND: Following RCTs the dissemination of complex interventions has been poorly studied. The LOGICA RCT included 10 Dutch centers and compared laparoscopic to open gastrectomy. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) on all gastrectomies performed in the Netherlands (2012-2021), and the LOGICA RCT from 2015 to 2018. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the effect of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy upon clinical outcomes before, during, and after the LOGICA RCT. RESULTS: Two hundred eleven patients from the LOGICA RCT (105 open vs 106 laparoscopic) and 4131 patients from the DUCA data set (1884 open vs 2247 laparoscopic) were included. In 2012, laparoscopic gastrectomy was performed in 6% of patients, increasing to 82% in 2021. No significant effect of laparoscopic gastrectomy on postoperative clinical outcomes was observed within the LOGICA RCT. Nationally within DUCA, a shift toward a beneficial effect of laparoscopic gastrectomy upon complications was observed, reaching a significant reduction in overall [adjusted odds ratio (aOR):0.62; 95% CI: 0.46-0.82], severe (aOR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.46-0.90) and cardiac complications (aOR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.30-0.89) after the LOGICA trial. CONCLUSIONS: The wider benefits of the LOGICA trial included the safe dissemination of laparoscopic gastrectomy across the Netherlands. The robust surgical quality assurance program in the design of the LOGICA RCT was crucial to facilitate the national dissemination of the technique following the trial and reducing potential patient harm during surgeons learning curve.

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 prior to esophagectomy was associated with poorer long-term survival. METHODS: This was an international multi-center cohort study involving seventeen tertiary centers, including patients who received CRT followed by surgery between 2010-2020. Patients undergoing MIE were defined as thoracoscopic and laparoscopic approach. RESULTS: 428 patients (145 MIE and 283 OE) had surgery between 12 weeks and two years after CRT. Significant differences were observed in ASA grade, radiation dose, clinical T stage, and histological subtype. There were no significant differences between the groups in age, sex, BMI, pathological 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 to 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 40-50Gy dose groups (HR=1.9; 95% CI 1.2 to 3.0), and in patients having surgery within six months of CRT (HR=1.6; 95% CI 1.1 to 2.2). CONCLUSION: MIE was associated with an improved overall survival compared to 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.

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

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

Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency after non-pancreatic upper gastrointestinal surgery: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Untreated pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) results in substantial patient harm. Upper gastrointestinal surgery (bariatric metabolic surgery and oesophagogastric resection) affects the delicate physiology of pancreatic exocrine function and may result in PEI. The aim of this study was to assimilate the literature on incidence, diagnosis, and management of PEI after bariatric metabolic surgery and oesophagogastric resection. METHODS: A systematic review of PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases identified studies investigating PEI after non-pancreatic upper gastrointestinal surgery. Meta-analyses were undertaken for incidence of PEI and benefit of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. RESULTS: Among 1620 patients from 24 studies included in quantitative synthesis, 36.0% developed PEI. The incidence of PEI was 23.0 and 50.4% after bariatric metabolic surgery and oesophagogastric resection respectively. Notably, the incidence of PEI was 44% after biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch and 66.2% after total gastrectomy. The most common diagnostic test used was faecal elastase 1 (15 of 31 studies), with less than 200 µg/g being diagnostic of PEI. A total of 11 studies considered the management of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, with 78.6% of patients responding positively to pancreatic enzyme replacement when it was prescribed. CONCLUSION: PEI is common after non-pancreatic upper gastrointestinal surgery and patients may benefit from enzyme replacement therapy.

Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency occurs when enzymes from the pancreas are unable to help digest food. Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency is known to cause disruptive symptoms after gastrointestinal surgery. Although such symptoms are well known after pancreatic surgery, after other gastrointestinal operations, including bariatric metabolic surgery and oesophagogastric cancer resection, pancreatic exocrine insufficiency is often overlooked as a cause of both symptoms and poor nutrition. This study looked at, and combined, all the current evidence on the rate of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency after these operations, the way it is diagnosed, and how it is treated. Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency may be more common than previously thought after bariatric metabolic surgery or oesophagogastric surgery, and clinicians working with these patients should have a low threshold for starting treatment.

Western European Variation in the Organization of Esophageal Cancer Surgical Care.

Reasons for structural and outcome differences in esophageal cancer surgery in Western Europe remain unclear. This questionnaire study aimed to identify differences in the organization of esophageal cancer surgical care in Western Europe. A cross-sectional international questionnaire study was conducted among upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgeons from Western Europe. One surgeon per country was selected based on scientific output and active membership in the European Society for Diseases of the Esophagus or (inter)national upper GI committee. The questionnaire consisted of 51 structured questions on the structural organization of esophageal cancer surgery, surgical training, and clinical audit processes. Between October 2021 and October 2022, 16 surgeons from 16 European countries participated in this study. In 5 countries (31%), a volume threshold was present ranging from 10 to 26 annual esophagectomies, in 7 (44%) care was centralized in designated centers, and in 4 (25%) no centralizing regulations were present. The number of centers performing esophageal cancer surgery per country differed from 4 to 400, representing 0.5-4.9 centers per million inhabitants. In 4 countries (25%), esophageal cancer surgery was part of general surgical training and 8 (50%) reported the availability of upper GI surgery fellowships. A national audit for upper GI surgery was present in 8 (50%) countries. If available, all countries use the audit to monitor the quality of care. Substantial differences exist in the organization and centralization of esophageal cancer surgical care in Western Europe. The exchange of experience in the organizational aspects of care could further improve the results of esophageal cancer surgical care in Europe.

An International Multicenter Study Exploring Whether Surveillance After Esophageal Cancer Surgery Impacts Oncological and Quality of Life Outcomes (ENSURE).

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of surveillance on recurrence pattern, treatment, survival and health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) following curative-intent resection for esophageal cancer. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although therapies for recurrent esophageal cancer may impact survival and HRQL, surveillance protocols after primary curative treatment are varied and inconsistent, reflecting a lack of evidence. METHODS: European iNvestigation of SUrveillance after Resection for Esophageal cancer was an international multicenter study of consecutive patients undergoing surgery for esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancers (2009-2015) across 20 centers (NCT03461341). Intensive surveillance (IS) was defined as annual computed tomography for 3 years postoperatively. The primary outcome measure was overall survival (OS), secondary outcomes included treatment, disease-specific survival, recurrence pattern, and HRQL. Multivariable linear, logistic, and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: Four thousand six hundred eighty-two patients were studied (72.6% adenocarcinoma, 69.1% neoadjuvant therapy, 45.5% IS). At median followup 60 months, 47.5% developed recurrence, oligometastatic in 39%. IS was associated with reduced symptomatic recurrence (OR 0.17 [0.12-0.25]) and increased tumor-directed therapy (OR 2.09 [1.58-2.77]). After adjusting for confounders, no OS benefit was observed among all patients (HR 1.01 [0.89-1.13]), but OS was improved following IS for those who underwent surgery alone (HR 0.60 [0.47-0.78]) and those with lower pathological (y)pT stages (Tis-2, HR 0.72 [0.58-0.89]). IS was associated with greater anxiety ( P =0.016), but similar overall HRQL. CONCLUSIONS: IS was associated with improved oncologic outcome in select cohorts, specifically patients with early-stage disease at presentation or favorable pathological stage post neoadjuvant therapy. This may inform guideline development, and enhance shared decision-making, at a time when therapeutic options for recurrence are expanding.

Decreased Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma After Gastric Bypass Surgery in a Cohort Study From 3 Nordic Countries.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that bariatric surgery decreases the risk of esophageal and cardia adenocarcinoma. BACKGROUND: Obesity is strongly associated with esophageal adenocarcinoma and moderately with cardia adenocarcinoma, but whether weight loss prevents these tumors is unknown. METHODS: This population-based cohort study included patients with an obesity diagnosis in Sweden, Finland, or Denmark. Participants were divided into a bariatric surgery group and a nonoperated group. The incidence of esophageal and cardia adenocarcinoma (ECA) was first compared with the corresponding background population by calculating standardized incidence ratios (SIR) with 95% CIs. Second, the bariatric surgery group and the nonoperated group were compared using multivariable Cox regression, providing hazard ratios (HR) with 95% CI, adjusted for sex, age, comorbidity, calendar year, and country. RESULTS: Among 748,932 participants with an obesity diagnosis, 91,731 underwent bariatric surgery, predominantly gastric bypass (n=70,176; 76.5%). The SIRs of ECA decreased over time after gastric bypass, from SIR=2.2 (95% CI, 0.9-4.3) after 2 to 5 years to SIR=0.6 (95% CI, <0.1-3.6) after 10 to 40 years. Gastric bypass patients were also at a decreased risk of ECA compared with nonoperated patients with obesity [adjusted HR=0.6, 95% CI, 0.4-1.0 (0.98)], with decreasing point estimates over time. Gastric bypass was followed by a strongly decreased adjusted risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma (HR=0.3, 95% CI, 0.1-0.8) but not of cardia adenocarcinoma (HR=0.9, 95% CI, 0.5-1.6), when analyzed separately. There were no consistent associations between other bariatric procedures (mainly gastroplasty, gastric banding, sleeve gastrectomy, and biliopancreatic diversion) and ECA. CONCLUSIONS: Gastric bypass surgery may counteract the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma in morbidly obese individuals.

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.

Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Versus Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma in the European Multicenter ENSURE Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare clinicopathologic, oncologic, and health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes following neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) and chemotherapy (nCT) in the ENSURE international multicenter study. BACKGROUND: nCT and nCRT are the standards of care for locally advanced esophageal cancer (LAEC) treated with curative intent. However, no published randomized controlled trial to date has demonstrated the superiority of either approach. METHODS: ENSURE is an international multicenter study of consecutive patients undergoing surgery for LAEC (2009-2015) across 20 high-volume centers (NCT03461341). The primary outcome measure was overall survival (OS), secondary outcomes included histopathologic response, recurrence pattern, oncologic outcome, and HRQL in survivorship. RESULTS: A total of 2211 patients were studied (48% nCT, 52% nCRT). pCR was observed in 4.9% and 14.7% ( P <0.001), with R0 in 78.2% and 94.2% ( P <0.001) post nCT and nCRT, respectively. Postoperative morbidity was equivalent, but in-hospital mortality was independently increased [hazard ratio (HR)=2.73, 95% CI: 1.43-5.21, P= 0.002] following nCRT versus nCT. Probability of local recurrence was reduced (odds ratio=0.71, 95% CI: 0.54-0.93, P =0.012), and distant recurrence-free survival time reduced (HR=1.18, 95% CI: 1.02-1.37, P =0.023) after nCRT versus nCT, with no difference in OS among all patients (HR=1.10, 95% CI: 0.98-1.25, P =0.113). On subgroup analysis, patients who underwent R0 resection following nCT as compared with nCRT had improved OS (median: 60.7 months, 95% CI: 49.5-71.8 vs 40.8 months, 95% CI: 42.8-53.4, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this European multicenter study, nCRT compared with nCT was associated with reduced probability of local recurrence but reduced distant recurrence-free survival for patients with LAEC, without differences in OS. These data support tailored patient-specific decision-making in the overall approach to achieving optimum outcomes in LAEC.

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.

A Complete Pipeline for Untargeted Urinary Volatolomic Profiling with Sorptive Extraction and Dual Polar and Nonpolar Column Methodologies Coupled with Gas Chromatography Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry.

Volatolomics offers an opportunity for noninvasive detection and monitoring of human disease. While gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) remains the technique of choice for analyzing volatile organic compounds (VOCs), barriers to wider adoption in clinical practice still exist, including: sample preparation and introduction techniques, VOC extraction, throughput, volatolome coverage, biological interpretation, and quality control (QC). Therefore, we developed a complete pipeline for untargeted urinary volatolomic profiling. We optimized a novel extraction technique using HiSorb sorptive extraction, which exhibited high analytical performance and throughput. We achieved a broader VOC coverage by using HiSorb coupled with a set of complementary chromatographic methods and time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Furthermore, we developed a data preprocessing strategy by evaluating internal standard normalization, batch correction, and we adopted strict QC measures including removal of nonlinearly responding, irreproducible, or contaminated metabolic features, ensuring the acquisition of high-quality data. The applicability of this pipeline was evaluated in a clinical cohort consisting of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients (n = 28) and controls (n = 33), identifying four urinary candidate biomarkers (2-pentanone, hexanal, 3-hexanone, and p-cymene), which can successfully discriminate the cancer and noncancer subjects. This study presents an optimized, high-throughput, and quality-controlled pipeline for untargeted urinary volatolomic profiling. Use of the pipeline to discriminate PDAC from control subjects provides proof of principal of its clinical utility and potential for application in future biomarker discovery studies.

Quantifying the burden of survivorship associated with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVES: Survivorship encompasses the physical, psychological, social, functional, and economic experience of a living with a chronic condition for both the patient and their caregiver. It is made up of nine distinct domains and remains understudied in nononcological pathologies, including infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysmal disease (AAA). This review aims to quantify the extent to which existing AAA literature addresses the burden of survivorship. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsychINFO databases were searched from 1989 through September 2022. Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and case series were included. Eligible studies had to detail outcomes related to survivorship in patients with AAA. Owing to the heterogeneity between studies and outcomes, no meta-analysis was conducted. Study quality was assessed with specific risk of bias tools. RESULTS: A total of 158 studies were included. Of these, only five (treatment complications, physical functioning, comorbidities, caregivers, and mental health) of the nine domains of survivorship have been studied previously. The available evidence is of variable quality; most studies display a moderate to high risk of bias, are of an observational study design, are based within a limited number of countries, and consist of an insufficient follow-up period. The most frequent complication after EVAR was endoleak. EVAR is associated with poorer long-term outcomes compared with open surgical repair in most studies retrieved. EVAR showed better outcomes in regard to physical functioning in the short term, but this advantage was lost in the long term. The most common comorbidity studied was obesity. No significant differences were found between open surgical repair and EVAR in terms of impact on caregivers. Depression is associated with various comorbidities and increased the risk of a nonhospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights the absence of robust evidence regarding survivorship in AAA. As a result, contemporary treatment guidelines rely on historic quality-of-life data that are narrow in scope and nonrepresentative of contemporary clinical practice. As such, there is an urgent need to reevaluate the aims and methodology associated with traditional quality-of-life research moving forward.

Bariatric surgery volume by hospital and long-term survival: population-based NordOSCo data.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether annual hospital volume of bariatric surgery influences the long-term survival of individuals who undergo surgery for severe obesity. The hypothesis that higher annual hospital volume of bariatric surgery is associated with better long-term survival was evaluated. METHODS: This retrospective population-based study included patients who underwent bariatric surgery in Sweden and Finland between 1989 and 2020. Annual hospital volume was analysed for risk of all-cause mortality. Multivariable Cox regression provided HRs with 95 per cent confidence intervals adjusted for age, sex, co-morbidity, country, and type of bariatric procedure. RESULTS: Weight loss surgery was performed in 77 870 patients with a 0.5 per cent risk of postoperative death (mortality rate (MR) per 100 000 people 592.7, 95 per cent c.i. 575.0 to 610.9). Higher annual hospital volume of bariatric surgery was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality. The adjusted HRs were slightly more reduced for each quartile of annual hospital volume compared with the lowest quartile (MR per 100 000 people for lowest quartile 815.1, 95 per cent c.i. 781.7 to 849.9; for quartile II: HR 0.88, 95 per cent c.i. 0.81 to 0.96 (MR per 100 000 people 545.0, 512.0 to 580.1); for quartile III: HR 0.87, 0.78 to 0.97 (MR per 100 000 people 428.8, 395.5 to 465.0); for quartile IV: HR 0.82, 0.73 to 0.93 (MR per 100 000 people 356.0, 324.1 to 391.1)). In analyses restricted to laparoscopic surgery, volume and mortality were related only in the crude model (HR 0.86, 0.75 to 0.98), but not in the multivariable model (HR 0.97, 0.84 to 1.13) that compared highest and lowest quartiles. CONCLUSION: If there was a survival benefit associated with hospital volume, it may have been due to a faster uptake of laparoscopic surgery in the busier hospitals.

EAES Multidisciplinary Rapid Guideline: systematic review, meta-analysis, GRADE assessment and evidence-informed recommendations on the surgical management of paraesophageal hernias.

BACKGROUND: New evidence has emerged since latest guidelines on the management of paraesophageal hernia, and guideline development methodology has evolved. Members of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery have prioritized the management of paraesophageal hernia to be addressed by pertinent recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on paraesophageal hernias, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders. METHODS: We performed three systematic reviews, and we summarized and appraised the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE methodology. A panel of general and upper gastrointestinal surgeons, gastroenterologists and a patient advocate discussed the evidence in the context of benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, acceptability, feasibility, equity, cost and use of resources, moderated by a Guidelines International Network-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey. RESULTS: The panel suggests surgery over conservative management for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias (conditional recommendation), and recommends conservative management over surgery for asymptomatic/minimally symptomatic paraesophageal hernias in frail patients (strong recommendation). Further, the panel suggests mesh over sutures for hiatal closure in paraesophageal hernia repair, fundoplication over gastropexy in elective paraesophageal hernia repair, and gastropexy over fundoplication in patients who have cardiopulmonary instability and require emergency paraesophageal hernia repair (conditional recommendation). A strong recommendation means that the proposed course of action is appropriate for the vast majority of patients. A conditional recommendation means that most patients would opt for the proposed course of action, and joint decision-making of the surgeon and the patient is required. Accompanying evidence summaries and evidence-to-decision frameworks should be read when using the recommendations. This guideline applies to adult patients with moderate to large paraesophageal hernias type II to IV with at least 50% of the stomach herniated to the thoracic cavity. The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/j7q7Gn . CONCLUSION: An interdisciplinary panel provides recommendations on key topics on the management of paraesophageal hernias using highest methodological standards and following a transparent process. GUIDELINE REGISTRATION NUMBER: PREPARE-2023CN018.

Evaluation of tumor regression by neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens for esophageal adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinomas (EACs) are treated with multimodal therapy, namely surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT) depending on patient and tumor level factors. Yet, there is little consensus on choice of the optimum systemic therapy. To compare the pathological complete response (pCR) after FLOT, non-FLOT-based chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy regimes in patients with EACs. A systematic review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Review and Scopus databases. Studies were included if they had investigated the use of chemo(radio)therapy regimens in the neoadjuvant setting for EAC and reported the pCR rates. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed to compare the pooled pCR rates between FLOT, non-FLOT and CRT cohorts. We included 22 studies that described tumor regression post-NAC. Altogether, 1,056 patients had undergone FLOT or DCF regimes, while 1,610 patients had received ECF or ECX. The pCR rates ranged from 3.3% to 54% for FLOT regimes, while pCR ranged between 0% and 31% for ECF/ECX protocols. Pooled random-effects meta-meta-analysis of proportions showed a statistically significant higher incidence of pCR in FLOT-based chemotherapy at 0.148 (95%CI: 0.080, 0.259) compared with non-FLOT-based chemotherapy at 0.074 (95%CI: 0.042, 0.129). However, pCR rates were significantly highest at 0.250 (95%CI: 0.202, 0.306) for CRT. The use of enhanced FLOT-based regimens have improved the pCR rates for chemotherapeutic regimes but still falls short of pathological outcomes from CRT. Further work can characterize clinical responses to neoadjuvant therapy and determine whether an organ-preservation strategy is feasible.

Longer-term outcomes of gastroesophageal reflux disease treated with magnetic sphincter augmentation.

Surgical intervention for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has historically been limited to fundoplication. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a less invasive alternative that was introduced 15 years ago, and it may have a superior side-effect profile. To date, however, there has been just a single published study reporting outcomes in a UK population. This study reports quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes and antacid use in patients undergoing MSA, with a particular focus on postoperative symptoms and those with severe reflux. A single-center cohort study was carried out to assess the QOL outcomes and report long-term safety outcomes in patients undergoing MSA. GERD-health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) and Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) scores were collected preoperatively, and immediately postoperatively, at 1-, 2-, 3-, and 5-year follow-up time points. All patients underwent preoperative esophagogastroduodenoscopy, impedance, and manometry. Two hundred and two patients underwent laparoscopic MSA over 9 years. The median preoperative GERD-HRQL score was 31, and the median RSI score was 17. There was a reduction in all scores from preoperative values to each time point, which was sustained at 5-year follow-up; 13% of patients had a preoperative DeMeester score of >50, and their median preoperative GERD-HRQL and RSI scores were 32 and 15.5, respectively. These were reduced to 0 at the most recent follow-up. There was a significant reduction in antacid use at all postoperative time points. Postoperative dilatation was necessary in 7.4% of patients, and the device was removed in 1.4%. Erosion occurred in no patients. MSA is safe and effective at reducing symptom burden and improving QOL scores in patients with both esophageal and laryngopharyngeal symptoms, including those with severe reflux.

Results of the ARROW survey of anti-reflux practice in the United Kingdom.

Gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common, significant health burden. United Kingdom guidance states that surgery should be considered for patients with a diagnosis of GERD not suitable for long-term acid suppression. There is no consensus on many aspects of patient pathways and optimal surgical technique, and an absence of information on how patients are currently selected for surgery. Further detail on the delivery of anti-reflux surgery (ARS) is required. A United Kingdom-wide survey was designed to gather surgeon opinion regarding pre-, peri- and post-operative practice of ARS. Responses were received from 155 surgeons at 57 institutions. Most agreed that endoscopy (99%), 24-hour pH monitoring (83%) and esophageal manometry (83%) were essential investigations prior to surgery. Of 57 units, 30 (53%) had access to a multidisciplinary team to discuss cases; case-loads were higher in those units (median 50 vs. 30, P < 0.024). The most popular form of fundoplication was a Nissen posterior 360° (75% of surgeons), followed by a posterior 270° Toupet (48%). Only seven surgeons stated they had no upper limit of body mass index prior to surgery. A total of 46% of respondents maintain a database of their practice and less than a fifth routinely record quality of life scores before (19%) or after (14%) surgery. While there are areas of consensus, a lack of evidence to support workup, intervention and outcome evaluation is reflected in the variability of practice. ARS patients are not receiving the same level of evidence-based care as other patient groups.

ESDE-MIE fellowship: a descriptive analysis of the first experiences.

Esophageal resection is a high-risk and technically demanding procedure, with a long proficiency-gain curve. The European Society Diseases of the Esophagus (ESDE)-Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) training program was launched in 2018 for European surgeons willing to train and to begin a career undertaking MIE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the first experience of the ESDE-MIE fellowship and relate this to the initially predetermined core principles and objectives of the program. Between October 2021 and May 2022, the participating fellows, in collaboration with the ESDE Educational Committee, initiated a survey to assess the outcome and experience of these fellowships. Data from each individual fellowship were analysed and reported in a descriptive manner. Between 2018 and 2022, in total, five fellows have completed the ESDE-MIE fellowship program. Despite the COVID-19 outbreak just the year after its launch, predetermined clinical and research goals were achieved in all cases. Each of the fellows were able to assist in a median of 40 (IQR 27-69) MIE and/or Robot assisted (RA)MIE procedures, of a total median of 115 (IQR 83-123) attended Upper GI cases. After the fellowship, MIE has been fully adopted by the fellows who returned to their home institutions as Upper GI surgeons. The fellowship was concluded by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) Multidisciplinary Joint Committee (MJC) certification in Upper GI Surgery, which was successfully obtained by all who took part. Based on the experience of the first five fellows, the ESDE-MIE training fellowship meets with the expected needs even despite the COVID-19 outbreak in 2019. Furthermore, these fellows have returned home and integrated MIE into their independent surgical practice, affirming the ability of this program to train the next generation of MIE surgeons, even in the most challenging of circumstances.

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.