Fashioning esophagogastric anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study is to compare outcomes of the robotic hand-sewn, linear- and circular-stapled techniques performed to create an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis in patients who underwent Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. METHODS: Patients who underwent a planned Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were retrospectively analysed from prospectively maintained databases. Only patients who underwent a robotic thoracic approach with the creation of an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis were included in the study. Patients were divided into three groups: hand-sewn-, circular stapled-, and linear-stapled anastomosis group. Demographic information and surgery-related data were extracted. The primary outcome was the rate of anastomotic leakages (AL) in the three groups. Moreover, the rate of grade A, B and C anastomotic leakage were evaluated. In addition, patients of each group were divided in subgroups according to the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty patients were enrolled in the study. No significant differences were found between the three groups about AL rate (p = 0.137). Considering the management of the AL for each of the three groups, no significant differences were found. Evaluating the correlation between AL rate and the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique, no significant differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: No standardized anastomotic fashioning technique has yet been generally accepted. This study could be considered a call to perform ad hoc high-quality studies involving high-volume centers for upper gastrointestinal surgery to evaluate what is the most advantageous anastomotic technique.

Clinical predictors of postoperative complications in the context of enhanced recovery (ERAS) in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer.

The overall frequency of postoperative complications in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer diverges between studies. We evaluated the frequency and assessed the relationship between complications and demographic and clinical features. For this observational study, data were extracted from the ERAS Registry managed by the University of Verona, Italy. Patients were evaluated and compared for postoperative complications according to the consensus-based classification and the Clavien-Dindo scale. The study population was 877 patients: 346 (39.5%) with esophageal and 531 (60.5%) with gastric cancer; 492 (56.2%) reported one or more postoperative complications, 213 (61.6%) of those with esophageal and 279 (52.5%) of those with gastric cancer. When stratified by consensus-based classification, patients with esophageal cancer reported general postoperative complications more frequently (p < 0.001) than those with gastric cancer, but there was no difference in postoperative surgical complications between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression models revealed an association between postoperative complications and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.36), operation time (adjusted OR, 1.08; 95% CI 1.00-1.15), and days to solid diet intake (adjusted OR, 1.39; 95% CI 1.20-1.59). Complications in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer are frequent, even in those treated according to ERAS principles, and are often associated with comorbidities, longer operative time, and longer time to solid diet intake.

The "Weekday Effect" on Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocol for Gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: While enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol demonstrated to improve outcomes after gastrectomy, some papers evidenced a detrimental effect on postoperative morbidity related to the "weekday effect." We aimed to understand whether the day of gastrectomy could affect postoperative outcomes and compliance with ERAS items. METHODS: We included all patients that underwent gastrectomy for cancer between January 2017 and September 2021. Cohort was divided considering the day of surgery: Early group (Monday-Wednesday) and Late group (Thursday-Friday). Compliance with protocol and postoperative outcomes were compared. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-seven patients were included in Early group, while 154 were in Late group. The groups were comparable in preoperative characteristics. No significant difference in pre/intraoperative and postoperative ERAS items' compliance was apparent between Early and Late groups, with most items exceeding the 70% threshold. Median length of stay was 6.5 days and 6 days in Early and Late groups (p = 0.616), respectively. Morbidity was 50% in both groups, with severe complications that occurred in 13% of Early patients and 15% of Late patients. Ninety-day mortality was 2%, and it was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In a center with a standardized ERAS protocol, the weekday of gastrectomy has no significant impact on the success of each ERAS item and on postoperative surgical and oncological outcomes.

Robotic versus open Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: A more accurate lymph node dissection without burdening the leak rate.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) combines the beneficial effects of minimally invasive surgery on postoperative complications, especially on pulmonary ones, with the safety of the anastomosis performed in open surgery. Moreover, RAMIE could allow a more accurate lymphadenectomy. METHODS: We reviewed our database to identify all patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus treated by Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in the period January 2014 to June 2022. Patients were divided according to the thoracic approach into RAMIE and open esophagectomy (OE) groups. We compared the groups for early surgical outcomes, 90-day mortality as well as R0 rate, and the number of lymph nodes harvested. RESULTS: We identified 47 patients in RAMIE and 159 patients in the OE group. Baseline characteristics were comparable. Operative time was significantly longer for RAMIE procedures (p < 0.01); however, we did not observe the difference in overall (RAMIE 55.5% vs. OE 61%, p = 0.76) and severe complications rate (RAMIE 17% vs. OE 22.6%, p = 0.4). The anastomotic leak rate was 2.1% after RAMIE and 6.9% after OE (p = 0.56). We did not report the difference in 90-day mortality (RAMIE 2.1% vs. OE 1.9%, p = 0.65). In the RAMIE group, we observed a significantly higher number of thoracic lymph nodes harvested, with a median of 10 lymph nodes in the RAMIE group versus 8 in the OE group (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, RAMIE has morbimortality rates comparable to OE. Moreover, it allows a more accurate thoracic lymphadenectomy which results in a higher thoracic lymph nodes retrieval rate.

Transthoracic esophagectomy compared to transhiatal extended gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a multicenter retrospective cohort study.

Optimal surgical treatment for Siewert type II esophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma is debated. The aim of this study was to compare transhiatal extended gastrectomy (TEG) and transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE). Patients with Siewert type II tumors who underwent a resection by TEG or TTE in two centers (Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, and University of Verona) between 2014 and 2019 were identified. To limit selection bias, patients were matched for baseline characteristics and compared with a multivariable logistic regression model. Some 159 patients treated by TEG (60 patients, 37.7%) or TTE (99 patients, 62.3%) were included. Patients in the TEG group were older, had less tumor invasion of the esophagus, and were more often excluded from neoadjuvant therapy. Post-operative morbidity was comparable (P = 0.88), while 90-day mortality was higher after TEG (90-day mortality 10.0% in TEG group vs. 2.0% in TTE group P = 0.01). R0 resection was achieved in 83.3% of patients after TEG and in 97.9% after TTE (P < 0.01), with the proximal resection margin involved in 16.6% of patients after TEG versus 0 in TTE group (P < 0.01). The 3-year overall survival was comparable (TEG: 36.5%, TTE: 48.4%, P = 0.12). At multivariable analysis, (y)pT category was an independent risk factor for 3-year recurrence. After matching, TEG was still associated with an increased risk of incomplete tumor resection (P = 0.03) and proximal margin involvement (P < 0.01), while there were no differences in post-operative morbidity (P = 0.56) and mortality (P = 0.31). Our data suggest that patients with Siewert type II tumors treated by TEG are exposed to a higher risk of positive proximal resection margin compared to TTE.

Effect of Pyloroplasty on Gastric Conduit Emptying and Patients' Quality of Life After Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy.

Background: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication after esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction. It is still unclear whether a pyloric drainage procedure might reduce the risk of DGE. Methods: We identified in our database all patients subjected to Ivor Lewis esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in the period 2000-2012. In the period 2000-2009, we performed a routine pyloroplasty (pyloroplasty group, PP group, 15 patients), after 2009 we did not perform any type of pyloric drainage procedure (nonpyloroplasty group, NPP group, 11 patients). We compared the groups with subjective questionnaires to assess the perceived quality of life (QoL) (QLQ-C30 and OES-18) and with objective test to study the gastric tube emptying (timed barium swallow test, scintigraphy, 24 hours' pH-metry). Results: No difference was observed in questionnaires QLC-C30 and OES-18 scores: 73% of patients in PP group and 63% in NPP group scored their overall QoL as good to excellent (QLC-C30). We did not report difference in timed barium swallow test results and in scintigraphy results. Twenty-four-hour pH-metry results showed in PP group a nonsignificant higher number of acid reflux episodes (NPP group 23.2 ± 9.5 versus PP group 41.3 ± 10.7, P = .29) and a longer time with pH <4 (NPP group 0.89% ± 1.6% versus PP group 3.1% ± 2.1%, P = .24). Conclusions: In our series, pyloroplasty was not associated with improved long-term QoL nor with better gastric conduit emptying. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Effectiveness of endoscopic vacuum therapy as rescue treatment in refractory leaks after gastro-esophageal surgery.

The treatment of leak after esophageal and gastric surgery is a major challenge. Over the last few years, endoscopic vacuum therapy (E-VAC) has gained popularity in the management of this life-threatening complication. We reported our initial experience on E-VAC therapy as rescue treatment in refractory anastomotic leak and perforation after gastro-esophageal surgery. From September 2017 to December 2019, a total of 8 E-VAC therapies were placed as secondary treatment in 7 patients. Six for anastomotic leak (3 cervical, 1 thoracic, 2 abdominal) and 1 for perforation of the gastric conduit. In 6 cases, E-VAC was placed intracavitary; while in the remaining 2, the sponge was positioned intraluminal (one patient was treated with both approaches). A total of 60 sponges were used in the whole cohort. The median number of sponge insertions was 10 (range: 5-14) with a median treatment duration of 41 days (range: 19-49). A complete healing was achieved in 4 intracavitary (67%) and in 1 intraluminal (50%) E-VAC. We observed only one E-VAC-related complication: a bleeding successfully managed endoscopically. E-VAC therapy seems to be a safe and effective tool in the management of leaks and perforations after upper GI surgery, although with longer healing time when it is used as secondary treatment.

Gastric conduit perforation after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy successfully treated with endoscopic vacuum therapy (E-VAC): a case report.

Gastric conduit perforation is a life-threatening complication after esophagectomy and currently there is no consensus about its optimal management. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (E-VAC) is a promising technique for the treatment of leaks and perforations after upper gastro-intestinal surgery. We report the case of a 65 years-old male patient who underwent an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma. He referred to our Emergency Department for septic shock and right hydropneumothorax. We performed an emergency thoracoscopy with intraoperative esophagogastroduodenoscopy which showed a pre-pyloric perforation of the gastric conduit. The perforation was initially treated with unsuccessful primary surgical closure and subsequently by means of E-VAC, firstly placed intraluminal and then intracavitary. With the latter technique, we assisted to a progressive clinical improvement until the definitive healing of the perforation. To our knowledge, this is the first case of a gastric tube perforation after esophagectomy successfully treated with E-VAC.

Feasibility and safety of an enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) for upper GI surgery in elderly patients (≥ 75 years) in a high-volume surgical center.

Enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) have demonstrated their efficacy after esophagectomy and gastrectomy but little is known about their feasibility and safety in elderly patients. Patients submitted to Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy or gastrectomy for cancer between January 2016 and June 2019 were divided into three age groups: young-age group, YG (≤ 65 years, n = 130); middle-age group, MG (66-74 years, n = 101); old-age group, OG (≥ 75 years, n = 74). The groups were compared for adherence to our ERP, morbidity and mortality rates. After esophagectomy, adherence to ERP was comparable between the three groups, overall morbidity was higher in OG, without statistically significant difference, while the incidence of cardiac complications was significantly higher in OG (p = 0.02). After gastrectomy, OG presented a lower adherence to urinary catheter removal and to early mobilization. No difference in overall morbidity rate was observed (p = 0.13). The median length of stay was comparable both after esophagectomy (p = 0.075) and gastrectomy (p = 0.07). Multivariable analysis showed that age ≥ 75 years was not associated with a higher risk of ERP failure either after esophagectomy (p = 0.59) or after gastrectomy (p = 0.83). After esophagectomy, the risk of failure of the ERP program was higher for patients with ASA grade 3-4 (p = 0.03) and for those with postoperative complications (p < 0.001) while after gastrectomy only postoperative complications were associated to higher risk of ERP failure (p < 0.001). In our series, adherence to ERP protocol of patients ≥ 75 years old was similar to that of younger patients after esophagectomy and gastrectomy, without a significant increase in morbi-mortality rates.

Preliminary Experience with Prophylactic Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair in Patients Affected by Advanced Esophageal Cancer.

Bleeding from the thoracic aorta is potentially fatal in patients with advanced esophageal cancer (AEC). Esophageal malignancy is the third most common cause of aortoesophageal fistula, after thoracic aortic aneurysm and ingestion of foreign body. The involvement of aortic wall often contraindicates chemoradiotherapy (CRT) treatment, thus reducing life expectancy of these patients. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) is a well-described mini-invasive technique that can be also applied for coverage of the aortic lumen in case of invasion by esophageal cancer. Only few cases have been published with this atypical indication. Between 2016 and 2018, in our tertiary hospital 3 patients affected by AEC involving the thoracic aorta were treated by means of prophylactic TEVAR. All procedures were uneventful, and all patients were reconsidered fit for preoperative or definitive CRT.

Esophageal Cancer Surgery for Patients with Concomitant Liver Cirrhosis: A Single-Center Matched-Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Cirrhosis is a risk factor with nonhepatic surgery, but only three series regarding esophagectomy are reported. The Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score has shown benefit in risk evaluation, but there is no experience regarding esophagectomy. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of surgery for esophageal cancer between cirrhotic and noncirrhotic patients and to evaluate whether the MELD score has a prognostic value for risk stratification. METHODS: From the authors' esophageal cancer database, they selected all the patients with concomitant cirrhosis who underwent surgery with curative intent and a matched cohort of patients without cirrhosis. The preoperative data included demographics, medical history, blood work, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score, and MELD score. The operative data included type of surgery, radicality, operative time, and blood loss. The postoperative data included hemoderivatives, 90-day morbidity and mortality rates, lab works, and hospital length of stay. The cirrhotic patients were further divided and analyzed according to a MELD score cutoff of 9. RESULTS: Of 3445 esophageal cancer patients, 73 cirrhotic patients underwent surgery. Their 90-day morbidity and mortality rates were higher than those for 146 noncirrhotic patients. The cirrhotic patients also had more respiratory events (p = 0.013) and infections (p = 0.005). The anastomotic complications among the cirrhotic patients were significantly more severe (p = 0.046). No difference in 5-year survival rates was registered. Stratification according to the MELD score showed that patients with a MELD score higher than 9 had a significantly worse postoperative course (5-year survival: p = 0.004). The patients with a MELD score of 9 or lower showed an outcome similar to that of the noncirrhotic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Liver cirrhosis is not an absolute contraindication to esophagectomy. The MELD score can be applicable for esophagectomy risk assessment for cirrhotic patients.

Endoscopic Tumor Length Should Be Reincluded in the Esophageal Cancer Staging System: Analyses of 662 Consecutive Patients.

Esophageal cancer represents the 6th cause of cancer mortality in the World. New treatments led to outcome improvements, but patient selection and prognostic stratification is a critical aspect to gain maximum benefit from therapies. Today, patients are stratified into 9 prognostic groups, according to a staging system developed by the American Joint Committee on Cancer. Recently, trying to better select patients with curing possibilities several authors are reconsidering tumor length as a valuable prognostic parameter. Specifically, endoscopic tumor length can be easily measured with an esophageal endoscopy and, if its utility in esophageal cancer staging is demonstrated, it may represent a simple method to identify high risk patients and an easy-to-obtain variable in prognostic stratification. In this study we retrospectively analyzed 662 patients treated for esophageal cancer, stratified according to cancer histology and current staging system, to assess the possible role of endoscopic tumor length. We found a significant correlation between endoscopic tumor length, current staging parameters and 5-year survival, proving that endoscopic tumor length may be used as a simple risk stratification tool. Our results suggest a possible indication for preoperative therapy in early stage squamocellular carcinoma patients without lymph nodes involvement, who are currently treated with surgery alone.