RESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Various anastomotic and reconstruction techniques are used for minimally invasive total (miTG) and distal gastrectomy (miDG). Their effects on postoperative morbidity have not been extensively studied. METHODS: MiTG and miDG patients were selected from 9356 oncological gastrectomies performed 2017-2021 in 44 centers. Endpoints included anastomotic leakage (AL) rate and postoperative morbidity tested by multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Three major anastomotic techniques (circular stapled (CS); linear stapled (LS); hand sewn (HS)), and three major bowel reconstruction types (Roux (RX); Billroth I (BI); Billroth II (BII)) were identified in miTG (n=878) and miDG (n=3334). Postoperative complications including AL (5.2% vs. 1.1%), overall (28.7% vs. 16.3%) and major morbidity (15.7% vs. 8.2%), as well as 90-day mortality (1.6% vs. 0.5%) were higher after miTG compared with miDG. After miTG, AL rate was higher after CS (4.3%) and HS (7.9%) compared with LS (3.4%). Similarly, major complications (LS: 9.7%, CS: 16.2%, HS: 12.7%) were lowest after LS. Multivariate analysis confirmed anastomotic technique as predictive factor for AL, overall and major complications. In miDG, AL rate (BI: 1.4%, BII 0.8%, RX 1.2%), overall (BI: 14.5%, BII: 15.0%, RX: 18.7%,) and major morbidity (BI: 7.9%, BII: 9.1%, RX: 7.2%), and mortality (BI: 0%, BII: 0.1%, RY: 1.1%%) were not affected by bowel reconstruction. CONCLUSION: In oncologically suitable situations, miDG should be preferred to miTG, as postoperative morbidity is significantly lower. LS should be a preferred anastomotic technique for miTG in Western Centers. Conversely, bowel reconstruction in DG may be chosen according to surgeon's preference.
RESUMEN
Textbook outcome (TO) is a composite measure representing an ideal perioperative course, which has been utilized to assess the quality of care in oesophagogastric cancer (OGC) surgery. We aim to determine TO rates among OGC patients in a UK tertiary center, investigate predictors of TO attainment, and evaluate the relationship between TO and survival. A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected departmental database between 2006 and 2021 was conducted. Patients that underwent radical OGC surgery with curative intent were included. TO attainment required margin-negative resection, adequate lymphadenectomy, uncomplicated postoperative course, and no hospital readmission. Predictors of TO were investigated using multivariable logistic regression. The association between TO and survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression modeling. In sum, 667 esophageal cancer and 312 gastric cancer patients were included. TO was achieved in 35.1% of esophagectomy patients and 51.3% of gastrectomy patients. Several factors were independently associated with a low likelihood of TO attainment: T3 stage (odds ratio (OR): 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.22-0.79], p = 0.008) and T4 stage (OR:0.26, 95% CI [0.08-0.72], p = 0.013) in the esophagectomy cohort and high BMI (OR:0.93, 95% CI [0.88-0.98], p = 0.011) in the gastrectomy cohort. TO attainment was associated with greater overall survival and recurrence-free survival in esophagectomy and gastrectomy cohorts. TO is a relevant quality metric that can be utilized to compare surgical performance between centers and investigate patients at risk of TO failure. Enhancement of preoperative care measures can improve TO rates and, subsequently, long-term survival.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Esofágicas , Esofagectomía , Gastrectomía , Neoplasias Gástricas , Humanos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Femenino , Masculino , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirugía , Neoplasias Gástricas/mortalidad , Anciano , Gastrectomía/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Escisión del Ganglio Linfático/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Márgenes de Escisión , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Reino Unido , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Modelos LogísticosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Both anastomotic leak (AL) and conduit necrosis (CN) after oesophagectomy are associated with high morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the identification of preoperative, modifiable risk factors is desirable. The aim of this study was to generate a risk scoring model for AL and CN after oesophagectomy. METHODS: Patients undergoing curative resection for oesophageal cancer were identified from the international Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) from April 2018-December 2018. Definitions for AL and CN were those set out by the Oesophageal Complications Consensus Group. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for both AL and CN. A risk score was then produced for both AL and CN using the derivation set, then internally validated using the validation set. RESULTS: This study included 2247 oesophagectomies across 137 hospitals in 41 countries. The AL rate was 14.2% and CN rate was 2.7%. Preoperative factors that were independent predictors of AL were cardiovascular comorbidity and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The risk scoring model showed insufficient predictive ability in internal validation (area under the receiver-operating-characteristic curve [AUROC] = 0.618). Preoperative factors that were independent predictors of CN were: body mass index, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, previous myocardial infarction and smoking history. These were converted into a risk-scoring model and internally validated using the validation set with an AUROC of 0.775. CONCLUSION: Despite a large dataset, AL proves difficult to predict using preoperative factors. The risk-scoring model for CN provides an internally validated tool to estimate a patient's risk preoperatively.
Asunto(s)
Anastomosis Quirúrgica , Fuga Anastomótica , Neoplasias Esofágicas , Esofagectomía , Necrosis , Humanos , Fuga Anastomótica/epidemiología , Fuga Anastomótica/etiología , Masculino , Femenino , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Neoplasias Esofágicas/patología , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Factores de Riesgo , Medición de Riesgo , Estómago/cirugía , Estómago/patología , Curva ROC , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica , Índice de Masa Corporal , Esófago/cirugía , Esófago/patologíaRESUMEN
The peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) procedure has revolutionized the management of achalasia in many centres around the world as it offers patients a minimally invasive endoscopic solution to their dysphagia caused by achalasia. Alongside its success in alleviating dysphagia, concerns regarding postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease have emerged as a pertinent issue which are not fully resolved. In this study, Nabi et al have comprehensively reviewed the topic of the prediction, prevention and management of gastroesophageal reflux after POEM. POEM is a purely endoscopic procedure which is usually performed without any anti-reflux procedure. Certain patients may be better served by a laparoscopic Heller's myotomy and fundoplication and it is important that gastroenterologists and surgeons provide comprehensive risks and benefits of each achalasia treatment option so that patients can decide what treatment is best for them. This article by Nabi et al provides a comprehensive review of the current status of this issue to allow these discussions to occur.
Asunto(s)
Acalasia del Esófago , Fundoplicación , Reflujo Gastroesofágico , Miotomía de Heller , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Acalasia del Esófago/diagnóstico , Acalasia del Esófago/cirugía , Acalasia del Esófago/terapia , Acalasia del Esófago/fisiopatología , Humanos , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/etiología , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/diagnóstico , Reflujo Gastroesofágico/terapia , Fundoplicación/métodos , Fundoplicación/efectos adversos , Medición de Riesgo , Miotomía de Heller/efectos adversos , Miotomía de Heller/métodos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/prevención & control , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Trastornos de Deglución/etiología , Trastornos de Deglución/terapia , Trastornos de Deglución/diagnóstico , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Laparoscopía/métodos , Cirugía Endoscópica por Orificios Naturales/efectos adversos , Cirugía Endoscópica por Orificios Naturales/métodos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
Objective: The aim of this study is to identify risk factors for readmission after elective esophagogastric cancer surgery and characterize the impact of readmission on long-term survival. The study will also identify whether the location of readmission to either the hospital that performed the primary surgery (index hospital) or another institution (nonindex hospital) has an impact on postoperative mortality. Background: Over the past decade, the center-volume relationship has driven the centralization of major cancer surgery, which has led to improvements in perioperative mortality. However, the impact of readmission, especially to nonindex centers, on long-term mortality remains unclear. Methods: This was a national population-based cohort study using Hospital Episode Statistics of adult patients undergoing esophagectomy and gastrectomy in England between January 2008 and December 2019. Results: This study included 27,592 patients, of which overall readmission rates were 25.1% (index 15.3% and nonindex 9.8%). The primary cause of readmission to an index hospital was surgical in 45.2% and 23.7% in nonindex readmissions. Patients with no readmissions had significantly longer survival than those with readmissions (median: 4.5 vs 3.8 years; P < 0.001). Patients readmitted to their index hospital had significantly improved survival as compared to nonindex readmissions (median: 3.3 vs 4.7 years; P < 0.001). Minimally invasive surgery and surgery performed in high-volume centers had improved 90-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.75; P < 0.001; odds ratio, 0.60; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Patients requiring readmission to the hospital after surgery have an increased risk of mortality, which is worsened by readmission to a nonindex institution. Patients requiring readmission to the hospital should be assessed and admitted, if required, to their index institution.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Textbook outcomes are composite outcome measures that reflect the ideal overall experience for patients. There are many of these in the elective surgery literature but no textbook outcomes have been proposed for patients following emergency laparotomy. The aim was to achieve international consensus amongst experts and patients for the best Textbook Outcomes for non-trauma and trauma emergency laparotomy. METHODS: A modified Delphi exercise was undertaken with three planned rounds to achieve consensus regarding the best Textbook Outcomes based on the category, number and importance (Likert scale of 1-5) of individual outcome measures. There were separate questions for non-trauma and trauma. A patient engagement exercise was undertaken after round 2 to inform the final round. RESULTS: A total of 337 participants from 53 countries participated in all three rounds of the exercise. The final Textbook Outcomes were divided into 'early' and 'longer-term'. For non-trauma patients the proposed early Textbook Outcome was 'Discharged from hospital without serious postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ grade III; including intra-abdominal sepsis, organ failure, unplanned re-operation or death). For trauma patients it was 'Discharged from hospital without unexpected transfusion after haemostasis, and no serious postoperative complications (adapted Clavien-Dindo for trauma ≥ grade III; including intra-abdominal sepsis, organ failure, unplanned re-operation on or death)'. The longer-term Textbook Outcome for both non-trauma and trauma was 'Achieved the early Textbook Outcome, and restoration of baseline quality of life at 1 year'. CONCLUSION: Early and longer-term Textbook Outcomes have been agreed by an international consensus of experts for non-trauma and trauma emergency laparotomy. These now require clinical validation with patient data.
Asunto(s)
Técnica Delphi , Laparotomía , Humanos , Laparotomía/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Consenso , Urgencias Médicas , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dense inflammation obscuring the hepatocystic anatomy can hinder the ability to perform a safe standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy in severe cholecystitis, requiring use of a bailout procedure. We compared clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and open subtotal cholecystectomy against the traditional standard of open total cholecystectomy to identify the optimal bailout strategy for the difficult gallbladder. METHODS: A multicenter, multinational retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent bailout procedures for severe cholecystitis. Procedures were compared using one-way analysis of variance/Kruskal-Wallis tests and χ2 tests with multiple pairwise comparisons, maintaining a family-wise error rate at 0.05. Multiple multivariate linear/logistical regression models were created. RESULTS: In 11 centers, 727 bailout procedures were conducted: 317 laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomies, 172 open subtotal cholecystectomies, and 238 open cholecystectomies. Baseline characteristics were similar among subgroups. Bile leak was common in laparoscopic and open fenestrating subtotal cholecystectomies, with increased intraoperative drain placements and postoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography(P < .05). In contrast, intraoperative bleeding (odds ratio = 3.71 [1.9, 7.22]), surgical site infection (odds ratio = 2.41 [1.09, 5.3]), intensive care unit admission (odds ratio = 2.65 [1.51, 4.63]), and length of stay (Δ = 2 days, P < .001) were higher in open procedures. Reoperation rates were higher for open reconstituting subtotal cholecystectomies (odds ratio = 3.43 [1.03, 11.44]) than other subtypes. The overall rate of bile duct injury was 1.1% and was not statistically different between groups. Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy had a bile duct injury rate of 0.63%. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic subtotal cholecystectomy is a feasible surgical bailout procedure in cases of severe cholecystitis where standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy may carry undue risk of bile duct injury. Open cholecystectomy remains a reasonable option.