Major Intraoperative Complications During Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) to be a feasible surgical technique in treating esophageal carcinoma. Postoperative complications have been extensively reviewed, but literature focusing on intraoperative complications is limited. The main objective of this study was to report major intraoperative complications and 90-day mortality during MIE for cancer. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively from 10 European esophageal surgery centers. All intention-to-treat, minimally invasive laparoscopic/thoracoscopic esophagectomies with gastric conduit reconstruction for esophageal and GE junction cancers operated on between 2003 and 2019 were reviewed. Major intraoperative complications were defined as loss of conduit, erroneous transection of vascular structures, significant injury to other organs including bowel, heart, liver or lung, splenectomy, or other major complications including intubation injuries, arrhythmia, pulmonary embolism, and myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Amongst 2862 MIE cases we identified 98 patients with 101 intraoperative complications. Vascular injuries were the most prevalent, 41 during laparoscopy and 19 during thoracoscopy, with injuries to 18 different vessels. There were 24 splenic vascular or capsular injuries, 11 requiring splenectomies. Four losses of conduit due to gastroepiploic artery injury and six bowel injuries were reported. Eight tracheobronchial lesions needed repair, and 11 patients had significant lung parenchyma injuries. There were 2 on-table deaths. Ninety-day mortality was 9.2%. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers an overview of the range of different intraoperative complications during minimally invasive esophagectomy. Mortality, especially from intrathoracic vascular injuries, appears significant.

Impact of the introduction of an enhanced recovery pathway in esophageal cancer surgery: a cohort study and propensity score matching analysis.

Enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) have the potential to improve clinical outcomes. Aim of this study was to determine the impact of ERP on perioperative results as compared with traditional care (TC) after esophagectomy. In this study, two cohorts were compared. Cohort 1 represented 296 patients to whom TC was provided. Cohort 2 consisted of 200 unselected ERP patients. Primary endpoints were postoperative complications. Secondary endpoints were the length of stay and 30-day readmission rates. To confirm the possible impact of ERP, a propensity matched analysis (1:1) was conducted. A significant decrease in complications was found in ERP patients, especially for pneumonia and respiratory failure requiring reintubation (39% in TC and 14% in ERP; P<0.0001 and 17% vs. 12%; P<0.0001, respectively) and postoperative blood transfusion (26.7%-11%; P<0.0001). Furthermore, median length of stay was also significantly shorter: 13 days (interquartile range [IQR] 10-23) in TC compared with 10 days (IQR 8-14) in ERP patients (P<0.0001). The 30-day readmission rate (5.4% in TC and 9% in ERP; P=0.121) and in-hospital mortality rate (4.4% in TC and 2.5% in ERP; P=0.270) were not significantly affected. A propensity score matching confirmed a significant impact on pneumonia (P=0.0001), anastomotic leak (P=0.047), several infectious complications (P=0.01-0.034), blood transfusion (P=0.001), Comprehensive Complications Index (P=0.01), and length of stay (P=0.0001). We conclude that ERP for esophagectomy is associated with significantly fewer postoperative complications and blood transfusions, which results in a significant decrease of length of stay without affecting readmission and mortality rates.

Prognostic value of the circumferential resection margin and its definitions in esophageal cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

The accepted importance of a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) (defined as R1 in the TNM classification) is based on histopathology of the resection specimen obtained after primary surgery in esophageal cancer patients. The aim of this study is to look for the prognostic value of CRM after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and to compare the clinical significance of a histologically CRM < 1 mm from the cut margin (Royal College of Pathologists definition of R1) to a positive cut margin (College of American Pathologists definition of R1) and to ≥1 mm margin (R0) resections in patients with ypT3-esophageal tumors after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Between 2000 and 2014, 458 patients who received esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy were selected. Overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated by means of Kaplan-Meier curves and compared by Cox regression analysis. There were 163 (35.9%) patients who had a ypT3 tumor; in 118 (72.4%) resection was complete (R0). In 37 (22.7%) patients a CRM < 1 mm was found and 8 (4.9%) had a circumferential R1-resection. CRM involvement was inversely correlated with tumor regression grading, lymph node capsular involvement, and number of positive lymph nodes. On univariate analysis, no statistically significant difference was found between R0-resection and CRM < 1 mm (P = 0.103) for OS, but DFS showed a significant difference (P = 0.025). Circumferential R1-resections showed a significant difference compared to R0-resections for OS and DFS (both P = 0.002). In multivariate analysis, extracapsular lymph node involvement and circumferential R1-resection were withheld as independent prognosticators for OS, whereas extracapsular lymph node involvement, absence of regression on the primary tumor and circumferential R1-resection were withheld for DFS. After correcting for different variables in the multivariate model, CRM < 1 mm showed no statistical difference compared to R0-resections neither for OS nor for DFS. After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, CRM is correlated with biological behavior of the tumor and with therapy response. Furthermore it is an independent prognosticator for OS and DFS. However CRM < 1 mm itself is no independent prognosticator for OS nor DFS survival in multivariable analysis. These results suggest that the definition of R1-resection should be limited to true invasion of the section plane.

Isolated local recurrence or solitary solid organ metastasis after esophagectomy for cancer is not the end of the road.

Recurrent disease after esophagectomy bears an infaust prognosis, especially when multiple recurrences are present. But little is known about survival in patients with limited recurrence (solitary locoregional recurrence or solid organ metastasis). Herein, we report our experience with these subgroups. We analyzed 1754 consecutive patients surgically treated with curative resection for esophageal cancer and cancer of the gastroesophageal junction between 1990 and 2012. Seven subgroups were defined according to the recurrence type (locoregional vs. organ metastasis), the site of recurrence (abdominal, thoracic, cervical for lymph nodes and lung, liver, adrenals and others for organ metastasis) and also the number of lesions (one vs. multiple lymph node stations or organ metastasis) Of these groups; clinical isolated locoregional recurrence (ciLR) was defined as solitary lymph-node recurrence confined to one compartment (cervical, thoracic or abdominal, within or outside surgical dissection-field) at clinical staging. Clinical solitary solid organ metastasis (csSOM) was defined as metastasis in a resectable solid organ, i.e. liver, lung, brain or adrenal. Salvage therapies were grouped in five categories. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to calculate survival. Recurrent disease was observed in 766 patients (43.7%) with overall 5-year survival of 4.5% after diagnosis of recurrence. Fifty-seven patients (7.4%) showed ciLR and 110 (14.4%) csSOM. Median time-to-recurrence was 16.8 months in ciLR and 9.9 months in csSOM (P = 0.0074). Survival is significantly improved compared to supportive therapy when local therapy is possible (P < 0.0001). In 25 (15%) of ciLR or csSOM patients, surgical therapy with or without systemic therapy, yielded a 5-year survival of 49.9% (median 54.8 months) after diagnosis of recurrence. When surgery was impossible or contraindicated, the combination of chemoradiotherapy appeared to be superior to chemotherapy alone (respectively 27.0% vs. 4.6% 5-year survival) or radiotherapy alone (no 5-year survival). Recurrent disease after esophagectomy is a common problem with poor overall survival. However prolonged survival could be obtained in selected patients if the recurrent disease is limited to ciLR or csSOM, if surgery (+/- systemic therapy) can be performed. If not a combination of chemoradiotherapy seems to offer the second best option. Patients presenting with a ciLR or csSOM should be discussed in a dedicated multidisciplinary team meeting as to evaluate and define the place of salvage treatment which in well selected cases could offer a perspective of prolonged survival.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation treatment followed by surgery for esophageal cancer: there is much more than the mandard tumor regression score.

OBJECTIVE: Tumor regression grading (TRG) systems categorize residual tumor volume on the primary tumor after neoadjuvant treatment. Aim was to evaluate the impact of Mandard TRG, residual tumor depth (ypT) and residual lymph node status (ypN) and extent (ELNI) i.e. intracapsular versus extracapsular involvement on overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) in esophageal carcinoma. METHODS: Between 2005 and 2014, 344 patients receiving R0-esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT) were selected. Mandard TRG, ypTN and ELNI were prospectively recorded. RESULTS: Mandard TRG1 was found in 110 (32%); TRG2 in 120 (35%); TRG3 in 53 (15%); TRG4 in 54 (16%) and TRG5 in 7 (2%) patients. Both OS and DFS showed no significant difference between TRG1 and 2 (p = 0.059 and 0.105, respectively). Therefore, TRG1/2 was classified together as 'major response', TRG3/4 as 'minor response' and TRG5 as 'no response'. Multivariate analysis showed two independent prognosticators for OS (tumor regression response (TRR) and number of positive lymph nodes) and three independent prognosticators for DFS (TRR, ypT and ELNI). CONCLUSION: After nCRT followed by surgery for esophageal carcinoma, number of residual positive lymph nodes as well as TRR are prognosticators for OS. Minor TRR, ypT and extracapsular lymph node invasion are prognosticators for recurrence.

Recurrence pattern in patients with a pathologically complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and surgery for oesophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about recurrence patterns in patients with a pathologically complete response (pCR) or an incomplete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by resection for oesophageal cancer. This study was performed to determine the pattern of recurrence in patients with a pCR after neoadjuvant CRT followed by surgery. METHODS: All patients who received neoadjuvant CRT followed by oesophagectomy between 1993 and 2009 were identified from a database, and categorized according to pathological tumour response. Recurrences were classified as locoregional or distant. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-eight patients were included. Median potential follow-up was 71·6 months. A pCR was achieved in 62 (33·0 per cent) of 188 patients. Recurrence developed in 24 (39 per cent) of 62 patients with a pCR and 70 (55·6 per cent) of 126 without a pCR (P = 0·044). Locoregional recurrence with or without synchronous distant metastases occurred in eight patients (13 per cent) in the pCR group and 31 (24·6 per cent) in the non-pCR group (P = 0·095). Locoregional recurrences without synchronous distant metastases occurred four (6 per cent) and ten (7·9 per cent) patients respectively (P = 0·945). The overall 5-year survival rate was significantly higher in the pCR group than in the non-pCR group (52 versus 33·9 per cent respectively; P = 0·019). CONCLUSION: Of patients with a pCR, 13 per cent still developed a locoregional recurrence. Although pCR is more favourable for survival, it is not synonymous with cure or complete locoregional disease control.

Surgical management of submucosal esophageal cancer: extended or regional lymphadenectomy?

INTRODUCTION: Radical esophagectomy is considered the standard therapy for tumors that infiltrate the submucosa of the esophagus (T1b), as the prevalence of lymph node metastases has been reported in up to 40% of these patients. It remains unclear whether radical esophagectomy with extended lymphadenectomy is needed or whether a surgical procedure with only regional lymphadenectomy suffices. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of patients who underwent esophagectomy for T1b cancer through a transthoracic approach with extended lymphadenectomy (TTE) with those of patients in whom transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) was performed with a regional lymph node dissection. METHODS: Patients who underwent esophagectomy for T1b cancer between 1990 and 2004 and who did not receive (neo)adjuvant therapy were included. Data were collected from prospective databases of 4 centers. In Leuven, Belgium (n = 101), and Los Angeles, CA (n = 31), patients with T1b tumors had been operated on via TTE with extended lymphadenectomy, whereas in Amsterdam (n = 43) and Rotterdam (n = 47), the Netherlands, THE with regional lymphadenectomy had been performed. RESULTS: The 2 patient groups (TTE, n = 132; THE, n = 90) were comparable with regard to age, body mass index, and ASA classification. Operative time was longer in patients who underwent TTE (390 minutes) versus THE (250 minutes) (P < 0.001). The yield of lymph nodes resected was higher in the TTE group (median: 32) versus THE (median: 10) (P < 0.001). Overall morbidity, in-hospital mortality, and length of hospital stay were comparable between both the groups. In the TTE group, 27.3% of complications were classified as major versus 14.4% in the THE group (P < 0.001); however, the reoperation rate was higher after THE (12.2%) versus TTE (3.8%) (P = 0.01). There was no difference in pathological outcomes (infiltration depth, pN stage, pM stage, positive lymph node ratio) between both groups. Overall, 5-year survival (63.4% TTE vs 69.4% THE; P = 0.55) and disease-free 5-year survival (76.9% TTE vs 78.3% THE; P = 0.65) were comparable between both the groups. In patients with N1 disease, disease-free 5-year survival was 49.8% in the TTE group versus 40.0% in the THE group (P = 0.57). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with submucosal esophageal cancer (T1b), TTE with extended lymphadenectomy and THE with regional lymphadenectomy had similar short-term outcome and long-term survival. In the selected group of T1bN1 patients, TTE may be the preferred operative technique because of a potential disease-free survival benefit; in patients with T1bN0 disease, THE with en bloc dissection of the esophagus and regional lymph nodes offers an oncologically safe and less invasive treatment.

Morbidity and mortality after induction chemotherapy followed by surgery in IIIa-N2 non small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the frequency and risk of postoperative complications and mortality in patients with IIIa-N2 non small cell lung cancer after induction chemotherapy and surgery. METHODS: In a surgical database records from ninety two patients, operated between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2006 were reviewed. Univariate analysis was used to identify predictors of postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: All cases were histologically confirmed stage IIIa-N2. All patients received preoperative platinum based chemotherapy without radiotherapy. Pneumonectomy was performed in 20 cases (23.5%), from which 9 right sided. (Bi)lobectomy was performed in 53 cases (62.4%) and sleeve lobectomy in 11 cases (17.2%). One wedge resection was performed (1.2%). In 7 cases (7.6%) only an exploration was done. Complications developed in 35 patients (38%). Major complications in 15 patients (16%). No bronchopleural fistulae were observed. Analysis identified increased age and high physiological and operative severity score for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity (POSSUM) as a risk factor to develop complications, and a high simplified comorbidity score as a risk factor to develop a major complication. Higher age, Charlson comorbidity index, simplified comorbidity score and POSSUM were a risk factor for developing pneumonia. CONCLUSION: Although surgery after induction therapy for IIIa-N2 NSCLC can be done with a morbidity and mortality comparable to surgery alone, it remains a high risk operation. It should therefore be performed in a center with experience. Bronchial stump protection should be used whenever there is an increased risk for developing a bronchopleural fistula. In deciding whether to do surgery or radiotherapy one should keep in mind the feasibility of performing a complete resection together with a preoperative assessment to predict complications and mortality. For the preoperative assessment several scoring systems can be used from which we find the simplified comorbidity score most useful.

Predicting individual survival after potentially curative esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction.

INTRODUCTION: Even after potentially curative esophagectomy, the majority of patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction die due to cancer recurrence. To predict individual disease-specific survival, a nomogram has been developed in a high-volume center in the Netherlands. The validity of this nomogram was externally tested in patients treated in another country at a different high-volume institution. METHODS: Clinicopathological data from patients who underwent a macroscopically radical resection in a high-volume center in Leuven, Belgium, were used to validate the original nomogram based on a Cox regression model. Moreover, it was examined whether adjusting the value of the original coefficients of the predictors or adding new predictors would improve the fit of the nomogram in the validation cohort. Calibration was evaluated by comparing the observed survival with the expected survival as predicted by the original nomogram across patients with different risk profiles. The discriminatory ability of the nomogram was determined in the validation cohort, using the concordance index and compared with the original estimate. RESULTS: A total of 382 patients were used in the validation study. The median esophageal cancer-specific survival was 38 months. None of the coefficients re-estimated in the validation cohort differed significantly from the values of the original nomogram. Observed and expected survival curves showed good calibration. Discrimination of the original nomogram was preserved in the validation cohort: the concordance index hardly decreased from 0.77 in the original cohort to 0.76 in the validation cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The nomogram model that was originally developed in a Dutch institute had good individual discriminatory properties and good overall calibration when applied to an independent series of patients. The nomogram was updated using the data from both cohorts to provide even more robust estimates of survival for individual patients. This tool is clinically helpful to supply more reliable prognostic information, to offer tailored follow-up schedules and/or novel therapeutic strategies in subgroups of patients with higher risk of recurrence.

Surgical techniques.

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) has shown a remarkable increase during recent decades. Most patients are present with advanced stage disease, reflecting transmural growth and metastasis to lymph nodes at the time of diagnosis. Moreover, the pattern of lymph node dissemination is chaotic and difficult to predict, and despite the use of modern technology (e.g., spiral CT, EUS, FDG-PET), clinical staging remains suboptimal. These shortcomings in staging, as well as in different attitudes toward extent of resection and lymphadenectomy, are reflected by a great variation in surgical techniques, which are discussed in this review. As to the results, primary surgery can currently be performed with low mortality, below 5% in high volume centers. Hospital mortality and morbidity are mainly related to pulmonary complications and anastomotic leaks, the latter mostly resolving under conservative treatment. Overall 5-year survival varies between 10% and 59%. As expected the most important prognostic determinants are completeness of resection (R0 vs. R1-R2) and lymph node status (N0, N1). R0 resection currently offers 5-year survival rates of over 40%. Five-year survival figures for node-negative (N0) patients exceed 70%, and even for node-positive (N1), patients reach 25%. It is not known whether performing a three-field lymph node dissection is beneficial for patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus. With overall 5-year survival currently exceeding 30%-40%, these figures should be the gold standard against which all other therapeutic modalities are compared.

Quality in the surgical treatment of cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

Surgical treatment of cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) remains a complex and challenging task. Quality of care may be improved by concentrating these patients in high volume centres in order to decrease post-operative mortality. However, it appears that hospital mortality is a poor tool to measure the quality. More likely specialisation as well as appropriate hospital environment supporting a dedicated multidisciplinary team are key elements in improving both the short term and long term results. The dedicated specialist surgeon has a key role in improving these results through surgical quality. The most important goal in the surgical treatment of these cancers is to perform a complete resection (R0). Data from literature seem to indicate that R0 resection combined with extensive lymphadenectomy are resulting in improved disease free survival and possibly in improved 5 year survival, often reported to exceed 35% after such interventions. These results suggest that there is a great need for standardisation of surgery. Such a standardisation and the resulting improved quality most likely will result in a significant improvement of outcome of esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and GEJ. These improvements in outcome should become the gold standard to which all other therapeutic regimens should be compared. Poor surgical quality and related poor results should not be a justification for multimodality regimen.

Three-field lymphadenectomy for carcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction in 174 R0 resections: impact on staging, disease-free survival, and outcome: a plea for adaptation of TNM classification in upper-half esophageal carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of esophagectomy with 3-field lymphadenectomy on staging, disease-free survival, and 5-year survival in patients with carcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). BACKGROUND: Esophagectomy with 3-field lymphadenectomy is mainly performed in Japan. Data from Western experience with 3-field lymphadenectomy are scarce and dealing with relatively small numbers. As a result, its role in the surgical practice of cancer of the esophagus and GEJ remains controversial. METHODS: Between 1991 and 1999, primary surgery with 3-field lymphadenectomy was performed in 192 patients, of whom a cohort of 174 R0 resections was used for further analysis. RESULTS: Hospital mortality of the whole series was 1.2%. Overall morbidity was 58%. Pulmonary complications occurred in 32.8%, cardiac dysrhythmias in 10.9%, and persistent recurrent nerve problems in 2.6%. pTNM staging was as follows: stage 0, 0.6%; stage I, 9.2%; stage II, 27.6%; stage III, 28.7%; and stage IV, 33.9%. Overall 3- and 5-year survival was 51% and 41.9%, respectively. The 3- and 5-year disease-free survival was 51.4% and 46.3%, respectively. Locoregional lymph node recurrence was 5.2%; no patient developed an isolated cervical lymph node recurrence. Five-year survival for node-negative patients was 80.2% versus 24.5% for node-positive patients. Five-year survival by stage was 100% in stages 0 and I, 59.1% in stage II, 36.8% in stage III, and 13.3% in stage IV. Twenty-three percent of the patients with adenocarcinoma (25.8% distal third and 17.6% GEJ) and 25% of the patients with squamous cell carcinoma (26.2% middle third) had positive cervical nodes resulting in a change of pTNM staging specifically related to the unforeseen cervical lymph node involvement in 12%. Cervical lymph node involvement was unforeseen in 75.6% of patients with cervical nodes at pathologic examinations. Five-year survival for patients with positive cervical nodes was 27.7% for middle third squamous cell carcinoma. For distal third adenocarcinomas, 4-year survival was 35.7% and 5-year survival 11.9%. No GEJ adenocarcinoma with positive cervical nodes survived for 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Esophagectomy with 3-field lymph node dissection can be performed with low mortality and acceptable morbidity. The prevalence of involved cervical nodes is high, regardless of the type and location of tumor resulting in a change of final staging specifically related to the cervical field in 12% of this series. Overall 5-year and disease-free survival after R0 resection of 41.9% and 46.3%, respectively, may indicate a real survival benefit. A 5-year survival of 27.2% in patients with positive cervical nodes in middle third carcinomas indicates that these nodes should be considered as regional (N1) rather than distant metastasis (M1b) in middle third carcinomas. These patients seem to benefit from a 3-field lymphadenectomy. The role of 3-field lymphadenectomy in distal third adenocarcinoma remains investigational.

Extended surgery for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

The overall prognosis of patients with carcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) remains poor mainly because of the advanced stage of the disease at the time of presentation. As a result, controversy persists over the appropriate extent of surgery. This article reviews the impact of aggressive surgery on staging, disease-free survival, and cure rate. Despite recent advances in staging including positron emission tomography (PET), the findings after aggressive surgery indicate that the overall accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of clinical staging are still too low. These shortcomings in clinical staging therefore question the value of the indications, results, and interpretation of outcomes in multimodality treatment regimens. Extended surgery increases the R(0) resection rate, which seems to have an undeniable beneficial effect on the incidence of locoregional recurrence and which should be considered as a parameter of surgical quality, especially within the context of multimodality trials. As to the effect on cure rate, the only randomized trial with published results did not indicate a significant difference between extended and more limited resections for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and GEJ, albeit that a subsequent subanalysis did show a significant survival benefit favoring more extended surgery in distal third adenocarcinomas. However, the bulk of current literature suggests that better survival is achieved by more aggressive surgery. For three-field lymphadenectomy the available data suggest a potential survival benefit. It appears that positive cervical lymph nodes in patients with middle or proximal third carcinoma should no longer be considered as M(1a/b) distant lymph node metastasis but rather as N(1) regional disease.

Extracapsular lymph node involvement is a negative prognostic factor in T3 adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

OBJECTIVE: To assess prognosis according to whether lymph node involvement is intracapsular or with extracapsular breakthrough in adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. Materials and methods One hundred ninety-five consecutive patients with T3 adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and gastroesophageal junction between 1990 and 1999 were studied. All patients underwent primary R0 esophagectomy. The mean number of resected nodes per patient was 36.9. Survival was analyzed according to intracapsular and extracapsular involvement. RESULTS: In N0 patients 5-year survival was 57% and 9-year survival was 38.7%. In patients with positive nodes these figures were 26.2% and 18.1%, respectively (P =.0069). Intracapsular and extracapsular node involvement showed 5- and 10-year survival of 40.9% and 21.7% versus 18% and 15.7%, respectively. There was no significant difference in 5- and 10-year survival between N0 and intracapsular node involvement (P =.43). However, there was a significant difference in survival between N0 and extracapsular node involvement (P =.002) and between intracapsular and extracapsular node involvement (P =.0001). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a significant difference in survival according to whether lymph node involvement was intracapsular or extracapsular. Patients with intracapsular lymph node involvement have similar survival rates as N0 patients. Extracapsular lymph node involvement is a bad prognostic factor, independent of the number of involved lymph nodes. The number of involved lymph nodes has an additive negative effect. These data may have an impact on treatment strategies.

Optimizing treatment of carcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

Overall prognosis in patients with carcinoma of the esophagus and Gastroesophageal junction remains poor mainly because of the late presentation and advanced stage of the disease at the time of diagnosis. Over the last decades, clinical staging has improved, especially since the introduction of CT scan and echo-endoscopy; however, the clinical definition of potential curative tumors still remains unsatisfactory. More recently, the introduction of PET scanning seems to offer better perspective for more precise staging and evaluation of response. In centers with large experience, cure rates today are exceeding 30% after primary surgery. To improve the cure rate, much attention is paid to neoadjuvant multimodality regimens. In resectable tumors, induction therapy offers little or no benefit. In locally advanced tumors especially, the combination of induction chemoradiotherapy results in a complete response in a substantial number of patients. This subset of patients seems to benefit in terms of survival and cure, whereas the others do not. Future research, therefore, needs to focus on early identification of responders (e.g., through molecular biology) and new chemotherapeutic drugs with higher impact on tumor response and fewer side effects.