ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The adoption of robotic platforms in upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery is expanding rapidly. The absence of centralised guidance and governance in adoption of new surgical technologies may lead to an increased risk of patient harm. METHODS: Surgeon stakeholders participated in a Delphi consensus process following a national open-invitation in-person meeting on the adoption of robotic upper GI surgery. Consensus agreement was deemed met if >80% agreement was achieved. RESULTS: Following two rounds of Delphi voting, 25 statements were agreed on covering the training process, governance and good practice for surgeons' adoption in upper GI surgery. One statement failed to achieve consensus. CONCLUSIONS: These recommendations are intended to support surgeons, patients and health systems in the adoption of robotics in upper GI surgery.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The uptake of upper gastrointestinal (GI) robotic surgery in the United Kingdom (UK), and Europe more widely, is expanding rapidly. This study aims to present a current snapshot of the practice and opinions of the upper GI community with reference to robotic surgery, with an emphasis on tertiary cancer (oesophagogastric) resection centres. METHODS: An electronic survey was circulated to the UK upper GI surgical community via national mailing lists, social media and at an open-invitation conference on robotic upper GI surgery in January 2023. The survey included questions on surgeons' current practice or planned adoption (if any) of robotics at individual and unit level, and their opinions on robotic upper GI surgery in general. Priority ranking and Likert-scale response options were used. RESULTS: In total, 81 respondents from 43 hospitals were included. Thirty-four resectional centres responded, including 30 of 31 (97%) recognised upper GI cancer centres in England. Respondents reported performing robotic surgery in 21 of 34 (61.8%) resectional centres, with a median of 65 procedures per centre performed at the time of the survey (range 0-500, interquartile range 93.75). Every centre without a robotic programme expressed a desire or had active plans to implement one. Respondents ranked surgeon ergonomics as the most important reason for pursuing robotics, followed by improvements in patient outcomes and oncological efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic upper GI practice is nascent but rapidly growing in the UK with plans for uptake in almost all tertiary centres. There is growing opinion that this is likely to become the predominant surgical approach in future with benefits to both patients and surgeons. This snapshot offers a point of reference to all stakeholders in upper GI surgery.
ABSTRACT
The clinical value of multiple staging investigations for high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus is unclear. A single-center prospective cohort of patients treated for early esophageal cancer between 2000 and 2019 was analyzed. This coincided with a transition period from esophagectomy to endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as the treatment of choice. Patients were staged with computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography(PET)/CT. The aim of this study was to assess their accuracy and impact on clinical management. 297 patients with high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma were included (endoscopic therapy/EMR n = 184; esophagectomy n = 113 [of which a 'combined' group had surgery preceded by endoscopic therapy n = 23]). Staging accuracy was low (accurate staging EMR: CT 40.1%, EUS 29.6%, FDG-PET/CT 11.0%; Esophagectomy: CT 43.3%, EUS 59.7%, FDG-PET/CT 29.6%; Combined: CT 28.6%, EUS46.2%, FDG-PET/CT 30.0%). Staging inaccuracies across all groups that could have changed management by missing T2 disease were CT 12%, EUS 12% and FDG-PET/CT 1.6%. The sensitivity of all techniques for detecting nodal disease was low (CT 12.5%, EUS 12.5%, FDG-PET/CT0.0%). Overall, FDG-PET/CT and EUS changed decision-making in only 3.2% of patients with an early cancer on CT and low-risk histology. The accuracy of staging with EUS, CT and FDG-PET/CT in patients with high-grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma of the esophagus is low. EUS and FDG-PET/CT added relevant staging information over standard CT in very few cases, and therefore, these investigations should be used selectively. Factors predicting the need for esophagectomy are predominantly obtained from EMR histology rather than staging investigations.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Esophageal Neoplasms , Humans , Prospective Studies , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18 , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Esophageal Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Endosonography/methods , Positron-Emission Tomography , Neoplasm StagingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The presence of malformations of cortical development in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia has been reported on previous occasions. We evaluated a sample of adults with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia for the presence of malformations of cortical development, spatial coincidence of malformations of cortical development and AVMs, and the coincidence of brain and pulmonary AVMs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 141 patients 18 years of age or older who were referred to the Augusta University hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia clinic and underwent brain MR imaging between January 19, 2018, and December 3, 2020, were identified. MR imaging examinations were reviewed retrospectively by 2 experienced neuroradiologists, and the presence of malformations of cortical development and AVMs was confirmed by consensus. Demographic and clinical information was collected for each case, including age, sex, hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia status by the Curacao Criteria, mutation type, presence of malformations of cortical development, presence of brain AVMs, presence of pulmonary AVMs, and a history of seizures or learning disabilities. RESULTS: Five of 141 (3.5%) patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia had malformations of cortical development. Two of the 5 patients with polymicrogyria also had closed-lip schizencephaly. One of the patients had a porencephalic cavity partially lined with heterotopic GM. The incidence of spatially coincident polymicrogyria and brain AVMs was 40% (2/5 cases). Of the patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia and malformations of cortical development, 4/5 (80%) had pulmonary AVMs and 2/5 (40%) had brain AVMs. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, we are the first group to report the presence of schizencephaly in patients with hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia. The presence of schizencephaly and porencephaly lends support to the hypothesis of regional in utero cerebral hypoxic events as the etiology of malformations of cortical development in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia.
Subject(s)
Arteriovenous Malformations , Polymicrogyria , Schizencephaly , Telangiectasia, Hereditary Hemorrhagic , Adult , Humans , Adolescent , Telangiectasia, Hereditary Hemorrhagic/complications , Telangiectasia, Hereditary Hemorrhagic/diagnostic imaging , Telangiectasia, Hereditary Hemorrhagic/epidemiology , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Tumor Location-Modified Laurén Classification (MLC) system combines Laurén histologic subtype and anatomic tumor location. It divides gastric tumors into proximal non-diffuse (PND), distal non-diffuse (DND), and diffuse (D) types. The optimum classification of patients with Laurén mixed tumors in this system is not clear due to its grouping with both diffuse and non-diffuse types in previous studies. The clinical relevance of the MLC in a Western population has not been examined. METHODS: A cohort study investigated 404 patients who underwent gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma between 2005 and 2020. The classification of Laurén mixed tumors was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and comparison of clinicopathologic characteristics (chi-square). Survival analysis was performed using multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: The ROC curve analysis demonstrated a slightly higher area under the curve value for predicting survival when Laurén mixed tumors were grouped with intestinal-type rather than diffuse-type tumors (0.58 vs 0.57). Survival, tumor recurrence, and resection margin positivity in mixed tumors also was more similar to intestinal type. Distal non-diffuse tumors had the best 5-year survival (DND 64.7 % vs PND 56.1 % vs diffuse 45.1 %; p = 0.006) and were least likely to have recurrence (DND 27.0 % vs PND 34.3 % vs diffuse 48.3 %; p = 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated that MLC was an independent prognostic factor for survival (PND: hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.16-2.32 vs diffuse: HR, 2.20; 95 % CI, 1.56-3.09) CONCLUSIONS: The MLC was an independent prognostic marker in this Western cohort of patients with gastric adenocarcinoma. The patients with PND and D tumors had worse survival than those with DND tumors.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Stomach Neoplasms , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Cohort Studies , Gastrectomy , Humans , Neoplasm Staging , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Stomach Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Histopathological outcomes, such as lymph node yield and margin positivity, are used to benchmark and assess surgical centre quality, and are reported annually by the National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit (NOGCA) in England and Wales. The variation in pathological specimen assessment and how this affects these outcomes is not known. METHODS: A survey of practice was circulated to all tertiary oesophagogastric cancer centres across England and Wales. Questions captured demographic data, and information on how specimens were prepared and analysed. National performance data were retrieved from the NOGCA. Survey results were compared for tertiles of lymph node yield, and circumferential and longitudinal margins. RESULTS: Survey responses were received from 32 of 37 units (86 per cent response rate), accounting for 93.1 per cent of the total oesophagectomy volume in England and Wales. Only 5 of 32 units met or exceeded current guidelines on specimen preparation according to the Royal College of Pathologists guidelines. There was wide variation in how centres defined positive (R1) margins, and how margins and lymph nodes were assessed. Centres with the highest nodal yield were more likely to use systematic fat blocking, and to re-examine specimens when the initial load was low. Systematic blocking of lesser curve fat resulted in significantly higher rates of patients with at least 15 lymph nodes examined (91.4 versus 86.5 per cent; P = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Preparation and histopathological assessment of specimens varies significantly across institutions. This challenges the validity of currently used surgical quality metrics for oesophageal and other tumours.
Subject(s)
Esophagectomy/standards , Esophagus/pathology , Quality Indicators, Health Care , England , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagus/surgery , Humans , Lymph Node Excision , Margins of Excision , Surveys and Questionnaires , WalesABSTRACT
Recent national audit has shown that levels of minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer have increased to around 45% in the UK. The hybrid approach is the most common, with a laparoscopic abdominal phase and an open thoracic dissection. A number of centers have now adopted a two-phase Ivor-Lewis minimally invasive esophagectomy using a laparoscopic abdominal phase, followed by a thoracoscopic chest phase with a mini-thoracotomy to extract the specimen. The two-phase nature of the procedure lengthens the operative time and makes returning to the abdominal cavity difficult. The thoracotomy incision can also be painful and may reduce respiratory function post operatively. This report describes a novel single-phase minimally invasive left-sided technique with a mini-laparotomy for specimen extraction. This method offers excellent hiatal exposure, avoids a thoracotomy, and shortens the procedure time. Minimally invasive left-sided esophagectomy is a new useful approach for tumors located at the gastroesophageal junction.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Laparoscopy , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagectomy , Esophagogastric Junction/surgery , Humans , Operative Time , ThoracoscopyABSTRACT
Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is an autosomal dominant disease with an estimated prevalence of 1 in 5000 that is characterized by the presence of vascular malformations (VMs). These result in chronic bleeding, acute hemorrhage, and complications from shunting through VMs. The goal of the Second International HHT Guidelines process was to develop evidence-based consensus guidelines for the management and prevention of HHT-related symptoms and complications. The guidelines were developed using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) framework and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. The guidelines expert panel included expert physicians (clinical and genetic) in HHT from 15 countries, guidelines methodologists, health care workers, health care administrators, patient advocacy representatives, and persons with HHT. During the preconference process, the expert panel generated clinically relevant questions in 6 priority topic areas. A systematic literature search was done in June 2019, and articles meeting a priori criteria were included to generate evidence tables, which were used as the basis for recommendation development. The expert panel subsequently convened during a guidelines conference to conduct a structured consensus process, during which recommendations reaching at least 80% consensus were discussed and approved. The expert panel generated and approved 6 new recommendations for each of the following 6 priority topic areas: epistaxis, gastrointestinal bleeding, anemia and iron deficiency, liver VMs, pediatric care, and pregnancy and delivery (36 total). The recommendations highlight new evidence in existing topics from the first International HHT Guidelines and provide guidance in 3 new areas: anemia, pediatrics, and pregnancy and delivery. These recommendations should facilitate implementation of key components of HHT care into clinical practice.
Subject(s)
Humans , Telangiectasia, Hereditary Hemorrhagic/genetics , Telangiectasia, Hereditary Hemorrhagic/prevention & control , Vascular Malformations/genetics , Epistaxis/prevention & control , Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage/prevention & control , Nasal MucosaABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The role of adjuvant therapy in patients with oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy is contentious. In UK practice, surgical resection margin status is often used to classify patients for receiving adjuvant treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the survival benefit of adjuvant therapy in patients with positive (R1) resection margins. METHODS: Two prospectively collected UK institutional databases were combined to identify eligible patients. Adjusted Cox regression analyses were used to compare overall and recurrence-free survival according to adjuvant treatment. Recurrence patterns were assessed as a secondary outcome. Propensity score-matched analysis was also performed. RESULTS: Of 616 patients included in the combined database, 242 patients who had an R1 resection were included in the study. Of these, 112 patients (46·3 per cent) received adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 46 (19·0 per cent) were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and 84 (34·7 per cent) had no adjuvant treatment. In adjusted analysis, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy improved recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0·59, 95 per cent c.i. 0·38 to 0·94; P = 0·026), with a benefit in terms of both local (HR 0·48, 0·24 to 0·99; P = 0·047) and systemic (HR 0·56, 0·33 to 0·94; P = 0·027) recurrence. In analyses stratified by tumour response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, non-responders (Mandard tumour regression grade 4-5) treated with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy had an overall survival benefit (HR 0·61, 0·38 to 0·97; P = 0·037). In propensity score-matched analysis, an overall survival benefit (HR 0·62, 0·39 to 0·98; P = 0·042) and recurrence-free survival benefit (HR 0·51, 0·30 to 0·87; P = 0·004) were observed for adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus no adjuvant treatment. CONCLUSION: Adjuvant therapy may improve overall survival and recurrence-free survival after margin-positive resection. This pattern seems most pronounced with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy in non-responders to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
ANTECEDENTES: El papel del tratamiento adyuvante en pacientes con adenocarcinoma esofagogástrico tratados con quimioterapia neoadyuvante es polémico. En la práctica del Reino Unido, el estado del margen de resección quirúrgico se utiliza a menudo para identificar a los pacientes que reciben tratamiento adyuvante. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar el beneficio en la supervivencia del tratamiento adyuvante en pacientes con márgenes de resección positivos (R1). MÉTODOS: Se combinaron dos bases de datos de instituciones del Reino Unido que recogen información de forma prospectiva para identificar pacientes elegibles. Se utilizaron análisis de regresión de Cox ajustados para comparar la supervivencia global y la supervivencia libre de recidiva según el tratamiento adyuvante. Los patrones de recidiva se evaluaron como resultado secundario. También se realizó un análisis de emparejamiento por puntaje de propensión. RESULTADOS: De 616 pacientes incluidos en la base de datos combinada, se incluyeron en el estudio 242 pacientes con resección R1. De estos pacientes, 112 (46%) recibieron quimiorradioterapia adyuvante, 46 (19%) pacientes fueron tratados con quimioterapia adyuvante y 84 (35%) pacientes no recibieron ningún tratamiento. En el análisis ajustado, la quimiorradioterapia adyuvante mejoró la supervivencia libre de recidiva (cociente de riesgos instantáneos, hazard ratio, HR 0,59, i.c. del 95% 0,38-0,94; P = 0,026) con un beneficio tanto para la recidiva local (HR 0,48, i.c. del 95% 0,24-0,99; P = 0,047) como para la sistémica (HR 0,56, i.c. del 95% 0,33-0,94; P = 0,027). Cuando los pacientes se clasificaron según la respuesta tumoral a la quimioterapia neoadyuvante, los no respondedores (Mandard Grado 4/5) tratados con quimiorradioterapia adyuvante obtuvieron un beneficio en la supervivencia (HR 0,61, i.c. del 95% 0,38-0,97; P = 0,037). En el análisis por emparejamiento por puntaje de propensión, se observó un beneficio en la supervivencia global (HR 0,62, i.c. del 95% 0,39-0,98; P = 0,042) y en la supervivencia libre de recidiva (HR 0,51.i.c. del 95% 0,30-0,87; P = 0,004) con la quimiorradioterapia adyuvante frente a no recibir tratamiento adyuvante. CONCLUSIÓN: El tratamiento adyuvante puede mejorar la supervivencia global y la supervivencia libre de recidiva en pacientes con margen de resección positivo. Este patrón parece más pronunciado con la quimiorradioterapia adyuvante en pacientes que no responden a la quimioterapia.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/therapy , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Esophageal Neoplasms/therapy , Esophagectomy , Margins of Excision , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adult , Aged , Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Propensity Score , Retrospective Studies , Survival AnalysisABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To report a novel approach for locally advanced tumors located at the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) using a laparoscopic abdominal phase and open left thoracotomy with the patient in a single right lateral decubitus position. BACKGROUND: The standard open left thoracoabdominal approach offers excellent exposure and access to the GEJ and lower esophagus. It also involves a single position for the procedure, shortening the operation time. The disadvantages are a large incision, division of the costochondral junction, and a low-level thoracotomy. The laparoscopic-assisted left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy (LLTA) is performed with the patient in the same right lateral decubitus position, but initially rolled away from the operator at 45° allowing laparoscopic gastric mobilization and lymphadenectomy. The patient is then tilted back to the lateral position for the thoracic phase. An anterolateral left thoracotomy is performed through the higher fifth intercostal space allowing a high intrathoracic anastomosis, just below the aortic arch. No disruption of the costochondral junction is made. METHODS: Consecutive patients selectively treated for locally advanced GEJ tumors with an LLTA approach between 2013 and 2019 were analyzed and compared to national standards (NOGCA). RESULTS: This series of 74 consecutive patients had a mean age of 63 years. The median operation time was 235 minutes. The median inpatient stay was 10 days (NOGCA 9 [11-17]). The tumors were predominantly adenocarcinoma (95%) and located at the GEJ (92%). The majority were locally advanced T3 or T4 tumors. Postoperative morbidity was low, Clavien-Dindo (C-D) 0 in 52.7% patients, C-D1 (1.4%), C-D2 (31.1%), C-D3a (5.4%), C-D4a (9.5%), and C-D5 (1.4%). The median number of total lymph nodes (LN) excised was 28 (NOGCA >15); LN % yield ≥18 was 90% (NOGCA 82.5%). Positive nodes were located at the lesser-curve (40%), paraesophageal (32.4%), and subcarinal regions (2.7%). Positive circumferential resection margins (<1 mm) were present in 28.4% of resected specimens (NOGCA 25.1%). This is reflective of the high proportion T3/T4 tumors selected for this approach. Hospital and 30-day mortality was 1.4% (NOGCA 2.7%). Recurrence after LLTA was 25.7% (local 5.4%, systemic 17.6%, mixed 2.7%) at a median of 311 days (62-1,158). CONCLUSION: This series demonstrates a novel, safe, and reproducible approach for locally advanced cancer of the GEJ. It offers a better exposure of the hiatus than the right-sided approach and avoids division of the costochondral junction and low thoracotomy seen with the open left thoracoabdominal approach.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms , Laparoscopy , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagectomy , Esophagogastric Junction/surgery , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Lymph Node Excision , Neoplasm Recurrence, LocalABSTRACT
Esophagectomy is a mainstay in curative treatment for esophageal cancer; however, the reported techniques and outcomes can vary greatly. Thirty-day mortality of patients with an intact anastomosis is 2-3% as compared to 17-35% in patients who have an anastomotic leak. The subsequent management of leaks postesophagectomy has great global variability with little consensus on a gold standard of practice. The aim of this multicentre prospective audit is to analyze current techniques of esophagogastric anastomosis to determine the effect on the anastomotic leak rate. Leak rates and leak management will be assessed to determine their impact on patient outcomes. A 12-month international multicentre prospective audit started in April 2018 and is coordinated by a team from the West Midlands Research Collaborative. This will include patients undergoing esophagectomy over 9 months and encompassing a 90-day follow-up period. A pilot data collection period occurred at four UK centers in 2017 to trial the data collection form. The audit standards will include anastomotic leak and the conduit necrosis rate should be less than 13% and major postoperative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo Grade III or more) should be less than 35%. The 30-day mortality rate should be less than 5% and the 90-day mortality rate should be less than 8%. This will be a trainee-led international audit of esophagectomy practice. Key support will be given by consultant colleagues and anesthetists. Individualized unit data will be distributed to the respective contributing sites. An overall anonymized report will be made available to contributing units. Results of the audit will be published in peer-reviewed journals with all collaborators fully acknowledged. The key information and results from the audit will be disseminated at relevant scientific meetings.
Subject(s)
Anastomotic Leak/mortality , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagectomy/mortality , Esophagus/surgery , Stomach/surgery , Adult , Aged , Anastomosis, Surgical/mortality , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Female , Humans , Male , Medical Audit , Middle Aged , Pilot Projects , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/statistics & numerical data , Prospective Studies , Research Design , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
In esophageal cancer, metastatic spread to the lungs is detected in 4-9.7% of cases. During staging investigations, 22% of patients have pulmonary nodules detected on cross-sectional imaging. The purpose of this study is to elucidate the clinical importance of these incidentally found pulmonary nodules, in patients with clinically localized esophageal cancer. A retrospective cohort study was conducted from January 2008 to December 2012 in a tertiary esophagogastric referral center. One-hundred and forty-nine patients were included in the study. All patients underwent dedicated staging followed by neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery as indicated. Thirty-three (22.1%) patients had pulmonary nodules found in their preoperative staging. Only three (9%) patients proved to develop metastatic pulmonary disease on follow-up. Interestingly, in all three patients, the nodules were negative on initial 18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Incidentally found pulmonary nodules in newly diagnosed patients with esophageal cancer during staging investigations are rarely metastases. Such nodules, in isolation, should not preclude patients from radical treatment.
Subject(s)
Chemoradiotherapy/methods , Esophageal Neoplasms , Esophagectomy/methods , Lung Neoplasms , Multiple Pulmonary Nodules , Clinical Decision-Making , Esophageal Neoplasms/epidemiology , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Fluorodeoxyglucose F18/pharmacology , Humans , Incidental Findings , Lung Neoplasms/epidemiology , Lung Neoplasms/pathology , Lung Neoplasms/secondary , Lung Neoplasms/surgery , Male , Middle Aged , Multiple Pulmonary Nodules/diagnostic imaging , Multiple Pulmonary Nodules/epidemiology , Multiple Pulmonary Nodules/etiology , Prognosis , Radiopharmaceuticals/pharmacology , Retrospective Studies , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , United Kingdom/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Background: A positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) has been associated with higher rates of locoregional recurrence and worse survival in oesophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to establish if clinicopathological and radiological variables might predict CRM positivity in patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy before surgery for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Methods: Multivariable analysis of clinicopathological and CT imaging characteristics considered potentially predictive of CRM was performed at initial staging and following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Prediction models were constructed. The area under the curve (AUC) with 95% confidence intervals (c.i.) from 1000 bootstrapping was assessed. Results: A total of 223 patients were included in the study. Poor differentiation (odds ratio (OR) 2·84, 95 per cent c.i. 1·39 to 6·01) and advanced clinical tumour status (T3-4) (OR 2·93, 1·03 to 9·48) were independently associated with an increased CRM risk at diagnosis. CT-assessed lack of response (stable or progressive disease) following chemotherapy independently corresponded with an increased risk of CRM positivity (OR 3·38, 1·43 to 8·50). Additional CT evidence of local invasion and higher CT tumour volume (14 cm3) improved the performance of a prediction model, including all the above parameters, with an AUC (c-index) of 0·76 (0·67 to 0·83). Variables associated with significantly higher rates of locoregional recurrence were pN status (P = 0·020), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0·007) and poor response to chemotherapy (Mandard score 4-5) (P = 0·006). CRM positivity was associated with a higher locoregional recurrence rate, but this was not statistically significant (P = 0·092). Conclusion: The presence of advanced cT status, poor tumour differentiation, and CT-assessed lack of response to chemotherapy, higher tumour volume and local invasion can be used to identify patients at risk of a positive CRM following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
Antecedentes: Un margen de resección circunferencial (circumferential resection margin, CRM) positivo se ha asociado con tasas más elevadas de recidiva locorregional y peor supervivencia en el cáncer de esófago. El objetivo de este estudio fue establecer si las variables clínicopatológicas y radiológicas podrían predecir la positividad del CRM en el adenocarcinoma de esófago tras quimioterapia neoadyuvante antes de la cirugía. Métodos: Se realizó un análisis multivariable de las características clínicopatológicas y de la tomografía computarizada (computed tomography, CT) que se consideraron potencialmente predictivas de CRM en la estadificación inicial y tras la quimioterapia neoadyuvante. Se construyeron modelos de predicción. Se evaluó el área bajo la curva (area under curve, AUC) con el i.c. del 95% a partir de 1.000 muestras bootstrap. Resultados: Se incluyeron 223 pacientes en el estudio. Una pobre diferenciación (razón de oportunidades, odds ratio, OR 2,84, i.c. del 95% 1,396,01) y un estadio clínico T avanzado (T34) (OR 2,93, i.c. del 95% 1,039,48) se asociaron de forma independiente con un riesgo aumentado de CRM en el diagnóstico. La falta de respuesta en la CT (estable o enfermedad en progresión) tras la quimioterapia se correspondía de forma independiente con un riesgo aumentado de CRM positivo (OR 3,38, i.c. del 95% 1,438,50). Además, la evidencia por CT de invasión local y un mayor volumen del tumor en CT (14 cm3) mejoraron el funcionamiento del modelo predictivo, incluyendo todos los parámetros previamente señalados; con AUC (índice c) de 0,76 (0,680,83). Las variables asociadas de forma significativa con tasas más elevadas de recidiva locorregional fueron el estado de los ganglios linfáticos patológicos (P = 0,002), la invasión linfovascular (P = 0,007) y la respuesta pobre a la quimioterapia (Mandard 4 y 5 (P = 0,006)). La positividad del CRM se asoció con una tasa de recidiva locorregional más elevada pero sin alcanzar significación estadística (P = 0,09). Conclusión: La presencia de un estadio clínico T avanzado, tumor pobremente diferenciado, falta de respuesta a la quimioterapia en la TC, mayor volumen del tumor en la TC e invasión local pueden ser utilizados para identificar pacientes en riesgo de un CRM positivo tras quimioterapia neoadyuvante.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/therapy , Esophageal Neoplasms/therapy , Esophagectomy , Margins of Excision , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/diagnosis , Adenocarcinoma/mortality , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/methods , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophagus/diagnostic imaging , Esophagus/pathology , Esophagus/surgery , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & control , Neoplasm Staging , Predictive Value of Tests , Preoperative Period , Prognosis , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Tumor BurdenABSTRACT
Background: Following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable gastroesophageal cancer, lymph node metastasis is the only validated prognostic variable; however, within lymph node groups there is still heterogeneity with risk of relapse. We hypothesized that gene profiles from neoadjuvant chemotherapy treated resection specimens from gastroesophageal cancer patients can be used to define prognostic risk groups to identify patients at risk for relapse. Patients and methods: The Medical Research Council Adjuvant Gastric Infusional Chemotherapy (MAGIC) trial (n = 202 with high quality RNA) samples treated with perioperative chemotherapy were profiled for a custom gastric cancer gene panel using the NanoString platform. Genes associated with overall survival (OS) were identified using penalized and standard Cox regression, followed by generation of risk scores and development of a NanoString biomarker assay to stratify patients into risk groups associated with OS. An independent dataset served as a validation cohort. Results: Regression and clustering analysis of MAGIC patients defined a seven-Gene Signature and two risk groups with different OS [hazard ratio (HR) 5.1; P < 0.0001]. The median OS of high- and low-risk groups were 10.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) of 6.5 and 13.2 months] and 80.9 months (CI: 43.0 months and not assessable), respectively. Risk groups were independently prognostic of lymph node metastasis by multivariate analysis (HR 3.6 in node positive group, P = 0.02; HR 3.6 in high-risk group, P = 0.0002), and not prognostic in surgery only patients (n = 118; log rank P = 0.2). A validation cohort independently confirmed these findings. Conclusions: These results suggest that gene-based risk groups can independently predict prognosis in gastroesophageal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. This signature and associated assay may help risk stratify these patients for post-surgery chemotherapy in future perioperative chemotherapy-based clinical trials.
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Biomarkers, Tumor/genetics , Esophageal Neoplasms/therapy , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/prevention & control , Stomach Neoplasms/therapy , Transcriptome/genetics , Adult , Aged , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/methods , Esophageal Neoplasms/genetics , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophagectomy , Esophagus/pathology , Esophagus/surgery , Female , Gastrectomy , Gene Expression Profiling , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Male , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/genetics , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , Risk Assessment/methods , Stomach/pathology , Stomach/surgery , Stomach Neoplasms/genetics , Stomach Neoplasms/pathology , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Previous analyses of the oesophageal circumferential resection margin (CRM) have focused on the prognostic validity of two different definitions of a positive CRM, that of the College of American Pathologists (tumour at margin) and that of the Royal College of Pathologists (tumour within 1 mm). This study aimed to analyse the validity of these definitions and explore the risk of recurrence and survival with incremental tumour distances from the CRM. METHODS: This cohort study included patients who underwent resection for adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus between 2000 and 2014. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were performed to determine the hazard ratio (HR) with 95 per cent confidence intervals for recurrence and mortality in CRM increments: tumour at the cut margin, extending to within 0·1-0·9, 1·0-1·9, 2·0-4·9 mm, and 5·0 mm or more from the margin. RESULTS: A total of 444 patients were included in the study. Kaplan-Meier and unadjusted analyses showed a significant incremental improvement in overall survival (P < 0·001) and recurrence (P for trend < 0·001) rates with increasing distance from the CRM. Tumour distance of 2·0 mm or more remained a significant predictor of survival on multivariable analysis (HR for risk of death 0·66, 95 per cent c.i. 0·44 to 1·00). Multivariable analysis of overall survival demonstrated a significant difference between a positive and negative CRM with the Royal College of Pathologists' definition (HR 1·37, 1·01 to 1·85), but not with the College of American Pathologists' definition (HR 1·22, 0·90 to 1·65). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated an incremental improvement in survival and recurrence rates with increasing tumour distance from the CRM.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The aim was to define the pathological response in lymph nodes following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for oesophageal adenocarcinoma and to quantify any associated survival benefit. METHODS: Lymph nodes retrieved at oesophagectomy were examined retrospectively by two pathologists for evidence of a response to chemotherapy. Patients were classified as lymph node-negative (either negative nodes with no evidence of previous tumour involvement or negative with evidence of complete regression) or positive (allocated a lymph node regression score based on the proportion of fibrosis to residual tumour). Lymph node responders (score 1, complete response; 2, less than 10 per cent remaining tumour; 3, 10-50 per cent remaining tumour) and non-responders (score 4, more than 50 per cent viable tumour; 5, no response) were compared in survival analyses using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 377 patients, 256 had neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Overall, 68 of 256 patients (26·6 per cent) had a lymph node response and 115 (44·9 per cent) did not. The remaining 73 patients (28·5 per cent) had negative lymph nodes with no evidence of regression. Some patients had a lymph node response in the absence of a response in the primary tumour (27 of 99, 27 per cent). Lymph node responders had a significant survival benefit (P < 0·001), even when stratified by patients with or without a response in the primary tumour. On multivariable analysis, lymph node responders had decreased overall (hazard ratio 0·53, 95 per cent c.i. 0·36 to 0·78) and disease-specific (HR 0·42, 0·27 to 0·66) mortality, and experienced reduced local and systemic recurrence. CONCLUSION: Lymph node regression is a strong prognostic factor and may be more important than response in the primary tumour.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/therapy , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/methods , Esophageal Neoplasms/therapy , Adenocarcinoma/mortality , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adult , Aged , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/mortality , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Esophagectomy/mortality , Female , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Lymphatic Metastasis , Male , Middle Aged , Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods , Neoadjuvant Therapy/mortality , Neoplasm Grading , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/mortality , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Transhiatal and transthoracic oesophagectomy in patients with oesophageal cancer have similar survival rates. Whether these approaches differ in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is uncertain and was examined in this study. METHODS: Patients undergoing transhiatal or transthoracic surgery for lower-third oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional cancer between 2011 and 2015 were selected from an institutional database. HRQoL outcomes were measured at 6 and 12 months after surgery using validated written questionnaires (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25). Linear mixed models provided mean score differences (MSDs) with 95 per cent confidence intervals, adjusted for preoperative HRQoL, age, physical status (ASA fitness grade), tumour location, tumour stage, neoadjuvant therapy, adjuvant therapy and postoperative complications. MSD values of 10 or more were regarded as clinically relevant. RESULTS: Some 146 patients underwent transhiatal (86, 58·9 per cent) or transthoracic (60, 41·1 per cent) oesophagectomy. The HRQoL questionnaires were returned by 111 patients at 6 months and 74 at 12 months. At 6 months, transthoracic oesophagectomy was associated with worse role function (MSD -12, 95 per cent c.i. -23 to 0; P = 0·046). At 12 months, patients in the transthoracic group had more nausea and vomiting (MSD 11, 0 to 22; P = 0·045), dyspnoea (MSD 13, 1 to 25; P = 0·029) and constipation (MSD 20, 7 to 33; P = 0·003) than those in the transhiatal group. CONCLUSION: Transhiatal oesophagectomy seems to offer better HRQoL than transthoracic oesophagectomy 6 and 12 months after surgery.
Subject(s)
Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagectomy/methods , Quality of Life , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Health Status Indicators , Humans , Linear Models , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to assess the oncological outcomes of a large multicenter series of left thoracoabdominal esophagectomies, and compare these to the more widely utilized Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. With ethics approval and an established study protocol, anonymized data from five centers were merged into a structured database. The study exposure was operative approach (ILE or LTE). The primary outcome measure was time to death. Secondary outcome measures included time to tumor recurrence, positive surgical resection margins, lymph node yield, postoperative death, and hospital length of stay. Cox proportional hazards models provided hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusting for age, pathological tumor stage, tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion, and neoadjuvant treatment. Among 1228 patients (598 ILE; 630 LTE), most (86%) had adenocarcinoma (AC) and were male (81%). Comparing ILE and LTE for AC patients, no difference was seen in terms of time to death (HR 0.904 95%CI 0.749-1.1090) or time to recurrence (HR 0.973 95%CI 0.768-1.232). The risk of a positive resection margin was also similar (OR 1.022 95%CI 0.731-1.429). Median lymph node yield did not differ between approaches (LTE 21; ILE 21; P = 0.426). In-hospital mortality was 2.4%, significantly lower in the LTE group (LTE 1.3%; ILE 3.6%; P = 0.004). Median hospital stay was 11 days in the LTE group and 14 days in the ILE group (P < 0.0001). In conclusion, this is the largest series of left thoracoabdominal esophagectomies to be submitted for publication and the only one to compare two different transthoracic esophagectomy strategies. It demonstrates oncological equivalence between operative approaches but possible short- term advantages to the left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy.
Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Esophagectomy/mortality , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Abdomen/surgery , Adenocarcinoma/mortality , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Databases, Factual , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Esophagectomy/methods , Esophagus/surgery , Female , Hospital Mortality , Humans , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Male , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/etiology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/mortality , Postoperative Complications/mortality , Proportional Hazards Models , Thoracic Cavity/surgery , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Weight loss is a cardinal symptom of oesophageal cancer and is often continued after surgery. High body mass index (BMI) is a strong risk factor for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. This study aimed to assess the impact of pre- and post-operative weight loss and BMI on long-term mortality after resection for oesophageal cancer. METHODS: This prospective and nationwide cohort study included 390 patients, operated on for oesophageal cancer in Sweden in 2001-2005 with follow-up until 2016, who responded to a questionnaire on weight history 6 months after surgery. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models provided hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) of mortality while adjusting for several prognostic factors, including tumour stage. RESULTS: Compared to weight stable patients, pre-surgery weight loss indicated increased HRs of overall all-cause mortality (HR = 1.32, 95% CI 0.94-1.86) and disease-specific mortality (HR = 1.36, 95% CI 0.93-1.98). Patients with >20% weight loss post-surgery had worse overall all-cause mortality (HR = 1.71, 95% CI 1.01-2.88) and disease-specific mortality (HR = 2.20, 95% CI 1.24-3.89). Compared to patients with normal BMI, decreased HRs were indicated for patients who were obese at the time of surgery (overall all-cause mortality HR 0.87 95% CI, 0.58-1.31 and disease-specific mortality HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.57-1.40), while patients with BMI ≤19.9 at 6 months post-surgery had increased all-cause mortality (HR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.03-1.95) and disease-specific mortality (HR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.09-2.21). CONCLUSION: Post-operative weight loss and low BMI at 6 months post-surgery are independent markers of poor prognosis in patients who undergo surgery for oesophageal cancer.
Subject(s)
Body Mass Index , Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery , Weight Loss , Aged , Esophageal Neoplasms/mortality , Esophageal Neoplasms/pathology , Female , Humans , Male , Neoplasm Staging , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Surveys and Questionnaires , Sweden/epidemiologyABSTRACT
Esophageal replacement by colonic interposition is an uncommon procedure. This study sought to identify the frequency of this operation in England, identify techniques and associated problems, and also assess health-related quality of life (HR QOL) from the two largest centers performing this procedure. Hospital Episode Statistics were used to identify patients and centers undertaking colon interposition between March 2001 and March 2015. An online survey of UK consultants discussed methods and experience. HR QOL was assessed using the Short Form 36(SF-36v2) with additional gastrointestinal questions. Hospital Episode Statistics identified 328 interpositions (22 in pediatric hospitals). The two highest volume units did 42 and 45 operations, respectively. Thirty-four surgeons (79% response rate) replied to the survey. Fifty-two percent preferred to use the left colon with 81% preferring a substernal placement. The HR QOL survey was performed on 24 patients with a median of 3 years after surgery (ranging from 9 months to 10 years) from the two largest centers and a 56% response rate. Five patients had physical QOL scores above population average and 10 had mental scores above population average. All patients had early satiety, 20 described dysphagia, and 18 regularly took antireflux medication. There was an estimated mean loss of 13.1% body weight (10.6 kg) postoperatively and three patients still relied on a feeding tube for nutrition after an average of 3 years. Colon interposition results in an acceptable long-term QOL. Few centers regularly perform this operation, and centralizing to high-volume centers may lead to better outcomes.