Prognostic value of Mandard score and nodal status for recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the association of pathological tumour response (tumour regression grade, TRG) and a novel scoring system, combining both TRG and nodal status (TRG-ypN score; TRG1-ypN0, TRG>1-ypN0, TRG1-ypN+ and TRG>1-ypN+), with recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: This Dutch nationwide cohort study included patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy for distal oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma between 2007 and 2016. The primary endpoint was the association of Mandard score and TRG-ypN score with recurrence patterns (rate, location, and time to recurrence). The secondary endpoint was overall survival. RESULTS: Among 2746 inclusions, recurrence rates increased with higher Mandard scores (TRG1 30.6%, TRG2 44.9%, TRG3 52.9%, TRG4 61.4%, TRG5 58.2%; P < 0.001). Among patients with recurrent disease, the distribution (locoregional versus distant) was the same for the different TRG groups. Patients with TRG1 developed more brain recurrences (17.7 versus 9.8%; P = 0.001) and had a longer mean overall survival (44 versus 35 months; P < 0.001) than those with TRG>1. The TRG>1-ypN+ group had the highest recurrence rate (64.9%) and worst overall survival (mean 27 months). Compared with the TRG>1-ypN0 group, patients with TRG1-ypN+ had a higher risk of recurrence (51.9 versus 39.6%; P < 0.001) and worse mean overall survival (33 versus 41 months; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Improved tumour response to neoadjuvant therapy was associated with lower recurrence rates and higher overall survival rates. Among patients with recurrent disease, TRG1 was associated with a higher incidence of brain recurrence than TRG>1. Residual nodal disease influenced prognosis more negatively than residual disease at the primary tumour site.

Information Needs in Patients with Potentially Curable Gastroesophageal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroesophageal cancer patients' information needs remain understudied, despite their complex treatment trajectories. METHODS: This study examined the (i) information needs of patients with or without postoperative complications, (ii) information needs of male and female patients, and (iii) the association between information needs and health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) following gastroesophageal cancer surgery. Patients completed the EORTC-QLQ-INFO25, QLQ-C30, and QLQ-OG25 questionnaires before and after curative surgery. Five information needs domains were investigated: information about the disease, about treatments, about medical tests, about things patients can do to help themselves, and overall helpfulness. Additionally, HR-QoL domains global health status, eating restrictions, and anxiety were explored. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients completed the questionnaires at baseline, 216 patients at 6-12 months, 184 patients at 18-24 months, and 163 patients at 3-5 years post-operation. There were no significant differences in information needs between patients with or without complications or between male and female patients. Patients with a higher global health status found the information more helpful at 6-12 months (p < 0.001), 18-24 months (p < 0.001), and 3-5 years (p < 0.001) postoperatively, as did patients who experienced more anxiety at 18-24 months (p = 0.009) and 3-5 years (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Gastroesophageal cancer patients, regardless of sex or postoperative complications, have consistent information needs, yet those with higher global health status and elevated anxiety levels find the information particularly helpful, emphasizing the importance of tailored communication strategies.

Trends in Distal Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer Care: The Dutch Nationwide Ivory Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the nationwide trends in care and accompanied postoperative outcomes for patients with distal esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The introduction of transthoracic esophagectomy, minimally invasive surgery, and neo-adjuvant chemo(radio)therapy changed care for patients with esophageal cancer. METHODS: Patients after elective transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy for distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction carcinoma in the Netherlands between 2007-2016 were included. The primary aim was to evaluate trends in both care and postoperative outcomes for the included patients. Additionally, postoperative outcomes after transthoracic and tran-shiatal esophagectomy were compared, stratified by time periods. RESULTS: Among 4712 patients included, 74% had distal esophageal tumors and 87% had adenocarcinomas. Between 2007 and 2016, the proportion of transthoracic esophagectomy increased from 41% to 81%, and neo-adjuvant treatment and minimally invasive esophagectomy increased from 31% to 96%, and from 7% to 80%, respectively. Over this 10-year period, postoperative outcomes improved: postoperative morbidity decreased from 66.6% to 61.8% ( P = 0.001), R0 resection rate increased from 90.0% to 96.5% (P <0.001), median lymph node harvest increased from 15 to 19 ( P <0.001), and median survival increased from 35 to 41 months ( P = 0.027). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide cohort, a transition towards more neo-adju-vant treatment, transthoracic esophagectomy and minimally invasive surgery was observed over a 10-year period, accompanied by decreased postoperative morbidity, improved surgical radicality and lymph node harvest, and improved survival.

Contrast-Enhanced Radiologic Evaluation of Gastric Conduit Emptying After Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Nasogastric tube (NGT) insertion is the standard of care in many hospitals after esophagectomy for gastric conduit decompression. An upper gastrointestinal contrast passage evaluation (UGI-CE) is a diagnostic test to evaluate passage through the gastric conduit. The authors hypothesized that introducing routine UGI-CE after esophagectomy results in earlier removal of the NGT and resumption of oral intake. METHODS: This retrospective study evaluated two consecutive series of patients undergoing esophagectomy, one before (control group) and one after the introduction of a routine UGI-CE on postoperative day (POD) 3 or 4 (UGI-CE group). If contrast passage was found on the UGI-CE, the NGT was capped and removed. In the control group, the NGT was routinely capped and removed on day 5 after surgery. The primary outcome was the POD on which oral diet was initiated. The secondary outcomes were the day of NGT removal, NGT reinsertions, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Each cohort included 74 patients. In the UGI-CE group, the contrast test was performed on median POD 3.5 (IQR, 3-4). The median day of NGT removal, initiation of clear liquids, and full liquid and solid intake was 1 to 2 days earlier in the UGI-CE group than in the control group (i.e. POD 4, 4, 5, and 6 vs. POD 5, 5, 6.5, and 8; all p < 0.001). The study found no significant differences in NGT reinsertions, pneumonias, anastomotic leakages, or hospital stay. CONCLUSION: The routine use of a UGI-CE after esophagectomy led to earlier removal of the NGT and earlier resumption of oral intake.

Preoperative Risk Stratification in Esophageal Cancer Surgery: Comparing Risk Models with the Clinical Judgment of the Surgeon.

BACKGROUND: Numerous prediction models estimating the risk of complications after esophagectomy exist but are rarely used in practice. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical judgment of surgeons using these prediction models. METHODS: Patients with resectable esophageal cancer who underwent an esophagectomy were included in this prospective study. Prediction models for postoperative complications after esophagectomy were selected by a systematic literature search. Clinical judgment was given by three surgeons, indicating their estimated risk for postoperative complications in percentage categories. The best performing prediction model was compared with the judgment of the surgeons, using the net reclassification improvement (NRI), category-free NRI (cfNRI), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) indexes. RESULTS: Overall, 159 patients were included between March 2019 and July 2021, of whom 88 patients (55%) developed a complication. The best performing prediction model showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.56. The three surgeons had an AUC of 0.53, 0.55, and 0.59, respectively, and all surgeons showed negative percentages of cfNRIevents and IDIevents, and positive percentages of cfNRInonevents and IDIevents. This indicates that in the group of patients with postoperative complications, the prediction model performed better, whereas in the group of patients without postoperative complications, the surgeons performed better. NRIoverall was 18% for one surgeon, while the remainder of the NRIoverall, cfNRIoverall and IDIoverall scores showed small differences between surgeons and the prediction models. CONCLUSION: Prediction models tend to overestimate the risk of any complication, whereas surgeons tend to underestimate this risk. Overall, surgeons' estimations differ between surgeons and vary between similar to slightly better than the prediction models.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leakage after upper gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recently, endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) was introduced as treatment for anastomotic leakage after upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. The aim of this study was to describe the initial experience with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery in a tertiary referral center. METHODS: Patients treated with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery were included retrospectively (January 2018-June 2021) and prospectively (June 2021-October 2021). The primary end point was the EVT success rate. Secondary end points included mortality and adverse events. RESULTS: 38 patients were included (31 men; mean age 66 years): 27 had undergone an esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction and 11 a total gastrectomy with esophagojejunal anastomosis. EVT was successful in 28 patients (74 %, 95 %CI 57 %-87 %). In 10 patients, EVT failed: deceased owing to radiation pneumonitis (n = 1), EVT-associated complications (n = 2), and defect closure not achieved (n = 7). Mean duration of successful EVT was 33 days, with a median of six EVT-related endoscopies. Median hospital stay was 45 days. CONCLUSION: This initial experience with EVT for anastomotic leakage after upper GI surgery demonstrated a success rate of 74 %. EVT is a promising therapy that could prevent further major surgery. More experience with the technique and its indications will likely improve success rates in the future.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for esophageal perforation: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND : Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVT) is a novel treatment for esophageal perforations. This study aimed to describe initial experience with EVT of esophageal perforations due to iatrogenic cause, Boerhaave syndrome, or other perforations not related to prior upper gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS : Data from patients treated with EVT for esophageal perforation at five hospitals in three European countries, between January 2018 and October 2021, were retrospectively collected. The primary end point was successful defect closure by EVT, with or without the use of other endoscopic treatment modalities. Secondary end points included mortality and adverse events. RESULTS : 27 patients were included (median age 71 years). The success rate was 89 % (24/27, 95 %CI 77-100). EVT failed in three patients: two deceased during EVT (septic embolic stroke, pulmonary embolism) and one underwent esophagectomy due to a persisting defect. Two adverse events occurred: one iatrogenic defect expansion during sponge exchange and one hemorrhage during sponge removal. Median treatment duration was 12 days (interquartile range [IQR] 6-16) with 1 sponge exchange (IQR 1-3). CONCLUSION : EVT is a promising organ-preserving treatment for esophageal perforations, with a success rate of 89 %. More experience with the technique and indications will likely improve success rates.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy in older patients with gastric cancer undergoing surgery: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In trials evaluating perioperative chemotherapy for gastric cancer, which serve as the basis for treatment guidelines, patients are selected. The generalizability of these trial findings to older patients is uncertain. METHODS: This population-based retrospective cohort study compared the survival outcomes of patients ≥ 75 years with gastric adenocarcinoma treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 2015 and 2019. Additionally, the percentage of patients < 75 years and ≥ 75 years who did not proceeded to surgery after receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy were examined. RESULTS: A total of 1995 patients, of whom 1249 aged < 75 years and 746 aged ≥ 75 years, were included. In the group of patients ≥ 75 years, 275 patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and 471 patients were directly scheduled for gastrectomy. Patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy differed significantly from one and another in characteristics. Overall survival of patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy was not significantly different (median 34.9 vs. 32.3 months; P = 0.506), also after adjusting for potential confounders (HR 0.87; P = 0.263). Of patients ≥ 75 years who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 43 (15.6%) did not proceed to surgery compared to 111 (8.9%) patients < 75 years (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients ≥ 75 years treated with or without chemotherapy were highly selected, and overall survival was not significantly different between both groups. Nonetheless, the proportion of patients who did not proceed to surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy was higher in patients ≥ 75 years compared to patients < 75 years. Therefore, neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered with more caution in patients ≥ 75 years, while identifying those who may benefit.

Omentectomy as Part of Radical Surgery for Gastric Cancer: 5-Year Follow-Up Results of a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Curative therapy for gastric cancer usually consists of perioperative chemotherapy combined with a radical (R0) gastrectomy. In addition to a modified D2 lymphadenectomy, a complete omentectomy is recommended. However, there is little evidence for a survival benefit of omentectomy. This study presents the follow-up data of the OMEGA study. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study included 100 consecutive patients with gastric cancer undergoing (sub)total gastrectomy with complete en bloc omentectomy and modified D2 lymphadenectomy. Primary outcome of the current study was 5-year overall survival. Patients with or without omental metastases were compared. Pathological factors associated with locoregional recurrence and/or metastases were tested with multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 100 included patients, five had metastases in the greater omentum. Five-year overall survival was 0.0% in patients with omental metastases and 44.2% in patients without omental metastases (p = 0.001). Median overall survival time for patients with or without omental metastases was 7 months and 53 months. A (y)pT3-4 stage tumor and vasoinvasive growth were associated with locoregional recurrence and/or metastases in patients without omental metastases. CONCLUSION: The presence of omental metastases in gastric cancer patients who underwent potentially curative surgery was associated with impaired overall survival. Omentectomy as part of radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer might not contribute to a survival benefit in case of undetected omental metastases.

Clinical implications of chyle leakage following esophagectomy.

The clinical consequences of chyle leakage following esophagectomy are underexposed. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical implications of chyle leakage following esophagectomy. This retrospective study of prospectively collected data included patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy in 2017-2020. Routinely, the thoracic duct was resected en bloc as part of the mediastinal lymphadenectomy. Chyle leakage was defined as milky drain fluid for which specific treatment was initiated and/or a triglyceride level in drain fluid of ≥1.13 mmol/L, according to the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) classification. Primary endpoints were the clinical characteristics of chyle leakage (type, severity and treatment). Secondary endpoints were the impact of chyle leakage on duration of thoracic drainage and hospital stay. Chyle leakage was present in 43/314 patients (14%), of whom 24 (56%) were classified as severity A and 19 (44%) as severity B. All patients were successfully treated with either medium chain triglyceride diet (98%) or total parental nutrition (2%). There were no re-interventions for chyle leakage during initial admission, although one patient needed additional pleural drainage during readmission. Patients with chyle leakage had 3 days longer duration of thoracic drainage (bias corrected accelerated (BCa) 95%CI:0.46-0.76) and 3 days longer hospital stay (BCa 95%CI:0.07-0.36), independently of the presence of other complications. Chyle leakage is a relatively frequent complication following esophagectomy. Postoperative chyle leakage was associated with a significant longer duration of thoracic drainage and hospital admission. Nonsurgical treatment was successful in all patients with chyle leakage.

Gastrectomy Versus Esophagectomy for Gastroesophageal Junction Tumors: Short- and Long-Term Outcomes From the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit.

OBJECTIVE: Investigate long-term survival, morbidity, mortality, and pathology results in patients following esophagectomy or total gastrectomy for gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. BACKGROUND: Both a total gastrectomy and an esophagectomy may be valid treatment options in patients with GEJ cancer. Which procedure results in the most optimal patient outcome is not well studied. The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term survival, morbidity, mortality, and pathology results in patients following esophagectomy or total gastrectomy for GEJ cancer. METHODS: A retrospective comparative cohort study of prospectively collected data from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit combined with survival data of the Dutch medical insurance database was performed. Patients with GEJ cancer in whom a total gastrectomy or an esophagectomy was performed between 2011 and 2016 were compared. The primary outcome was 3-year overall survival. Postoperative morbidity, mortality, 3-year conditional survival, radicality of resection, and lymph node yield were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: A total of 871 patients were included: 790 following esophagectomy and 81 following gastrectomy. The 3-year overall survival was 35.8% after esophagectomy and 28.4% after gastrectomy (hazard ratio 1.2, 95% confidence interval 0.721-1.836, P = 0.557). Postoperative morbidity, mortality, radicality of resection, lymph node yield, and 3-year conditional survival did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSION: A total gastrectomy and an esophagectomy for GEJ cancer show largely comparable results with regard to long-term survival, postoperative morbidity, mortality, and pathology results. If both procedures are feasible, other parameters such as surgeon's experience and quality of life should be considered when planning for surgery.

Recurrent Disease After Esophageal Cancer Surgery: A Substudy of The Dutch Nationwide Ivory Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the patterns, predictors, and survival of recurrent disease following esophageal cancer surgery. BACKGROUND: Survival of recurrent esophageal cancer is usually poor, with limited prospects of remission. METHODS: This nationwide cohort study included patients with distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma after curatively intended esophagectomy in 2007 to 2016 (follow-up until January 2020). Patients with distant metastases detected during surgery were excluded. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression were used to identify predictors of recurrent disease. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine the association of recurrence site and treatment intent with postrecurrence survival. RESULTS: Among 4626 patients, 45.1% developed recurrent disease a median of 11 months postoperative, of whom most had solely distant metastases (59.8%). Disease recurrences were most frequently hepatic (26.2%) or pulmonary (25.1%). Factors significantly associated with disease recurrence included young age (≤65 y), male sex, adenocarcinoma, open surgery, transthoracic esophagectomy, nonradical resection, higher T-stage, and tumor positive lymph nodes. Overall, median postrecurrence survival was 4 months [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 3.6-4.4]. After curatively intended recurrence treatment, median survival was 20 months (95% CI: 16.4-23.7). Survival was more favorable after locoregional compared with distant recurrence (hazard ratio: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.65-0.84). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides important prognostic information assisting in the surveillance and counseling of patients after curatively intended esophageal cancer surgery. Nearly half the patients developed recurrent disease, with limited prospects of survival. The risk of recurrence was higher in patients with a higher tumor stage, nonradical resection and positive lymph node harvest.

Improved anastomotic leakage rates after the "flap and wrap" reconstruction in Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for cancer.

Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy has serious consequences. In Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, a shorter and possibly better vascularized gastric conduit is created than in McKeown esophagectomy. Intrathoracic anastomoses can additionally be wrapped in omentum and concealed behind the pleura ("flap and wrap" reconstruction). Aims of this observational study were to assess the anastomotic leakage incidence after transhiatal esophagectomy (THE), McKeown esophagectomy (McKeown), Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (IL) without "flap and wrap" reconstruction, and IL with "flap and wrap" reconstruction. Consecutive patients undergoing esophagectomy at a tertiary referral center between January 2013 and April 2019 were included. Primary outcome was the anastomotic leakage rate. Secondary outcomes were postoperative outcomes, mortality, and 3-year overall survival. A total of 463 patients were included. The anastomotic leakage incidence after THE (n = 37), McKeown (n = 97), IL without "flap and wrap" reconstruction (n = 39), and IL with "flap and wrap" reconstruction (n = 290) were 24.3, 32.0, 28.2, and 7.2% (P < 0.001). THE and IL with "flap and wrap" reconstruction required fewer reoperations for anastomotic leakage (0 and 1.4%) than McKeown and IL without "flap and wrap" reconstruction (6.2 and 17.9%, P < 0.001). Fewer anastomotic leakages are observed after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with "flap and wrap" reconstruction compared to transhiatal, McKeown and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy without "flap and wrap" reconstruction. The "flap and wrap" reconstruction seems a promising technique to further reduce anastomotic leakages and its severity in esophageal cancer patients who have an indication for Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Optimal Perioperative Pain Management in Esophageal Surgery: An Evaluation of Paravertebral Analgesia.

BACKGROUND: For esophagectomy, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is the standard of care for perioperative pain management. Although effective, TEA is associated with moderate to serious adverse events such as hypotension and neurologic complications. Paravertebral analgesia (PVA) may be a safe alternative. The authors hypothesized that TEA and PVA are similar in efficacy for pain treatment in thoracolaparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study compared TEA with PVA in two consecutive series of 25 thoracolaparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomies. In this study, TEA consisted of continuous epidural bupivacaine and sufentanil infusion with a patient-controlled bolus function. In PVA, the catheter was inserted by the surgeon under thoracoscopic vision during surgery. Administration of PVA consisted of continuous paravertebral bupivacaine infusion after a bolus combined with patient-controlled analgesia using intravenous morphine. The primary outcome was the median highest recorded Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NRS) during the 3 days after surgery. The secondary outcomes were vasopressor consumption, fluid administration, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: In both groups, the median highest recorded NRS was 4 or lower during the first three postoperative days. The patients with PVA had a higher overall NRS (mean difference, 0.75; 95% confidence interval 0.49-1.44). No differences were observed in any of the other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: For the patients undergoing thoracolaparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, TEA was superior to PVA, as measured by NRS during the first three postoperative days. However, both modes provided adequate analgesia, with a median highest recorded NRS of 4 or lower. These results could form the basis for a randomized controlled trial.

Transthoracic Versus Transhiatal Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Nationwide Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chemoradiation followed by resection has been the standard therapy for resectable (cT1-4aN0-3M0) esophageal carcinoma in the Netherlands since 2010. The optimal surgical approach remains a matter of debate. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the transhiatal and the transthoracic approach concerning morbidity, mortality and oncological quality. METHODS: Data was acquired from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit. Patients who underwent esophagectomy with curative intent and gastric tube reconstruction for mid/distal esophageal or esophagogastric junction carcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3M0) from 2011 to 2016 were included. Patients who underwent a transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy were compared after propensity score matching. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 1532 of 4143 patients were included for analysis. The transthoracic approach yielded more lymph nodes (transthoracic median 19, transhiatal median 14; p < 0.001). There was no difference in the number of positive lymph nodes, however, the median (y)pN-stage was higher in the transthoracic group (p = 0.044). The transthoracic group experienced more chyle leakage (9.7% vs. 2.7%, p < 0.001), more pulmonary complications (35.5% vs. 26.1%, p < 0.001), and more cardiac complications (15.4% vs. 10.3%, p = 0.003). The transthoracic group required a longer hospital stay (median 14 vs. 11 days, p < 0.001), ICU stay (median 3 vs. 1 day, p < 0.001), and had a higher 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate (4.0% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: In a propensity score-matched cohort, the transthoracic esophagectomy provided a more extensive lymph node dissection, which resulted in a higher lymph node yield, at the cost of increased morbidity and short-term mortality.

Safety of Esophageal Cancer Surgery During the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Europe: A Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Many hospitals postponed elective surgical care during the first wave of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Some centers continued elective surgery, including esophageal cancer surgery, with the use of preoperative screening methods; however, there is no evidence supporting the safety of this strategy as postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic have not yet been investigated. METHODS: This multicenter study in four European tertiary esophageal cancer referral centers included consecutive adult patients undergoing elective esophageal cancer surgery from a prospectively maintained database in a COVID-19 pandemic cohort (1 March 2020-31 May 2020) and a control cohort (1 October 2019-29 February 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. RESULTS: The COVID-19 cohort consisted of 139 patients, versus 168 patients in the control cohort. There was no difference in the rate of respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (13.7% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.127) and number of pulmonary complications (32.4% vs. 29.9%, p = 0.646) between the COVID-19 cohort and the control cohort. Overall, postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were comparable between both cohorts. History taking and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) were used as preoperative screening methods to detect a possible severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in all centers. No patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 pre- or postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Esophageal cancer surgery during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic was not associated with an increase in pulmonary complications as no patients were diagnosed with COVID-19. Esophageal cancer surgery can be performed safely with the use of adequate preoperative SARS-CoV-2 screening methods.