Impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer resection: results of a European multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) on anastomotic leakage (AL) and other postoperative outcomes after esophageal cancer (EC) resection. BACKGROUND: Conflicting data have emerged from randomized studies regarding the impact of NCRT on AL. METHODS: Among 2944 consecutive patients operated on for EC between 2000 and 2010 in 30 European centers, patients treated by NCRT after surgery (n=593) were compared with those treated by primary surgery (n=1487). Multivariable analyses and propensity score matching were used to compensate for the differences in some baseline characteristics. RESULTS: Patients in the NCRT group were younger, with a higher prevalence of male sex, malnutrition, advanced tumor stage, squamous cell carcinoma, and surgery after 2005 when compared with the primary surgery group. Postoperative AL rates were 8.8% versus 10.6% (P=0.220), and 90-day postoperative mortality and morbidity rates were 9.3% versus 7.2% (P=0.110) and 33.4% versus 32.1% (P=0.564), respectively. Pulmonary complication rates did not differ between groups (24.6% vs 22.5%; P=0.291), whereas chylothorax (2.5% vs 1.2%; P=0.020), cardiovascular complications (8.6% vs 0.1%; P=0.037), and thromboembolic events (8.6% vs 6.0%; P=0.037) were higher in the NCRT group. After propensity score matching, AL rates were 8.8% versus 11.3% (P=0.228), with more chylothorax (2.5% vs 0.7%; P=0.030) and trend toward more cardiovascular and thromboembolic events in the NCRT group (P=0.069). Predictors of AL were high American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, supracarinal tumoral location, and cervical anastomosis, but not NCRT. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy does not have an impact on the AL rate after EC resection (NCT 01927016).

Development of the "OS-SEV90 Score" to Predict Severe Postoperative Complications at 90 Days Following Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery may be associated with severe postoperative complications (SPC). Factors associated with the risk of SPC have not been fully investigated. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify preoperative risk factors of SPC within 90 days and to develop a risk prediction model based on these factors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study based on a prospectively maintained database of obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery from October 2005 to May 2019. All SPC occurring up to the 90th postoperative day were recorded according to the Dindo-Clavien classification. Associations between potential risk factors and SPC were analyzed using a logistic regression model, and the risk prediction ("OS-SEV90 score") was computed. Based on the OS-SEV90 score, the patients were grouped into 3 categories of risk: low, intermediate, and high. RESULTS: Among 1963 consecutive patients, no patient died and 82 (4.2%) experienced SPC within 90 days. History of gastric or esophageal surgery (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.040, 95% confidence interval; CI 1.78-5.20, p< 0.0001), past of thromboembolic event aOR 2.26, 95%; CI 1.12-4.55, p = 0.0225), and surgery performed by a junior surgeon (aOR 1.99, 95%; CI 1.26-3.13, p = 0.003) were all independently associated with risk for SPC, adjusting for ASA physical status system (ASA) score ≥ 3, severe OSA, psychiatric disease, asthma, a history of abdominal surgery, alcohol, cardiac disease, and dyslipidemia. "the OS-SEV90 score" based on these factors was constructed to classify patients into 3 risk groups: low (≤2), intermediate (3-4), and high (≥5). According to "the OS-SEV90 score," SPC increased significantly from 2.9% in the low-risk group, 7.7% in the intermediate-risk group, and 23.3% in the high-risk group. CONCLUSIONS: A predictive model of SPC within 90 days "the OS-SEV90 score" has been developed using 9 baseline risk factors. The use of the OS-SEV90 score may help the multidisciplinary team to identify the specific risk of each patient and inform them about and optimize the comorbidities before the surgery. Further studies are warranted to validate this score in a new independent cohort before using it in clinical practice.

Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Safe Surgical Opportunity? Results of a Case-Matched Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) after adjustable gastric banding (AGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) compared with primary RYGB, in regard to early and late morbidity, weight, and resolution of obesity-related comorbidities. METHODS: The group of patients undergoing revisional RYGB was matched in a 1:1 ratio with control patient who underwent a primary RYGB, based on age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score, preoperative body mass index (BMI), and diabetes mellitus. Demographics, anthropometrics, preoperative work-up, and perioperative data were retrieved. RESULTS: One hundred fifteen patients (16 males and 99 females) with a mean age of 45.5 ± 1.5 years underwent revisional RYGB following either LAGB in 82 patients (71.3%) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in 33 patients (28.7%). There was no conversion and no mortality in either group. Revisional RYGB was associated with similar early (16.5 vs 15.6%, ns) and late (42.6% vs 32.2%, ns) morbidity rates with a mean follow-up of 25.3 ± 16.6 months compared to primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The revisional RYGB group had significantly less weight loss (mean %EWL 67.4 ± 20.7 vs 72.7 ± 22.9, p = 0.023 and mean %EBMI 68.1 ± 22 vs 78.3 ± 25.7, p = 0.01) at the time of 1 year. Improvement of comorbidities including hypertension (62.5 vs 70.5%; p > 0.05), diabetes (73.7 vs 79%; p > 0.05), and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (100 vs 97%; p > 0.05) was similar. CONCLUSION: This large case-matched study suggests that conversion of SG or AGB to RYGB is feasible with early and late comparable morbidity in an accredited center; even weight results might be inferior.

Does the Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Guidelines Improve Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery? A Propensity Score Analysis in 464 Patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines according to Thorell and co. in our tertiary referral bariatric center might improve post-operative outcomes. METHODS: ERAS program was introduced in our center since January 1, 2017. Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database identified patients who underwent laparoscopic primary and revisional bariatric surgeries from October 2005 to January 2018. Patients exposed to ERAS program ("ERAS group") were matched in a 1:1 ratio with patients exposed to conventional care (control group) using a propensity score based on age, gender, preoperative body mass index (BMI), diabetes mellitus, and the type of procedures. The primary outcome was total hospital length of stay (LOS) and the secondary outcomes included the post-operative complications and readmission rates. RESULTS: During the study period, 464 patients were included, 232 in each group. Implementation of the ERAS protocol was significantly associated with a reduction of LOS (2.47 ± 1.7 vs 5.39 ± 1.9 days, p < 0.00001). One-third of patients was discharged (77/232, 33%) on the first postoperative day (POD) and more than three quarter of patients on POD 2 (182/232, 77%). At the opposite, no patients of the control group were discharged on POD 2. Overall 30-day and 90-day morbidity and readmission rates were the same in both groups. There was no death in each group. CONCLUSIONS: This large case-matched study using a propensity score analysis suggests that implementation of ERAS program significantly reduced length of hospital stay without significant increases on overall morbidity, and readmission rates.

Esophagopericardial fistula: an unexpected dreaded complication of treatment of leak following revisional sleeve gastrectomy by endoscopic internal drainage.

Esophagopericardial fistula (EPF) is an uncommon but life-threatening complication of upper gastrointestinal tract surgery or endoscopy, which is related to anastomotic breakdown, chronic infection or esophageal traumatism. We first describe the first case of an EPF secondary to double pigtail drain migration: an endoscopic internal approach for the treatment of leak following revisional sleeve gastrectomy.

Indications and mid-term results of conversion from sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is currently considered as a primary bariatric surgery. This is because of its relative simplicity and satisfactory results. As observed with other bariatric procedures, surgeons are confronted with insufficient weight loss or weight regain, insufficient resolution of metabolic disorders, and intractable severe reflux. A retrospective analysis of conversion from SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) was performed to assess weight loss, diabetes resolution, and relief of reflux symptoms. The mean interval between the two procedures was almost 24 months. Eighteen patients underwent conversion from SG to RYGBP for insufficient weight loss (n = 9), severe reflux (n = 6), and persistence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) (n = 3). The median follow-up was 15.5 months. Weight loss was significantly improved with a mean percentage of excess of body mass index loss at 64.6 % after conversion versus 47.1 % before conversion. All reflux symptoms were immediately relieved without any medication at the end of the follow-up. The three patients who had an operation for persistence of T2DM are now free of medication. Only one postoperative complication was observed as a small bowel injury, which was treated surgically. Conversion from SG to RYGBP is safe. Severe reflux is definitely treated and is an incontestable indication with this procedure. Additionally, weight loss and diabetes are clinically improved. Our results appear to be similar to those with a primary RYGBP.