Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy with cisplatin/5-flourouracil or carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with resectable cancer of the esophagus and the gastroesophageal junction - comparison of postoperative mortality and complications, toxicity, and pathological tumor response.

PURPOSE: In 2012, the CROSS trial implemented a new neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy protocol for patients with locally advanced, resectable cancer of the esophagus prior to scheduled surgery. There are only limited studies comparing the CROSS protocol with a PF-based (cisplatin/5-fluorouracil) nRCT protocol. METHODS: In this retrospective, monocentric analysis, 134 patients suffering from esophageal cancer were included. Those patients received either PF-based nRCT (PF group) or nRCT according to the CROSS protocol (CROSS group) prior to elective en bloc esophagectomy. Perioperative mortality and morbidity, nRCT-related toxicity, and complete pathological regression were compared between both groups. Logistic regression analysis was performed in order to identify independent factors for pathological complete response (pCR). RESULTS: Thirty-day/hospital mortality showed no significant differences between both groups. Postoperative complications ≥ grade 3 according to Clavien-Dindo classification were experienced in 58.8% (PF group) and 47.6% (CROSS group) (p = 0.2) respectively. nRCT-associated toxicity ≥ grade 3 was 30.8% (PF group) and 37.2% (CROSS group) (p = 0.6). There was no significant difference regarding the pCR rate between both groups (23.5% vs. 30.5%; p = 0.6). In multivariate analysis, SCC (OR 7.7; p < 0.01) and an initial grading of G1/G2 (OR 2.8; p = 0.03) were shown to be independent risk factors for higher rates of pCR. CONCLUSION: We conclude that both nRCT protocols are effective and safe. There were no significant differences regarding toxicity, pathological tumor response, and postoperative morbidity and mortality between both groups. Squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) and favorable preoperative tumor grading (G1 and G2) are independent predictors for higher pCR rate in multivariate analysis.

Robot-assisted transthoracic hybrid esophagectomy versus open and laparoscopic hybrid esophagectomy: propensity score matched analysis of short-term outcome.

PURPOSE: Minimally invasive en-bloc esophagectomy is associated with a reduction of postoperative morbidity. This was demonstrated for both total minimally invasive and hybrid esophagectomy. However, little is known about any benefits of robotic assistance compared to the conventional minimally invasive technique, especially in hybrid procedures. METHODS: For this retrospective study, all consecutive patients who had undergone elective esophagectomy with circular stapled intrathoracic anastomosis using the open and the minimally invasive hybrid technique at the University Hospital Magdeburg, from January 2010 to March 2021 were considered for analysis. RESULTS: In total, 137 patients (60.4%) had undergone open esophagectomy. In 45 patients (19.8%), the laparoscopic hybrid technique and in 45 patients (19.8%), the robot-assisted hybrid technique were applied. In propensity score matching analysis comparing the open with the robotic hybrid technique, significant differences were found in favor of the robotic technique (postoperative morbidity, p < 0.01; hospital length of stay, p < 0.01; number of lymph nodes retrieved, p = 0.048). In propensity score matching analysis comparing the laparoscopic with the robotic hybrid technique, a significant reduction of the rate of postoperative delayed gastric emptying (p = 0.02) was found for patients who had undergone robotic esophagectomy. However, the operation time was significantly longer (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: En-bloc esophagectomy using the robotic hybrid technique is associated with a significant reduction of postoperative morbidity and of the hospital length of stay when compared to the open approach. However, when compared to the laparoscopic hybrid technique, only few advantages could be demonstrated.