Resection of hepatic and pulmonary metastasis from metastatic esophageal and gastric cancer: a nationwide study.

The standard of care for gastroesophageal cancer patients with hepatic or pulmonary metastases is best supportive care or palliative chemotherapy. Occasionally, patients can be selected for curative treatment instead. This study aimed to evaluate patients who underwent a resection of hepatic or pulmonary metastasis with curative intent. The Dutch national registry for histo- and cytopathology was used to identify these patients. Data were retrieved from the individual patient files. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed. Between 1991 and 2016, 32,057 patients received a gastrectomy or esophagectomy for gastroesophageal cancer in the Netherlands. Of these patients, 34 selected patients received a resection of hepatic metastasis (n = 19) or pulmonary metastasis (n = 15) in 21 different hospitals. Only 4 patients received neoadjuvant therapy before metastasectomy. The majority of patients had solitary, metachronous metastases. After metastasectomy, grade 3 (Clavien-Dindo) complications occurred in 7 patients and mortality in 1 patient. After resection of hepatic metastases, the median potential follow-up time was 54 months. Median overall survival (OS) was 28 months and the 1-, 3-, and 5- year OS was 84%, 41%, and 31%, respectively. After pulmonary metastases resection, the median potential follow-up time was 80 months. The median OS was not reached and the 1-, 3-, and 5- year OS was 67%, 53%, and 53%, respectively. In selected patients with gastroesophageal cancer with hepatic or pulmonary metastases, metastasectomy was performed with limited morbidity and mortality and offered a 5-year OS of 31-53%. Further prospective studies are required.

Introduction of minimally invasive surgery for distal and total gastrectomy: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive gastrectomy has been introduced in Western populations during the last decade. As minimally invasive distal gastrectomy (MIDG) versus total gastrectomy (MITG) are procedures with a different complexity, outcomes may differ. The aim of this population-based cohort study was to evaluate the safety of MIDG and MITG. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent potentially curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma were included from the Dutch Upper GI Cancer Audit (2011-2016). Propensity score matching was applied to create comparable groups of patients receiving open distal gastrectomy (ODG) versus MIDG and open total gastrectomy (OTG) versus MITG, using patient and tumor characteristics. Postoperative outcomes and short-term oncological outcomes were appraised. RESULTS: Of the 1970 eligible patients, 1138 underwent distal gastrectomy and 832 underwent total gastrectomy. For distal gastrectomy, 390 ODG were matched to 288 MIDG patients. Although overall postoperative morbidity and mortality were similar, patients who underwent MIDG encountered less intra-abdominal abscesses (4% vs. 1%, p = 0.039) and wound complications (6% vs. 2%, p = 0.021). The median hospital stay was shorter after MIDGs (9 vs. 7 days, p < 0.001). For total gastrectomy, 323 OTG patients were matched to 258 MITG patients. Overall postoperative morbidity, mortality and hospital stay were similar, whereas the anastomotic leakage rate was higher after MITGs (11% vs. 17%, p = 0.030). Short-term oncological outcomes between both groups were equal for distal and total gastrectomy. CONCLUSION: Benefits of MIG during the early introduction were demonstrated for distal gastrectomy but not for total gastrectomy. An increased anastomotic leakage rate was encountered for MITG.

ypT0N+ status in oesophageal cancer patients: Location of residual metastatic lymph nodes with regard to the neoadjuvant radiation field.

INTRODUCTION: A subset of oesophageal cancer patients has residual nodal disease despite complete pathologic response of the primary tumour after neoadjuvant chemoradiation and resection. The aim of this study was to determine the exact location of metastatic nodes with regard to the neoadjuvant radiation field and to assess progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in this group of patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2010 to January 2017, complete tumour responders (ypT0) after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and oesophagectomy were identified from a prospective database and grouped according to residual nodal disease (ypT0N + or ypT0N0). Radiation fields were analysed for location of the metastatic nodes and PFS and OS were determined. RESULTS: In a total of 192 patients, 53 complete responders (ypT0) were identified. Of those, 11 patients (20.8%) were ypT0N+ with a total of 12 metastatic nodes: 8 (66.7%) located within the neoadjuvant radiation field and 4 (33.3%) located outside this field. Although not statistically significant, 1- and 2-year PFS were worse in ypT0N + patients (ypT0N+ 64.3% vs. ypT0N0 84.4%; ypT0N+ 48.2% vs. ypT0N0 80.7%, respectively; p = 0.051), just as 1- and 2-year OS rates, however, to a lesser extent (ypT0N+ 75.0% vs. ypT0N0 76.3%; ypT0N+ 75.0% vs. ypT0N0 72.9%, respectively; p = 0.956). CONCLUSION: Most ypT0N + lymph nodes are located within the neoadjuvant radiation field. Although a small heterogeneous population was included, this might be due to an inadequate response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy leading to a trend towards worse PFS and OS in ypT0N + patients. Larger studies need to validate our findings.

Management of resectable esophageal and gastric (mixed adeno)neuroendocrine carcinoma: A nationwide cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to provide insight in accuracy of diagnosing, current treatment and survival in patients with resectable esophageal and gastric neuroendocrine- and mixed adenoneuroendocrine carcinomas (NEC, MANEC). METHODS: All patients with esophageal or gastric (MA)NEC, who underwent surgical resection between 2006 and 2016, were identified from the Dutch national registry for histo- and cytopathology (PALGA). Patients with a neuroendocrine tumor lower than grade 3 were excluded. Data on patients, treatment and outcomes were retrieved from the patient records. Diagnosis by endoscopic biopsy was compared with diagnosis by resection specimen. Kaplan Meier survival analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were identified in 25 hospitals, including 21 patients with esophageal (MA)NEC and 26 patients with gastric (MA)NEC on resection specimen. Biopsy diagnosis of (MA)NEC was correct in 23/27 patients. However, 20/47 patients with definitive diagnosis of (MA)NEC, were misdiagnosed on biopsy. Neoadjuvant therapy was administered in 13 (62%) esophageal (MA)NECs and 12 (46%) gastric (MA)NECs. Survival curves were similar with and without neoadjuvant therapy. One (4.8%) esophageal (MA)NEC and 4 (15%) gastric (MA)NECs died within 90 days postoperatively. For esophageal (MA)NEC the median overall survival (OS) after surgery was 37 months and 1-, 3- and 5-year OS were 71%, 50% and 35%, respectively. For gastric (MA)NEC, the median OS was 23 months and 1-, 3- and 5-year OS were 62%, 50% and 39%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Localized esophageal and gastric (MA)NEC are often misdiagnosed on endoscopic biopsies. After resection, long-term survival was achieved in respectively 35% and 39% of patients.

The predictive value of new-onset atrial fibrillation on postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy.

New-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) is frequently observed following esophagectomy and may predict other complications. The aim of the current study was to determine the association between, and the possible predictive value of, new-onset AF and infectious complications following esophagectomy. Consecutive patients who underwent elective esophagectomy with curative intent for esophageal cancer between 2004 and 2016 in the University Medical Center Utrecht were included from a prospective database. The date of diagnosis of the complications included in the current analysis was retrospectively collected from the computerized medical record. The association between new-onset AF and infectious complications was studied in univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. A total of 455 patients were included. In 93 (20.4%) patients new-onset AF was encountered after esophagectomy. There were no significant differences in patient and treatment-related characteristics between the patients with and without AF. In 9 (9.7%) patients, AF was the only adverse event following surgery. In multivariable analyses, AF was significantly associated with infectious complications in general (OR 3.00, 95% CI: 1.73-5.21). More specifically, AF was associated with pulmonary complications (OR 2.06, 95% CI: 1.29-3.30), pneumonia (OR 2.41, 95% CI: 1.48-3.91) and anastomotic leakage (OR 3.00, 95% CI: 1.80-4.99). In patients who underwent esophagectomy, new-onset AF was highly associated with infectious complications. AF may serve as an early clinical warning sign for anastomotic leakage. Therefore, further evaluation of patients who develop new-onset AF after esophagectomy is warranted.

Defining pneumonia after esophagectomy for cancer: validation of the Uniform Pneumonia Score in a high volume center in North America.

Surgery is a central component of multimodality therapy for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer. Pneumonia is a common sequela of esophagectomy, leading to an increase in intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, readmission rates, and postoperative mortality. Developing strategies to reduce pneumonia after esophagectomy is hampered by the absence of a standardized methodology for defining pneumonia. This study aims to validate the Uniform Pneumonia Score (UPS) in a high volume center in the USA. The UPS was developed to define pneumonia after esophagectomy for cancer and is based on the assessment of temperature (°C), leukocyte count (×109/L), and pulmonary radiography. The UPS has been validated utilizing a prospective, Institutional Review Board approved database of esophageal cancer patients treated in a high volume esophagectomy center in the USA between 2010 and 2015. One hundred ninety-three consecutive patients were included and 21 (10.9%) were treated for pneumonia. The UPS was able to predict treatment for suspected pneumonia with a good sensitivity (85.7%, confidence interval (CI): 63.7%-96.7%), specificity (97.1%, CI: 93.4%-99.1%), positive predictive value (78.3%, CI: 59.9%-89.7%), and negative predictive value (98.2%, CI: 95.1%-99.4%). The diagnostic accuracy was 95.9%, CI: 92.0%-98.2%. The UPS demonstrated to be a reliable scoring system to define pneumonia after esophagectomy for cancer. Global application of this model will standardize the definition of pneumonia after esophagectomy. This will improve outcome reporting and comparisons of complications between individual institutions, clinical trials, and national audits.

The diagnostic performance of 18F-FDG PET/CT, CT and MRI in the treatment evaluation of ablation therapy for colorectal liver metastases: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Uncertainty exists regarding the optimal imaging modality for timely detection of disease progression (DP) after ablation therapy for colorectal liver metastases. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET(/CT), CT and MRI for detection of DP following ablation therapy. METHODS: A systematic search was performed on May 18, 2016. The analysis included studies that reported on the diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET(/CT), CT and/or MRI for post-ablative evaluation of patients with liver metastases. Primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of the imaging modalities for detection of DP. Methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Pooled sensitivities and specificities were estimated using bivariate random-effects models. RESULTS: Ten studies were included in the meta-analysis, including seven comparative studies. Nine reported data on diagnostic accuracy of 18F-FDG PET(/CT), seven on CT imaging. Only two studies reported the diagnostic accuracy of MRI, hence not included in the meta-analysis. Quality assessment raised concerns about the risk of bias regarding the use of the reference standard, blinding of the index tests and the follow-up time. Pooled sensitivity was respectively 84.6% (75.0-90.6) and 53.4% (29.0-76.4) for 18F-FDG PET(/CT) and CT (P = 0.005). Pooled specificity was respectively 92.4% (86.5-95.9) and 95.7% (87.5-98.6) (P = 0.392). CONCLUSION: 18F-FDG PET/(CT) yields a higher sensitivity for detecting DP after ablation therapy compared with CT and has a comparably high specificity. These findings indicate that the use of 18F-FDG PET(/CT) in this setting particularly allows for minimization of the false-negative rate compared with CT without compromising the low false-positive rate.

Worldwide trends in surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the worldwide trends in surgical techniques for esophageal cancer surgery by comparing it to our survey from 2007. In addition, new questions were added for gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. An international survey on surgery of esophageal and GEJ cancer was performed among surgical members of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Disease of the Esophagus, the International Gastric Cancer Association. Also, surgeons from personal networks were contacted. The participants filled out a web based questionnaire about surgical strategies for esophageal and gastroesophageal cancer. The overall response rate was 478/1147 (42%). The respondents represented 49 different countries and 6 different continents. The annual cumulative number of esophageal and gastric resections per surgeon was low (≤11) in 11%, medium (11-21) in 17%, and high (≥21) in 72% of respondents. In a subgroup analysis of esophageal surgeons the number of high volume surgeons increased from 45 to 54% over the past 7 years. The preferred lymph node dissection was two-field in 86%. A gastric conduit was the preferred method of reconstruction in 95%. In 2014, the preferred approach to esophagectomy was minimally invasive transthoracic in 43%, compared with 14% in 2007. In minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy the cervical anastomosis was favored in 54% of respondents in 2014 compared with 87% in 2007. The preferred technique of construction of the cervical anastomosis was hand-sewn in 64% and stapled in 36%, whereas the thoracic anastomosis was stapled in 77% and hand-sewn in 23%. The preferred surgical approach for Siewert type 1 tumors (5-1 cm proximal of the GEJ) was esophagectomy in 93% of respondents, whereas 6% favored gastrectomy and 3% combined a distal esophagectomy with a proximal gastrectomy. For Siewert type 2 tumors (1-2 cm from the GEJ) an extended gastrectomy was favored by 66% of respondents, followed by esophagectomy in 27% and total gastrectomy in 7%. Siewert type 3 tumors (2-5 cm distal of the GEJ) were preferably treated with gastrectomy in 90% of respondents, esophagectomy in 6%, and extended gastrectomy in 4%. The preferred curative surgical treatment of esophageal cancer is minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy with a two-field lymph node dissection and gastric conduit reconstruction. A strong worldwide trend toward minimally invasive surgery is observed. The preferred surgical treatment of GEJ tumors is esophagectomy for Siewert type 1 tumors and gastrectomy for Siewert type 3 tumors. The majority of surgeons favor an extended gastrectomy for Siewert type 2 tumors.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Esophagolymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of multimodality treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. The preferred surgical approach is transthoracic, with a two-field lymph node dissection and gastric conduit reconstruction. A minimally invasive approach has been shown to reduce postoperative complications and increase quality of life. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was developed to facilitate this complex thoracoscopic procedure. RAMIE has been shown to be safe with good oncologic results and reduced morbidity. The use of RAMIE opens new indications for curative surgery in patients with T4b tumors, high mediastinal tumors, and lymph node metastases after neoadjuvant treatment.

[Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy. German version]. / Roboterassistierte minimal-invasive Ösophagektomie.

Esophagolymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of multimodality treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. The preferred surgical approach is transthoracic, with a two-field lymph node dissection and gastric conduit reconstruction. A minimally invasive approach has been shown to reduce postoperative complications and increase quality of life. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was developed to facilitate this complex thoracoscopic procedure. RAMIE has been shown to be safe with good oncologic results and reduced morbidity. The use of RAMIE opens new indications for curative surgery in patients with T4b tumors, high mediastinal tumors, and lymph node metastases after neoadjuvant treatment.

Resection of liver metastases in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors in the imatinib era: A nationwide retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: Liver metastases are common in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). In the absence of randomized controlled clinical trials, the effectiveness of surgery as a treatment modality is unclear. This study identifies safety and outcome in a nationwide study of all patients who underwent resection of liver metastases from GIST. METHODS: Patients were included using the national registry of histo- and cytopathology (PALGA) of the Netherlands from 1999. Kaplan Meier survival analysis was used for calculating survival outcome. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were carried out for the assessment of potential prognostic factors. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients (29 male, 19 female) with a median age of 58 (range 28-81) years were identified. Preoperative and postoperative tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy was given to 30 (63%) and 36 (75%) patients, respectively. A minor liver resection was performed in 32 patients, 16 patients underwent major liver resection. Median follow-up was 27 (range 1-146) months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 28 (range 1-121) months. One-, three-, and five-year PFS was 93%, 67%, and 59% respectively. Median overall survival (OS) was 90 (range 1-146) months from surgery. The one-, three-, and five-year OS was 93%, 80%, and 76% respectively. R0 resection was the only independent significant prognostic factor for DFS and OS at multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Resection of liver metastases in GIST patients combined with imatinib may be associated with prolonged overall survival when a complete resection is achieved.