Untutored training pathway to achieve competence in esophagogastric endoscopic submucosal dissection in a Western center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has a long learning curve. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of an ESD unsupervised training model for experienced endoscopists. METHODS: Stepwise training included a visit to a high-volume center, unsupervised training on an ex vivo porcine model, and in vivo human upper GI cases with anatomic progression. Performance measures included en bloc resection, R0 resection, adverse event rates, and operating time. RESULTS: After observation of 30 esophagogastric ESDs and 15 untutored ex vivo ESDs, 5 human cases of distal gastric ESDs were performed, followed by 55 unselected esophagogastric cases. En bloc and R0 resection rates were 93.0% and 80.7%, respectively. Operating time was 14.0 min/cm2 in the stomach and 25.1 min/cm2 in the esophagus, with evidence of a learning curve for esophageal ESDs (first block 30.26 min/cm2 vs second block 14.81 min/cm2, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Untutored training for esophagogastric ESD is feasible and allows endoscopists, experienced in therapeutic endoscopy, to achieve the required standards toward competency.

Standard versus simplified radiofrequency ablation protocol for Barrett's esophagus: comparative analysis of the whole treatment pathway.

Background and study aims The standard radiofrequency ablation (RFA) protocol for Barrett's esophagus (BE) encompasses an intermediary cleaning phase between two ablation sessions. A simplified protocol omitting the cleaning phase is less labor-intensive but equally effective in studies based on single ablation procedures. The aim of this study was to compare efficacy and safety of the standard and simplified RFA protocols for the whole treatment pathway for BE, including both circumferential and focal devices. Patients and methods We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on patients receiving RFA between January 2007 and August 2017 at two institutions. Outcomes assessed were: 1) complete remission of dysplasia (CR-D) and intestinal metaplasia (CR-IM) at 18 months; and 2) rate of esophageal strictures. Results One hundred forty-five patients were included of whom 73 patients received the standard and 72 patients received the simplified protocol. CR-D was achieved in 94.5 % and 95.8 % of patients receiving the standard and simplified protocol, respectively ( P  = 0.71). CR-IM was achieved in 84.9 % and 77.8 % of patients treated with the standard and simplified protocol, respectively ( P  = 0.27). Strictures were significantly more common among patients who received the simplified protocol (12.5 %) compared to the standard protocol (1.4 %; P  = 0.008). The median number of esophageal dilations was one. Conclusion The simplified RFA protocol is as effective as the standard protocol in eradicating BE but carries a higher risk of strictures. This needs to be taken into account, particularly in patients with higher pretreatment risk of strictures, such as those with esophageal narrowing from previous endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR).

Comparative outcomes of radiofrequency ablation for Barrett's oesophagus with different baseline histology.

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is currently recommended for dysplastic Barrett's oesophagus (BO); however, there are limited data on treatment response when stratified by baseline histology. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to evaluate RFA outcomes and durability for BO with different baseline histology. METHODS: Patients treated with RFA between 2007 and 2017 at a single institution were retrospectively included. Outcome measures were: (a) complete remission of dysplasia (CRD) and intestinal metaplasia (CRIM) at 18 months, (b) complication rate and (c) durability of CRD and CRIM. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients underwent RFA, of whom 113 completed the treatment protocol (21 low-grade dysplasia (LGD), 46 high-grade dysplasia (HGD) and 46 intramucosal carcinoma (IMC)). CRD and CRIM were achieved in 94.7% and 78.8% of patients, respectively. When stratified by baseline histology, there was no significant difference in CRD between groups (LGD, 95.2%; HGD, 95.7%; and IMC, 93.5%; p = 0.89). Similarly, there was no significant difference in CRIM between groups (LGD, 71.4%; HGD, 76.1% and IMC, 87.0%; p = 0.39). CRD and CRIM durability at 24 months for LGD, HGD and IMC were 100%, 97.7% and 100% (log rank p = 0.31), and 100%, 89.0% and 95.5%, respectively (log rank p = 0.62). CONCLUSION: Baseline histology is not a predictor of RFA response. Once CRD and CRIM are achieved, these effects are durable over time.

Iatrogenic oesophageal perforation during placement of an endoscopic vacuum therapy device.

Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) is increasingly being used as a means of managing perforations or anastomotic leaks of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Published outcomes are favourable, with few mentions of complications or morbidity. We present a case in which the management of a gastric perforation with endoscopic vacuum therapy was complicated by cervical oesophageal perforation. The case highlights the risks of such endoscopic therapeutic procedures and is the first report in the literature to describe significant visceral injury during placement of a VAC device for upper GI perforation. Iatrogenic oesophageal perforation is an inherent risk to upper GI endoscopy and the risk increases in therapeutic endoscopic procedures. Complications may be reduced by management under a multidisciplinary team in a centre with specialist upper GI services. There is no doubt that the endoscopic VAC approach is becoming established practice, and training in its use must reflect its increasingly widespread adoption.

Oesophagectomy remains the gold standard for treatment of high-grade dysplasia in Barrett's oesophagus.

AIM: The goal of surveillance in Barrett's oesophagus is to detect high-grade dysplasia (HGD). The natural history of HGD is unclear, but because of the reported high risk of coexistent invasive carcinoma, oesophagectomy is currently the gold standard treatment. Recent reports suggest the risk of coexistent tumour may be lower and that the optimum treatment for HGD is continuing surveillance or mucosal ablation treatment, reserving oesophagectomy for those patients with invasive malignancy. To re-examine the role of oesophagectomy we looked at the incidence of invasive cancer in patients undergoing resection for HGD and their subsequent outcome. METHODS: Prospective analysis of 240 patients undergoing oesophagectomy over 6 years under a single surgeon in a single centre. Analysis was focused on patients undergoing oesophagectomy for HGD picked up during Barrett's surveillance endoscopy. The incidence of invasive cancer, morbidity, mortality and survival of this subgroup is reported. RESULTS: Preoperatively, 17 patients were diagnosed with HGD and underwent oesophagectomy. Eleven of 17 (65%) patients had coexistent invasive cancer and six patients had HGD alone in the resected specimens. There was no in-patient mortality, four patients had significant respiratory complications and three patients had radiological/clinical anastomotic leaks. All 6 patients with HGD only are alive to date (3-68 months) and 3 of 11 patients with invasive cancer have died of recurrent disease. CONCLUSION: We continue to advocate oesophagectomy for HGD as the optimum treatment in the light of the high rate of coexistent invasive cancer. Oesophagectomy for HGD can be performed with low morbidity and minimal mortality in a specialist centre. We hypothesize that the lower rates of invasive cancer found in HGD reported by other groups result from interobserver variation in grading of HGD, variability in histological sampling of the resected oesophagus and variability in the endoscopic technique of acquisition of biopsy samples.

Long term results of surgery versus continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) in patients aged >70 years with stage 1 non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with T1N0 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are preferably treated by anatomic lobectomy. However, not all such patients are suitable for lobectomy due to their age or co-morbidity. Our aim was to determine the results obtained following lobectomy, wedge resection (WR) or continuous hyperfractionated accelerated radiotherapy (CHART) in patients aged >70 years. PATIENTS: Two hundred and fifteen consecutive patients aged >70 years, with pathologic stage 1 NSCLC in our unit between 1991 and 2001 were studied. Of these patients, 149 had a lobectomy, 47 had a WR and 19 had CHART. Follow-up was 100% complete. RESULTS: Analysis demonstrated the WR and CHART patients to have reduced pulmonary function (FEV(1) 59% and 52%, respectively, of predicted vs. 76%, P<0.001) when compared to the lobectomy group but there were no differences among the groups with regard to mean age and histologic tumour type. There were no operative mortality among patients after WR; however, a 2.7% 30-day operative mortality among patients undergoing lobectomy (P=0.29). Kaplan-Meier survival curves at 1 and 5 years for patients undergoing WR, lobectomy and CHART was 98% and 74% vs. 97% and 68% vs. 80% and 39%, respectively (P=0.0484). The frequency of local/regional recurrence in the WR group (19.1%) was not significantly higher than in the lobectomy group (18.4%, P=0.38) when compared to the CHART group (27%, P=0.07). CONCLUSION: Loco-regional recurrence and survival after WR and lobectomy in elderly patients with stage I NSCLC are comparable. Although the numbers are small, these data suggest that CHART is a reasonable treatment option for those who are not suitable candidates for surgery.

Should oesophagectomies be performed by trainees? The experience from a single teaching centre under the supervision of one surgeon.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical training is threatened by anxieties about trainees performing major procedures. We have analysed the outcome of oesophagectomies performed by a consultant surgeon and compared these to the performance of trainees (years 4-6) operating under direct supervision. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively in a computerised database on all patients who underwent oesophagectomy at a teaching tertiary centre between December 1997 and April 2004 with a minimum 15 months' follow-up. Analysis of outcome was according to measures of technical adequacy, postoperative course, histological analysis, recurrence and survival. RESULTS: During the study period, 241 oesophagectomies were carried out; 157 (65.1%) of these procedures were performed by the consultant and 84 (34.9%) were performed by surgeons-in-training under direct consultant supervision. Pre-operative, technical adequacy, postoperative course, histological analysis, recurrence and survival were comparable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate comparable patient outcome when suitably experienced trainees are supervised in performing oesophagectomies and support its continued use in operative training.

Needle catheter jejunostomy at esophagectomy for cancer.

Important physiological changes occur after major abdominal surgery. Cellular and morphological changes follow a period of malnutrition. Enteral feeding is an important strategy for maintaining gut integrity and function. Controversies remain on the use of feeding jejunostomy after major abdominal surgery and its use had not gained widespread acceptance. The records of 262 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer were reviewed retrospectively to assess whether the placement of a needle catheter jejunostomy (NCJ) at the time of surgery is a safe and useful procedure. All the patients had a 9 Fr. NCJ place in a standardized fashion at the time of the esophagectomy. The technique of placement, the utilisation, and the complications of the NCJ were examined. The enteral nutrition was started in the first post-operative day. Sixty-three percent of our patients required enteral nutrition for 10 or more days. In 19%, this requirement was prolonged for more then 20 days, upto 68 days. The complications related to NCJ were four (1.5%). The use of the NCJ as described is safe, with an extremely low rate of complications. It may provide adequate nutritional support for a prolonged period of time at low costs. Its routine use in patients undergoing esophagectomy is recommended.