Omentum preservation versus complete omentectomy in gastrectomy for gastric cancer (OMEGA trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Potentially curative therapy for locally advanced gastric cancer consists of gastrectomy, usually in combination with perioperative chemotherapy. An oncological resection includes a radical (R0) gastrectomy and modified D2 lymphadenectomy; generally, a total omentectomy is also performed, to ensure the removal of possible microscopic disease. However, the omentum functions as a regulator of regional immune responses to prevent infections and prevents adhesions which could lead to bowel obstructions. Evidence supporting a survival benefit of routine complete omentectomy during gastrectomy is lacking. METHODS: OMEGA is a randomized controlled, open, parallel, non-inferiority, multicenter trial. Eligible patients are operable (ASA < 4) and have resectable (≦ cT4aN3bM0) primary gastric cancer. Patients will be 1:1 randomized between (sub)total gastrectomy with omentum preservation distal of the gastroepiploic vessels versus complete omentectomy. For a power of 80%, the target sample size is 654 patients. The primary objective is to investigate whether omentum preservation in gastrectomy for cancer is non-inferior to complete omentectomy in terms of 3-year overall survival. Secondary endpoints include intra- and postoperative outcomes, such as blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, readmission rate, quality of life, disease-free survival, and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: The OMEGA trial investigates if omentum preservation during gastrectomy for gastric cancer is non-inferior to complete omentectomy in terms of 3-year overall survival, with non-inferiority being determined based on results from both the intention-to-treat and the per-protocol analyses. The OMEGA trial will elucidate whether routine complete omentectomy could be omitted, potentially reducing overtreatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05180864. Registered on 6th January 2022.

Association of Upper GI Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland (AUGIS) Delphi consensus recommendations on the adoption of robotic upper GI surgery.

BACKGROUND: The adoption of robotic platforms in upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery is expanding rapidly. The absence of centralised guidance and governance in adoption of new surgical technologies may lead to an increased risk of patient harm. METHODS: Surgeon stakeholders participated in a Delphi consensus process following a national open-invitation in-person meeting on the adoption of robotic upper GI surgery. Consensus agreement was deemed met if >80% agreement was achieved. RESULTS: Following two rounds of Delphi voting, 25 statements were agreed on covering the training process, governance and good practice for surgeons' adoption in upper GI surgery. One statement failed to achieve consensus. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations are intended to support surgeons, patients and health systems in the adoption of robotics in upper GI surgery.

Opinion, uptake and current practice of robot-assisted upper gastrointestinal and oesophagogastric surgery in the UK: AUGIS national survey results.

INTRODUCTION: The uptake of upper gastrointestinal (GI) robotic surgery in the United Kingdom (UK), and Europe more widely, is expanding rapidly. This study aims to present a current snapshot of the practice and opinions of the upper GI community with reference to robotic surgery, with an emphasis on tertiary cancer (oesophagogastric) resection centres. METHODS: An electronic survey was circulated to the UK upper GI surgical community via national mailing lists, social media and at an open-invitation conference on robotic upper GI surgery in January 2023. The survey included questions on surgeons' current practice or planned adoption (if any) of robotics at individual and unit level, and their opinions on robotic upper GI surgery in general. Priority ranking and Likert-scale response options were used. RESULTS: In total, 81 respondents from 43 hospitals were included. Thirty-four resectional centres responded, including 30 of 31 (97%) recognised upper GI cancer centres in England. Respondents reported performing robotic surgery in 21 of 34 (61.8%) resectional centres, with a median of 65 procedures per centre performed at the time of the survey (range 0-500, interquartile range 93.75). Every centre without a robotic programme expressed a desire or had active plans to implement one. Respondents ranked surgeon ergonomics as the most important reason for pursuing robotics, followed by improvements in patient outcomes and oncological efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic upper GI practice is nascent but rapidly growing in the UK with plans for uptake in almost all tertiary centres. There is growing opinion that this is likely to become the predominant surgical approach in future with benefits to both patients and surgeons. This snapshot offers a point of reference to all stakeholders in upper GI surgery.

Influence of postoperative complications following esophagectomy for cancer on quality of life: A European multicenter study.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative complications following major surgery have been shown to be associated with reduced health-related quality of life (HRQL), and severe complications may have profound negative effects. This study aimed to examine whether long-term HRQL differs with the occurrence and severity of complications in a European multicenter prospective dataset of patients following esophagectomy for cancer. METHODS: Disease-free patients following esophagectomy for cancer between 2010 and 2016 from the LASER study were included. Patients completed the LASER, EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-OG25 questionnaires >1 year following treatment. Long-term HRQL was compared between patients with and without postoperative complications, subgroup analysis was performed for severity of complications (no, minor [Clavien-Dindo I-II], severe [Clavien-Dindo ≥ III]), using univariable and multivariable regression. RESULTS: 645 patients were included: 283 patients with no, 207 with minor and 155 with severe complications. Significantly more dyspnea (QLQ-C30) was reported by patients with compared to patients without complications (differenceinmeans6.3). In subgroup analysis, patients with severe complications reported more dyspnea (difference in means 8.3) than patients with no complications. None of the differences were clinically relevant (difference in means ≥ 10 points). LASER-based low mood (OR2.3) was statistically different for minor versus severe complications. CONCLUSION: Comparable HRQL was found in patients with and without postoperative complications following esophagectomy for cancer, after a mean follow-up of 4.4 years. Furthermore, patients with different levels of severity of complications had comparable HRQL. The level of HRQL in esophageal cancer patients are more likely explained by the impact of the complex procedure of the esophagectomy itself.

Health-related quality of life following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus perioperative chemotherapy and esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a European multicenter study.

Curative treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer consists of (neo)adjuvant treatment followed by esophagectomy. Both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and perioperative chemotherapy improve the 5-year overall survival rate compared with surgery alone. However, it is unknown whether these treatment strategies are associated with differences in long-term health-related quality of life (HRQL). The aim of this study is to compare long-term HRQL in patients after esophagectomy treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy. Disease-free cancer patients having undergone esophagectomy and (neo)adjuvant treatment in one of the participating lasting symptoms after esophageal resection (LASER) study centers between 2010 and 2016, were identified from the LASER study dataset. Included patients completed the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), EORTC QLQ-OG25, and LASER questionnaires at least 1 year after the completion of treatment. Long-term HRQL was compared between patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or perioperative chemotherapy, using univariable and multivariable regression and presented as differences in mean score. Among the 565 included patients, 349 (61.8%) received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, and 216 (38.2%) perioperative chemotherapy. Patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy reported more symptomatology for diarrhea (difference in means 5.93), reflux (difference in means 7.40), and odynophagia (difference in means 4.66). The differences did not exceed the 10 points to be of clinical relevance. No significant differences for the LASER key symptoms were observed. The observed differences in long-term HRQL are in favor of patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy compared with patients treated with perioperative chemotherapy; however, the differences were small. Patients need to be informed about long-term HRQL when considering allocation of (neo)adjuvant treatment.

Health-related quality of life following total minimally invasive, hybrid minimally invasive or open oesophagectomy: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive oesophagectomy has been shown to reduce the risk of pulmonary complications compared with open oesophagectomy, but the effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and oesophageal cancer survivorship remain unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the longitudinal effects of minimally invasive compared with open oesophagectomy for cancer on HRQoL. METHODS: All patients who had surgery for oesophageal cancer in Sweden from January 2013 to April 2018 were identified. The exposure was total or hybrid minimally invasive oesophagectomy, compared with open surgery. The study outcome was HRQoL, evaluated by means of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaires QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25 at 1 and 2 years after surgery. Mean differences and 95 per cent confidence intervals were adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: Of the 246 patients recruited, 153 underwent minimally invasive oesophagectomy, of which 75 were hybrid minimally invasive and 78 were total minimally invasive procedures. After adjustment for age, sex, Charlson Co-morbidity Index score, pathological tumour stage and neoadjuvant therapy, there were no clinically and statistically significant differences in overall or disease-specific HRQoL after oesophagectomy between hybrid minimally invasive and total minimally invasive surgical technique versus open surgery. CONCLUSION: In this population-based nationwide Swedish study, longitudinal HRQoL after minimally invasive oesophagectomy was similar to that of the open surgical approach.

Patient-reported outcomes after oesophagectomy in the multicentre LASER study.

BACKGROUND: Data on the long-term symptom burden in patients surviving oesophageal cancer surgery are scarce. The aim of this study was to identify the most prevalent symptoms and their interactions with health-related quality of life. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional cohort study of patients who underwent oesophageal cancer surgery in 20 European centres between 2010 and 2016. Patients had to be disease-free for at least 1 year. They were asked to complete a 28-symptom questionnaire at a single time point, at least 1 year after surgery. Principal component analysis was used to assess for clustering and association of symptoms. Risk factors associated with the development of severe symptoms were identified by multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: Of 1081 invited patients, 876 (81.0 per cent) responded. Symptoms in the preceding 6 months associated with previous surgery were experienced by 586 patients (66.9 per cent). The most common severe symptoms included reduced energy or activity tolerance (30.7 per cent), feeling of early fullness after eating (30.0 per cent), tiredness (28.7 per cent), and heartburn/acid or bile regurgitation (19.6 per cent). Clustering analysis showed that symptoms clustered into six domains: lethargy, musculoskeletal pain, dumping, lower gastrointestinal symptoms, regurgitation/reflux, and swallowing/conduit problems; the latter two were the most closely associated. Surgical approach, neoadjuvant therapy, patient age, and sex were factors associated with severe symptoms. CONCLUSION: A long-term symptom burden is common after oesophageal cancer surgery.

The PanSurg-PREDICT Study: Endocrine Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, patients have continued to present with endocrine (surgical) pathology in an environment depleted of resources. This study investigated how the pandemic affected endocrine surgery practice. METHODS: PanSurg-PREDICT is an international, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort study of emergency and elective surgical patients in secondary/tertiary care during the pandemic. PREDICT-Endocrine collected endocrine-specific data alongside demographics, COVID-19 and outcome data from 11-3-2020 to 13-9-2020. RESULTS: A total of 380 endocrine surgery patients (19 centres, 12 countries) were analysed (224 thyroidectomies, 116 parathyroidectomies, 40 adrenalectomies). Ninety-seven percent were elective, and 63% needed surgery within 4 weeks. Eight percent were initially deferred but had surgery during the pandemic; less than 1% percent was deferred for more than 6 months. Decision-making was affected by capacity, COVID-19 status or the pandemic in 17%, 5% and 7% of cases. Indication was cancer/worrying lesion in 61% of thyroidectomies and 73% of adrenalectomies and calcium 2.80 mmol/l or greater in 50% of parathyroidectomies. COVID-19 status was unknown at presentation in 92% and remained unknown before surgery in 30%. Two-thirds were asked to self-isolate before surgery. There was one COVID-19-related ICU admission and no mortalities. Consultant-delivered care occurred in a majority (anaesthetist 96%, primary surgeon 76%). Post-operative vocal cord check was reported in only 14% of neck endocrine operations. Both of these observations are likely to reflect modification of practice due to the pandemic. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected endocrine surgical decision-making, case mix and personnel delivering care. Significant variation was seen in COVID-19 risk mitigation measures. COVID-19-related complications were uncommon. This analysis demonstrates the safety of endocrine surgery during this pandemic.

Racial disparity in curative treatment and survival from solid-organ cancers.

Race is an important prognostic factor affecting receipt of surgical intervention and survival from cancer in the USA. The findings of this study highlight the importance of implementing changes aimed at narrowing the disparities in outcomes between race in patients with cancers.

Race is an important prognostic factor affecting receipt of surgical intervention and survival from cancer in the USA. The findings of this study highlight the importance of implementing changes aimed at narrowing the disparities in outcomes between race in patients with cancers.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy alone for oesophageal cancer: population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although both neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and chemotherapy (nCT) are used as neoadjuvant treatment for oesophageal cancer, it is unknown whether one provides a survival advantage over the other, particularly with respect to histological subtype. This study aimed to compare prognosis after nCRT and nCT in patients undergoing oesophagectomy for oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) or squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC). METHODS: Data from the National Cancer Database (2006-2015) were used to identify patients with OAC and OSCC. Propensity score matching and Cox multivariable analyses were used to account for treatment selection biases. RESULTS: The study included 11 167 patients with OAC (nCRT 9972, 89.3 per cent; nCT 1195, 10.7 per cent) and 2367 with OSCC (nCRT 2155, 91.0 per cent; nCT 212, 9.0 per cent). In the matched OAC cohort, nCRT provided higher rates of complete pathological response (35.1 versus 21.0 per cent; P < 0.001) and margin-negative resections (90.1 versus 85.9 per cent; P < 0.001). However, patients who had nCRT had similar survival to those who received nCT (hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, 95 per cent c.i. 0.95 to 1.14). Five-year survival rates for patients who had nCRT and nCT were 36 and 37 per cent respectively (P = 0.123). For OSCC, nCRT had higher rates of complete pathological response (50.9 versus 30.4 per cent; P < 0.001) and margin-negative resections (92.8 versus 82.4 per cent; P < 0.001). A statistically significant overall survival benefit was evident for nCRT (HR 0.78, 0.62 to 0.97). Five-year survival rates for patients who had nCRT and nCT were 45.0 and 38.0 per cent respectively (P = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Despite pathological benefits, including primary tumour response to nCRT, there was no prognostic benefit of nCRT compared with nCT for OAC suggesting that these two modalities are equally acceptable. However, for OSCC, nCRT followed by surgery appears to remain the optimal treatment approach.

Psychological distress and health-related quality of life up to 2 years after oesophageal cancer surgery: nationwide population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Patients are at higher risk of suffering from psychological distress and reduced health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after oesophageal cancer surgery. This Swedish nationwide population-based longitudinal study aimed to evaluate the association between psychological distress and HRQoL up to 2 years after oesophageal cancer surgery. METHODS: The study included patients with oesophageal cancer who had survived for 1 year after oesophageal cancer surgery. The exposure was psychological distress measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Patients scoring at least 8 on either the anxiety or the depression subscale were classified as having psychological distress. The outcome was HRQoL assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire generic and disease-specific questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25). Exposure and outcome were measured at 1, 1.5, and 2 years after operation. Fixed-effects models with adjustment for all time-invariant confounding and potential time-varying confounders were used to examine the mean score difference in HRQoL between patients with and without psychological distress. RESULTS: In total, 180 patients were analysed. Clinically relevant, statistically significant and time-constant mean score differences were found in emotional function, social function, dyspnoea, anxiety, eating difficulty, eating in front of others, and weight loss (mean score difference range 10-29). Mean score differences for global quality of life, cognitive function, appetite loss, EORTC QLQ-C30 summary score, and trouble with taste increased over time, and reached clinical and statistical significance at 1.5 and/or 2 years after surgery. For body image, there was a clinically relevant decrease in mean score difference over time. CONCLUSION: Psychological distress was associated with several aspects of poor HRQoL up to 2 years after surgery for oesophageal cancer.

Fit-for-Discharge Criteria after Esophagectomy: An International Expert Delphi Consensus.

There are no internationally recognized criteria available to determine preparedness for hospital discharge after esophagectomy. This study aims to achieve international consensus using Delphi methodology. The expert panel consisted of 40 esophageal surgeons spanning 16 countries and 4 continents. During a 3-round, web-based Delphi process, experts voted for discharge criteria using 5-point Likert scales. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Consensus was reached if agreement was ≥75% in round 3. Consensus was achieved for the following basic criteria: nutritional requirements are met by oral intake of at least liquids with optional supplementary nutrition via jejunal feeding tube. The patient should have passed flatus and does not require oxygen during mobilization or at rest. Central venous catheters should be removed. Adequate analgesia at rest and during mobilization is achieved using both oral opioid and non-opioid analgesics. All vital signs should be normal unless abnormal preoperatively. Inflammatory parameters should be trending down and close to normal (leucocyte count ≤12G/l and C-reactive protein ≤80 mg/dl). This multinational Delphi survey represents the first expert-led process for consensus criteria to determine 'fit-for-discharge' status after esophagectomy. Results of this Delphi survey may be applied to clinical outcomes research as an objective measure of short-term recovery. Furthermore, standardized endpoints identified through this process may be used in clinical practice to guide decisions regarding patient discharge and may help to reduce the risk of premature discharge or prolonged admission.

Benefits of barbed suture utilisation in gastrointestinal anastomosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Anastomosis formation constitutes a critical aspect of many gastrointestinal procedures. Barbed suture materials have been adopted by some surgeons to assist in this task. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares the safety and efficacy of barbed suture material for anastomosis formation compared with standard suture materials. METHODS: An electronic search of Embase, Medline, Web of Science and Cochrane databases was performed. Weighted mean differences were calculated for effect size of barbed suture material compared with standard material on continuous variables and pooled odds ratios were calculated for discrete variables. FINDINGS: There were nine studies included. Barbed suture material was associated with a significant reduction in overall operative time (WMD: -12.87 (95% CI = -20.16 to -5.58) (P = 0.0005)) and anastomosis time (WMD: -4.28 (95% CI = -6.80 to -1.75) (P = 0.0009)). There was no difference in rates of anastomotic leak (POR: 1.24 (95% CI = 0.89 to 1.71) (P = 0.19)), anastomotic bleeding (POR: 0.80 (95% CI = 0.29 to 2.16) (P = 0.41)), or anastomotic stricture (POR: 0.72 (95% CI = 0.21 to 2.41) (P = 0.59)). CONCLUSIONS: Use of barbed sutures for gastrointestinal anastomosis appears to be associated with shorter overall operative times. There was no difference in rates of complications (including anastomotic leak, bleeding or stricture) compared with standard suture materials.

Cardiorespiratory Comorbidity and Postoperative Complications following Esophagectomy: a European Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of cardiorespiratory comorbidity on operative outcomes after esophagectomy remains controversial. This study investigated the effect of cardiorespiratory comorbidity on postoperative complications for patients treated for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A European multicenter cohort study from five high-volume esophageal cancer centers including patients treated between 2010 and 2017 was conducted. The effect of cardiorespiratory comorbidity and respiratory function upon postoperative outcomes was assessed. RESULTS: In total 1590 patients from five centers were included; 274 (17.2%) had respiratory comorbidity, and 468 (29.4%) had cardiac comorbidity. Respiratory comorbidity was associated with increased risk of overall postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, pneumonia, increased Clavien-Dindo score, and critical care and hospital length of stay. After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, respiratory comorbidity was associated with increased risk of anastomotic leak [odds ratio (OR) 1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-3.04], pneumonia (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.10-2.47), and any pulmonary complication (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.04-2.22), an effect which was not observed following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery alone. Cardiac comorbidity was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular and pulmonary complications, respiratory failure, and Clavien-Dindo score ≥ IIIa. Among all patients, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio > 70% was associated with reduced risk of overall postoperative complications, cardiovascular complications, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary complications, and pneumonia. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that cardiorespiratory comorbidity and impaired pulmonary function are associated with increased risk of postoperative complications after esophagectomy performed in high-volume European centers. Given the observed interaction with neoadjuvant approach, these data indicate a potentially modifiable index of perioperative risk.

Delays in referral from primary care are associated with a worse survival in patients with esophagogastric cancer.

NICE referral guidelines for suspected cancer were introduced to improve prognosis by reducing referral delays. However, over 20% of patients with esophagogastric cancer experience three or more consultations before referral. In this retrospective cohort study, we hypothesize that such a delay is associated with a worse survival compared with patients referred earlier. By utilizing Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a national primary care linked database, the first presentation, referral date, a number of consultations before referral and stage for esophagogastric cancer patients were determined. The risk of a referral after one or two consultations compared with three or more consultations was calculated for age and the presence of symptom fulfilling the NICE criteria. The risk of death according to the number of consultations before referral was determined, while accounting for stage and surgical management. 1307 patients were included. Patients referred after one (HR 0.80 95% CI 0.68-0.93 p = 0.005) or two consultations (HR 0.81 95% CI 0.67-0.98 p = 0.034) demonstrated significantly improved prognosis compared with those referred later. The risk of death was also lower for patients who underwent a resection, were younger or had an earlier stage at diagnosis. Those presenting with a symptom fulfilling the NICE criteria (OR 0.27 95% CI 0.21-0.35 p < 0.0001) were more likely to be referred earlier. This is the first study to demonstrate an association between a delay in referral and worse prognosis in esophagogastric patients. These findings should prompt further research to reduce primary care delays.