Implementation of Staging Guidelines in Early Esophageal Cancer: A Study of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the adoption and clinical impact of endoscopic resection (ER) in early esophageal cancer. BACKGROUND: Staging for early esophageal cancer is largely inaccurate. Assessment of the impact of ER on staging accuracy is unknown, as is the implementation of ER. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 2608 patients captured in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database between 2015 and 2020. Patients with clinical T1 and T2 esophageal cancer without nodal involvement (N0) who were treated with upfront esophagectomy were included. Staging accuracy was assessed by clinical-pathologic concordance among patients staged with and without ER. We also sought to measure adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network staging guidelines for esophageal cancer staging, specifically the implementation of ER. RESULTS: For early esophageal cancer, computed tomography/positron emission tomography/endoscopic ultrasound (CT/PET/EUS) accurately predicts the pathologic tumor (T) stage 58.5% of the time. The addition of ER to staging was related to a decrease in upstaging from 17.6% to 10.8% ( P =0.01). Adherence to staging guidelines with CT/PET/EUS improved from 58.2% between 2012 and 2014 to 77.9% between 2015 and 2020. However, when ER was added as a staging criterion, adherence decreased to 23.3%. Increased volume of esophagectomies within an institution was associated with increased staging adherence with ER ( P =0.008). CONCLUSIONS: The use of CT/PET/EUS for the staging of early esophageal cancer is accurate in only 56.3% of patients. ER may increase staging accuracy as it is related to a decrease in upstaging. ER is poorly utilized in staging of early esophageal cancer. Barriers to the implementation of ER as a staging modality should be identified and corrected.

Gastric Electric Stimulation for Refractory Gastroparesis.

OBJECTIVE: To outline the use and utility of gastric electric stimulation (GES) as a therapeutic intervention for gastroparesis. METHODS: Review of the literature. RESULTS: Gastroparesis is characterized by delayed gastric emptying, with symptoms of nausea, vomiting, early satiety, postprandial fullness, and abdominal pain. Some patients with gastroparesis do not respond to medical intervention, and for these patients surgical intervention may be warranted. GES utilizes high-frequency gastric neurostimulation to facilitate gastric emptying and reduce symptoms of gastroparesis. It is indicated for patients with idiopathic and diabetic gastroparesis who have nausea and vomiting as their primary symptoms and who have not responded to medical therapy. GES has also been used in postsurgical and pediatric gastroparesis patients. Optimizing the outcome of this surgical treatment through proper patient selection and meticulous surgical technique is essential as there are inherent risks to the procedure. Nonblinded studies of GES for medically refractory gastroparesis have demonstrated therapeutic symptomatic benefit, whereas randomized controlled trials have not. New interventions such as pyloromyotomy and pyloroplasty are reasonable alternatives or addendums to GES. CONCLUSION: GES may be considered among the therapies available for treating patients with refractory symptoms of gastroparesis. More studies, specifically those comparing GES, pyloromyotomy, GES combined with pyloromyotomy, and placebo, are needed to help guide therapy selection for refractory gastroparesis.

Comparative Analysis of Clinical, Treatment, and Survival Characteristics of Basaloid and Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Esophagus.

BACKGROUND: Basaloid squamous cell carcinoma (BSC) is a rare variant of squamous cell carcinoma (SqCC) of the esophagus. Even though pathologically thought to be more aggressive than SqCC, there is discrepancy in the literature regarding the outcomes of BSC compared with those of SqCC. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. All patients with a histologic diagnosis of BSC and SqCC between 2004 and 2013 were included. We compared treatment and survival characteristics of patients with BSC and SqCC. RESULTS: There were 16,158 patients included in this study; 173 patients (1.1%) had BSC. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups based on age, sex, marital status, insurance, or geographic region of diagnosis, but patients with BSC were more likely to be Caucasian (73.4% vs 64.7%; p = 0.017). Among staged patients, baseline tumor stage was similar in both groups. However, BSC tumors were more likely to be of high pathologic grade (56.8% vs 38.2%; p < 0.001). Patients with SqCC were more likely to receive radiation therapy (36.9% vs 53.9%; p < 0.001), while patients with BSC were more likely to undergo resection (32.4% vs 17.0%; p < 0.001). Median overall survival was similar in both groups (14 vs 9 months; log rank = 0.144), and this relationship persisted after stratification by treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Even though more likely to be poorly differentiated at presentation, BSC of the esophagus seems to have similar clinical features and survival outcomes when compared with SqCC. Patients with BSC and SqCC should undergo stage-specific treatment to achieve optimal outcomes.