Nutrition management by a multidisciplinary team for prevention of nutritional deficits and morbidity following esophagectomy.

This study evaluated the effects of perioperative nutrition management by a multidisciplinary team on nutrition and postoperative complications of patients with esophageal cancer. A total of 239 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy and gastric conduit reconstruction for esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancer between February 2019 and February 2020 were included in the study. They were divided into the experimental group (120 patients) and the control group (119 patients) using the random number table method. Control group patients received routine diet management and experimental group patients received perioperative nutrition management by a multidisciplinary team. The differences of nutriture and postoperative complications between the two groups were compared. At 3 and 7 days after surgery, the experimental group patients had higher total protein and albumin levels (P<0.05), shorter postoperative anal exhaust time (P<0.05), lower incidence of postoperative gastrointestinal adverse reactions, pneumonia, anastomotic fistula, hypoproteinemia (P<0.05), and lower hospitalization costs (P<0.05) than the control group. Nutrition management by a multidisciplinary team effectively improved the nutriture of patients, promoted the rapid recovery of postoperative gastrointestinal function, reduced postoperative complications, and reduced hospitalization costs.

Comparison of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy: A propensity-matched study from a single high-volume institution.

OBJECTIVE: Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy accounts for a growing proportion of esophagectomies, potentially due to improved technical capabilities simplifying the challenging aspects of standard minimally invasive esophagectomy. However, there is limited evidence directly comparing both operations. The objective is to evaluate the short-term and long-term outcomes of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy in comparison with the minimally invasive esophagectomy approach for patients with esophageal cancer over a 7-year period at a high-volume center. The primary end points of this study were overall survival and disease-free survival. Secondary end points included operation-specific morbidity, lymph node yield, readmission status, and in-hospital, 30-day, and 90-day mortality. METHODS: Patients who underwent robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy or standard minimally invasive esophagectomy over a 7-year period were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Inclusion criteria were patients with stage I to III disease, operations performed past the learning curve, and no evidence of scleroderma or cirrhosis. A 1:3 propensity match (robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy:minimally invasive esophagectomy) for multiple clinical covariates was performed to identify the final study cohort. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the 2 operations. RESULTS: A total of 734 patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (n = 630) or robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (n = 104) for esophageal cancer were identified. After exclusions and matching, a total cohort of 246 patients undergoing robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (n = 65) or minimally invasive esophagectomy (n = 181) were identified. There was no difference in overall survival (P = .69) or disease-free survival (P = .70). There were no significant differences in rates of major morbidity: pneumonia (17% vs 17%, P = .34), chylothorax (8% vs 9%, P = .95), recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (0% vs 1.5%, P = 1), anastomotic leak (5% vs 4%, P = .49), intraoperative complications (9% vs 8%, P = .73), or complete resection rates (99% vs 96%, P = .68). There was no difference in in-hospital (P = .89), 30-day (P = .66) or 90-day mortality (P = .73) between both cohorts. The robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy cohort yielded a higher median lymph node harvest in comparison with the minimally invasive esophagectomy cohort (32 vs 29, P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy may improve lymphadenectomy in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. Minimally invasive esophagectomy and robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy are otherwise associated with similar mortality, morbidity, and perioperative outcomes. Further prospective study is required to investigate whether improved lymph node resection may translate to improved oncologic outcomes.

Is early extubation after esophagectomy safe? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

There is no consensus on the timing of extubation after esophagectomy. There is a fear that premature extubation may result in a high risk of urgent reintubation. On the other hand, there is a risk of lung damage in prolonged intubation. The present systematic review compares early and late extubation. Five articles were selected. Early extubation after esophagectomy does not increase the risk of reintubation, mortality, complications, and length of stay.

Prophylactic thoracic duct obliteration and resection during esophagectomy: What is the impact on perioperative risks and long-term survival? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

There is no agreement whether prophylactic thoracic duct ligation (TDL), with or without resection, during esophagectomy for patients with cancer is beneficial. The effects of these procedures on postoperative complications and overall survival remain unclear. This systematic review included 16 articles. TDL did not influence short- and long-term outcomes. However, thoracic duct resection increased postoperative chylothorax and overall complications, with no improvement in survival.

Transthoracic Esophagectomy: Hand-sewn Versus Side-to-side Linear-stapled Versus Circular-stapled Anastomosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Three anastomotic techniques are mostly used to create an esophagogastric anastomosis in a transthoracic esophagectomy: hand-sewn (HS), side-to-side linear-stapled (SSLS), and circular-stapled (CS). The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes after HS, SSLS, and CS intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review using the MEDLINE database was performed to identify original articles analyzing outcomes after HS, SSLS, and CS esophagogastric anastomosis. The main outcome was an anastomotic leakage rate. Secondary outcomes included overall morbidity, major morbidity, and mortality. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each anastomotic technique on the different outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 101 studies comprising 12,595 patients were included; 8835 (70.1%) with CS, 2532 (20.1%) with HS, and 1228 (9.8%) with SSLS anastomosis. Anastomotic leak occurred in 10% [95% confidence interval (CI), 6%-15%], 9% (95% CI, 6%-13%), and 6% (95% CI, 5%-7%) of patients after HS, SSLS, and CS anastomosis, respectively. Risk of anastomotic leakage was significantly higher with HS anastomosis (odds ratio=1.73, 95% CI: 1.47-2.03, P<0.0001) and SSLS (odds ratio=1.68, 95% CI: 1.36-2.08, P<0.0001), as compared with CS. Overall morbidity (HS: 52% vs. SLSS: 39% vs. CS: 35%) and major morbidity (HS: 33% vs. CS: 19%) rates were significantly lower with CS anastomosis. Mortality rate was 4% (95% CI, 3%-6%), 2% (95% CI, 2%-3%), and 3% (95% CI, 3%-4%) after HS, SSLS, and CS anastomosis, respectively. CONCLUSION: HS and SSLS intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomoses are associated with significantly higher rates of an anastomotic leak than CS anastomosis.

Open versus hybrid versus totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Hybrid and minimally invasive approaches have emerged as less invasive alternatives to open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes between open (OE), hybrid (HE), and totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE). METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to analyze outcomes after OE, HE, and TMIE with intrathoracic anastomosis. Main outcomes included anastomotic leak rate, overall morbidity, and 30-day mortality. A meta-analysis of proportions was used to assess the effect of each approach on different outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 130 studies comprising 16,053 patients were included for analysis; 8081 (50.3%) underwent OE, 1524 (9.5%) HE, and 6448 (40.2%) TMIE. The risk of anastomotic leak was lower after OE (odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.62-0.81; P < .0001). Overall morbidity rate was 45% (95% CI, 38%-52%) after OE, 40% (95% CI, 25%-59%) after HE, and 37% (95% CI, 32%-43%) after TMIE. Risk estimation showed higher odds of postoperative mortality after OE (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.76-2.81; P < .0001) and HE (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.32-2.81; P < .001), compared with TMIE. Median length of hospital stay (LOS) was 14.1 (range, 8-28), 12.5 (range, 8-18), and 11.9 (range, 7-30) days after OE, HE and TMIE, respectively (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: HE and TMIE are associated with lower rates of overall morbidity, reduced postoperative mortality, and shorter LOS, compared with OE. TMIE is associated with lower mortality rates and shorter LOS than HE. Further efforts are needed to widely embrace TMIE in a safe manner.

Laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients with high-risk post-operative complications.

Surgical treatment of esophageal cancer is challenging, due to considerable morbidity, especially in high surgical risk patients. While transhiatal esophagectomy leads to good oncological outcomes and reduced postoperative complications, less invasive techniques might further improve outcomes. Our goal was to compare results of laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy (LTE) with open transhiatal esophagectomy (OTE) in esophageal cancer patients at high surgical risk. From 2014 to 2020, 128 patients were identified. Seventy received OTE while 51 received LTE. After propensity score matching (1:1), postoperative complications, analysis of overall and disease-free survival, and survival-related prognostic factors were assessed in two groups of 48 patients. Ninety-one (77%) patients were men with a mean age of 65 ± 10.3 years. Those who underwent OTE experienced more clinical and surgical complications. In LTE patients, the number of mean resected lymph nodes was 25.9, and in patients who had OTE, it was 17.4 (P < 0.001). Overall survival was 56.0% in the LTE group and 33.6% (P = 0.023) in the OTE group. In multivariable analysis of overall survival, open surgery and incomplete pathological response were seen as worse negative factors. In multivariable analysis, metastatic lymph nodes, incomplete pathologic response, surgical complications, and a Charlson's index > 2 (P = 0.014) were associated with poor prognosis. Both surgical methods are safe with similar morbidity and mortality; however, LTE was associated with fewer complications, a higher number of resected lymph nodes, better overall survival, and more prognostic factors related to global and disease-free overall survival in high-risk patients.

Robotic repair of post-oesophagectomy hiatal hernia.

Diaphragmatic hiatal hernia is a potential complication of oesophagectomy in cancer patients. Over the past decades, laparoscopy has become the preferred approach to repairing this condition due to the reduced morbidity, faster recovery and shorter hospital stay when compared with traditional open surgery. The development of robotic technology has added to the benefits of minimally invasive approaches, offering potential technical advantages and overcoming some limitations of traditional laparoscopic techniques when performing complex procedures. We present the first report of a robotic post-oesophagectomy hiatal hernia repair.

Management of refractory cervical anastomotic fistula after esophagectomy using the pectoralis major myocutaneous flap.

INTRODUCTION: A refractory cervical anastomotic fistula which postoperatively remains unhealed for more than 2 months under conservative care severely impacts the quality of life of the patient and potentially leads to anastomotic stricture after the fistula heals. It is widely accepted that, to avoid this complication, refractory cervical anastomotic fistulas should undergo more aggressive treatments. However, when and which surgical intervention should be considered is unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to evaluate the role of the pectoralis major myocutaneous flap in the management of refractory cervical anastomotic fistulas based on our experience of 6 cases and a literature review. METHODS: Six patients diagnosed with refractory cervical anastomotic fistula after esophagectomy treated using pectoralis major myocutaneous flap transfer were included in the study. The clinical data, surgical details, and treatment outcome were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: All patients survived the operations. One patient who had a circumferential anastomotic defect resulting from surgical exploration developed a mild fistula in the neo-anastomotic site in the 5th postoperative day, which healed after 7 days of conservative care. This patient developed an anastomotic stricture which was partially alleviated by an endoscopic anastomotic dilatation. All the other 5 patients had uneventful recoveries after operations and restored oral intake on the 10th-15th days after operation, and they tolerated normal diets without subsequent sequelae on follow-up. One patient developed both local and lung recurrence and died in 15 months after operation, while the other 5 patients survived with good tumor control during the follow-up of 25-53 months. CONCLUSION: The satisfactory treatment outcome in our study demonstrates that pectoralis major myocutaneous flap reconstruction is a reliable management modality for refractory cervical anastomotic fistulas after esophagectomy, particularly for those patients who experienced persistent fistulas after conservative wound care and repeated wound closures.

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging for prevention of anastomotic leak in totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging is an emerging technology that might help decreasing anastomotic leakage (AL) rates. The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of ICG fluorescence imaging for the prevention of AL after minimally invasive esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis. METHODS: A systematic literature review of the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases was performed to identify all articles on totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Studies were then divided into two groups based on the use or not of ICG for perfusion assessment. Primary outcome was anastomotic leak. Secondary outcomes included operative time, ICG-related adverse reactions, and mortality rate. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the overall weighted proportion and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for main outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 3,171 patients were included for analysis: 381 (12%) with intraoperative ICG fluorescence imaging and 2,790 (88%) without ICG. Mean patients' age and proportion of males were similar between groups. Mean operative time was also similar between both groups (ICG: 354.8 vs. No-ICG: 354.1 minutes, P = 0.52). Mean ICG dose was 12 mg (5-21 mg). No ICG-related adverse reactions were reported. AL rate was 9% (95% CI, 5-17%) and 9% (95% CI, 7-12%) in the ICG and No-ICG groups, respectively. The risk of AL was similar between groups (odds ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.53-1.28, P = 0.45). Mortality was 3% (95% CI, 1-9%) in patients with ICG and 2% (95% CI, 2-3%) in those without ICG. Median length of hospital stay was also similar between groups (ICG: 13.6 vs. No-ICG: 11.2 days, P = 0.29). CONCLUSION: The use of ICG fluorescence imaging for perfusion assessment does not seem to reduce AL rates in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis.

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic-thoracoscopic technique. Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence comparing conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (CMIE) via laparoscopy and thoracoscopy with robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is scarce. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare surgical outcomes after CMIE and RAMIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed to identify original articles analyzing outcomes after CMIE and RAMIE. Main surgical outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, anastomotic leak rates, pneumonia, overall morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day mortality. Oncologic outcomes included lymph node yield and R0 resections rates. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 6,249 patients were included for analysis; 5,275 (84%) underwent CMIE and 974 (16%) RAMIE. Robotic esophagectomy had longer operative time and less intraoperative blood loss. Anastomotic leakage rates were similar with both approaches. Patients undergoing RAMIE had significantly lower rates of postoperative pneumonia (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35-0.61, P < .0001) and overall morbidity (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58-0.79, P < .0001). Median LOS was similar in both procedures (RAMIE: 12.1 versus CMIE: 11.9 days, P = .64). Similar mortality rates were found after RAMIE and CMIE (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.34-1.38, P = .29). Lymph node yield was similar in both procedures, but RAMIE was associated with higher rates of R0 resection (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.53-5.26, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing robotic esophagectomy have less intraoperative blood loss, lower rates of postoperative pneumonia, reduced overall morbidity, and higher rates of R0 resections, as compared with those undergoing a laparoscopic-thoracoscopic esophageal resection.

Endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leak in esophagectomy and total gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The curative treatment for esophageal and gastric cancer is primarily surgical resection. One of the main complications related to esophagogastric surgery is the anastomotic leak. This complication is associated with a prolonged length of stay, reduced quality of life, high treatment costs, and an increased mortality rate. The placement of endoluminal stents is the most frequent endoscopic therapy in these cases. However, since its introduction, endoscopic vacuum therapy has been shown to be a promising alternative in the management of this complication. This study primarily aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic vacuum therapy for the treatment of anastomotic leak in esophagectomy and total gastrectomy. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Studies that evaluated the use of endoscopic vacuum therapy for anastomotic leak in esophagectomy and total gastrectomy were included. Twenty-three articles were included. A total of 559 patients were evaluated. Endoscopic vacuum therapy showed a fistulous orifice closure rate of 81.6% (rate: 0.816; 95% CI: 0.777-0.864) and, when compared to the stent, there is a 16% difference in favor of endoscopic vacuum therapy (risk difference [RD]: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.05-0.27). The risk for mortality in the endoscopic vacuum therapy was 10% lower than in endoluminal stent therapy (RD: -0.10; 95% CI: -0.18 to -0.02). Endoscopic vacuum therapy might have a higher rate of fistulous orifice closure and a lower rate of mortality, compared to intraluminal stenting.

Complicaciones postoperatorias en esofagectomía por cáncer: evaluación de 215 casos según definiciones del grupo de consenso internacional / Postoperative complications in esophagectomy for cancer: evaluation of 215 cases according to definitions of the international consensus group

Resumen Introducción: La esofagectomía presenta una alta morbilidad postoperatoria. Sin embargo, las definiciones de las complicaciones son variables. Un grupo multinacional (esophagectomy complications consensus group; ECCG) propuso definiciones estandarizadas. Objetivo: Evaluar las complicaciones postoperatorias en esofagectomía según las definiciones propuestas por el ECCG. Materiales y Método: Realizamos un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo, a partir de una base de datos prospectiva. Se incluyeron pacientes sometidos a una esofagectomía por cáncer entre 1996 y 2018 en un centro. Se aplicaron las definiciones de las complicaciones postoperatorias según el ECCG. Resultados: Se incluyeron 215 pacientes (Hombres 64%; edad 67 [31-82] años). Un 64% presentaban alguna comorbilidad. Existió un predominio de carcinoma escamoso con un 68%. La ubicación tumoral más frecuente fue el tercio inferior del esófago (48%). Se utilizó un abordaje abierto en 74% y mínimamente invasivo en 26%. La morbilidad postoperatoria total fue de 67%. Las complicaciones más frecuentes fueron las respiratorias alcanzando un 27%. En total, un 25% de los pacientes presentó una filtración de la anastomosis esofagogástrica, de las cuales un 24% fueron tipo II (no requirieron una reintervención quirúrgica). Se produjo una paresia de cuerda vocal en 7%, todas tipo I (no requirieron terapia específica). Se presentó una fístula quilosa en 2%, en 1% se trataron con nutrición parenteral (tipo II) y en 1% se realizó una reintervención (tipo III). Conclusión: La esofagectomía se asocia a una alta morbilidad. Las principales complicaciones son las respiratorias y las gastrointestinales. La utilización de las definiciones de consenso permite una estandarización y graduación de las complicaciones.

Introduction: Esophagectomy presents a high postoperative morbidity. However, the definitions used are variable. A multinational group (esophagectomy complications consensus group; ECCG) proposed standardized definitions. Aim: To evaluate postoperative complications in esophagectomy according to the definitions proposed by the ECCG. Materials and Method: We conducted a retrospective cohort study, based on a prospective database. Patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer between 1996 and 2018 at one center were included. The definitions of postoperative complications according to the ECCG were applied. Results: We included 215 patients (64% men, age 67 [31-82] years). Sixty-four percent had some comorbidity. There was a predominance of squamous carcinoma with 68%. The most frequent tumor location was the lower third of the esophagus (48%). An open approach was used in 74% and minimally invasive in 26%. Total postoperative morbidity was 67%. The most frequent complications were respiratory complications, which reached 27%. The leakage of the esophagogastric anastomosis reached 25%, 24% were type II (did not require surgical reoperation). There was a vocal cord paresis in 7%, all were classified as type I (did not require specific therapy). A chylous fistula was presented in 2%, in 1% they were treated with parenteral nutrition (type II) and in 1% a reoperation was performed (type III). Conclusion: Esophagectomy is associated with a high morbidity. The main complications are respiratory and gastrointestinal. The use of consensus definitions allows standardization and grading of complications.