Reconstruction Techniques and Associated Morbidity in Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy for Cancer - Insights from the GastroBenchmark and GASTRODATA databases.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Various anastomotic and reconstruction techniques are used for minimally invasive total (miTG) and distal gastrectomy (miDG). Their effects on postoperative morbidity have not been extensively studied. METHODS: MiTG and miDG patients were selected from 9356 oncological gastrectomies performed 2017-2021 in 44 centers. Endpoints included anastomotic leakage (AL) rate and postoperative morbidity tested by multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Three major anastomotic techniques (circular stapled (CS); linear stapled (LS); hand sewn (HS)), and three major bowel reconstruction types (Roux (RX); Billroth I (BI); Billroth II (BII)) were identified in miTG (n=878) and miDG (n=3334). Postoperative complications including AL (5.2% vs. 1.1%), overall (28.7% vs. 16.3%) and major morbidity (15.7% vs. 8.2%), as well as 90-day mortality (1.6% vs. 0.5%) were higher after miTG compared with miDG. After miTG, AL rate was higher after CS (4.3%) and HS (7.9%) compared with LS (3.4%). Similarly, major complications (LS: 9.7%, CS: 16.2%, HS: 12.7%) were lowest after LS. Multivariate analysis confirmed anastomotic technique as predictive factor for AL, overall and major complications. In miDG, AL rate (BI: 1.4%, BII 0.8%, RX 1.2%), overall (BI: 14.5%, BII: 15.0%, RX: 18.7%,) and major morbidity (BI: 7.9%, BII: 9.1%, RX: 7.2%), and mortality (BI: 0%, BII: 0.1%, RY: 1.1%%) were not affected by bowel reconstruction. CONCLUSION: In oncologically suitable situations, miDG should be preferred to miTG, as postoperative morbidity is significantly lower. LS should be a preferred anastomotic technique for miTG in Western Centers. Conversely, bowel reconstruction in DG may be chosen according to surgeon's preference.

Active surveillance for clinical complete responders after chemoradiotherapy for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines on the treatment of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) recommend neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery or definitive chemoradiotherapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of patients with a cCR after chemoradiotherapy who underwent active surveillance. METHODS: Patients with oesophageal SCC who were treated with chemoradiotherapy between January 2016 and June 2022 were identified from an institutional database. Survival and recurrence of patients with a cCR who underwent active surveillance were compared with those of patients who underwent planned surgery. Survival was calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups using the log rank test. RESULTS: The 37 patients who underwent active surveillance were older and tumours were more often located in the middle/upper-third of the oesophagus than in the surgery group of 57 patients. Median follow-up was 28.1 (i.q.r. 17.2-47.1) months for the active surveillance group and 20 (12.9-39.1) months for the surgery group. Overall survival was comparable between the two groups, with 3-year survival rates of 50 (95% c.i. 31 to 67) and 59 (40 to 73)% for the active surveillance and surgery groups respectively (P = 0.55). Three-year progression-free survival for patients who underwent active surveillance was better than in the surgery group: 70 (43 to 85) versus 58 (40 to 72)% (P = 0.02). Overall and progression-free survival was comparable between patients in the active surveillance group and 23 patients in the surgery group who had a pCR (ypT0 N0). The overall recurrence rate was comparable between the groups: 7 of 37 (19.4%) in active surveillance group versus 16 of 49 (32.6%) in surgery group (P = 0.26). Locoregional recurrence was noted more often in the active surveillance group and systemic recurrence in the surgery group. CONCLUSION: Active surveillance is feasible and safe for patients with oesophageal SCC who have a cCR after chemoradiotherapy.

Fashioning esophagogastric anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a multicenter experience.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study is to compare outcomes of the robotic hand-sewn, linear- and circular-stapled techniques performed to create an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis in patients who underwent Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. METHODS: Patients who underwent a planned Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were retrospectively analysed from prospectively maintained databases. Only patients who underwent a robotic thoracic approach with the creation of an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis were included in the study. Patients were divided into three groups: hand-sewn-, circular stapled-, and linear-stapled anastomosis group. Demographic information and surgery-related data were extracted. The primary outcome was the rate of anastomotic leakages (AL) in the three groups. Moreover, the rate of grade A, B and C anastomotic leakage were evaluated. In addition, patients of each group were divided in subgroups according to the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique. RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty patients were enrolled in the study. No significant differences were found between the three groups about AL rate (p = 0.137). Considering the management of the AL for each of the three groups, no significant differences were found. Evaluating the correlation between AL rate and the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique, no significant differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: No standardized anastomotic fashioning technique has yet been generally accepted. This study could be considered a call to perform ad hoc high-quality studies involving high-volume centers for upper gastrointestinal surgery to evaluate what is the most advantageous anastomotic technique.

The effect of aging on short- and long-term results after esophagectomy: an international multicenter retrospective analysis.

The optimal treatment for esophageal cancer in elderly patients is still debated and data on postoperative results are limited. This retrospective international study aims to clarify the impact of age on clinical and oncological outcomes after esophagectomy. All patients that underwent esophagectomy for cancer between 2007 and 2016 at two European high-volume Centers have been included in the study. Patients were divided into three groups according to their age: young-age group (YAG) (18-69), middle-age group (70-74) and old-age group (>74). Primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS), while secondary outcomes considered were 5-year disease free survival and disease related survival, 90-day morbidity and mortality, readmission rate and radicality. A total of 575 patients were included. No differences emerged in terms of morbidity and length of stay, while mortality increased with aging from 2% in YAG to 4.8% in old-aged (P = 0.003). Old-age patients had less neoadjuvant treatment (P < 0.001), a less aggressive mediastinal lymphadenectomy and presented a more advanced pathological stage. As expected, OS decreased significantly for older patients compared with the other two age groups (P = 0.044) but, on the other hand, disease free and disease related survival were comparable between the groups. Age itself should not be considered a contraindication to esophagectomy. Although in patients older than 75 years postoperative mortality is significantly increased, esophagectomy could be still an option in selected patients, favoring the use of minimally invasive techniques and enhanced recovery protocols.

Adherence to Guidelines for Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment for Gastric Cancer in Italy According to the View of Surgeons and Patients.

Background: Despite the strong declining trends in incidence and mortality over the last decades, gastric cancer (GC) is still burdened with high mortality, even in high-income countries. To improve GC prognosis, several guidelines have been increasingly published with indications about the most appropriate GC management. The Italian Society of Digestive System Pathology (SIPAD) and Gastric Cancer Italian Research Group (GIRCG) designed a survey for both surgeons and patients with the purpose of evaluating the degree of application and adherence to guidelines in GC management in Italy. Materials and Methods: Between January and May 2022, a questionnaire has been administered to a sample of Italian surgeons and, in a simplified version, to members of the Patient Association "Vivere Senza Stomaco" (patients surgically treated for GC between 2008 and 2021) to investigate the diagnosis, staging, and treatment issues. Results: The survey has been completed by 125 surgeons and 125 patients. Abdominal CT with gastric hydro-distension before treatment was not widespread in both groups (47% and 42%, respectively). The rate of surgeons stating that they do not usually perform minimally invasive gastrectomy was 15%, but the rate of patients who underwent a minimally invasive approach was 22% (between 2011 and 2022). The percentage of surgeons declaring to perform extended lymphadenectomy (>D2) was 97%, although a limited lymph node dissection rate was observed in about 35% of patients. Conclusions: This survey shows several important discrepancies from surgical attitudes declared by surgeons and real data derived from the reports available to the patients, suggesting heterogeneous management in clinical practice and, thus, a not rigorous adherence to the guidelines.

Multicenter study on the incidence and treatment of mediastinal leaks after esophagectomy (MuMeLe 2).

BACKGROUND: Management of mediastinal anastomotic leaks (MALs) after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy includes conservative, endoscopic, or surgical management. Endoscopic vacuum therapy (EVAC) is becoming a routine approach for MALs, although the outcomes have not been defined. This study aimed to describe the incidence, treatment, and outcomes of MALs in patients who underwent esophagectomy in 3 Italian high-volume centers that routinely use EVAC for MAL. METHODS: Patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between September 2018 and March 2023 were included. RESULTS: A total of 681 patients underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, of whom 88 had MAL. The MAL rates for open, minimally invasive, and robotic esophagectomies were 11.5%, 13.4%, and 14.8%, respectively. Global and specific 30- and 90-day mortality rates for MAL were 0.9% and 2.1% and 6.8% and 15.9%, respectively. Nonoperative management (NOM) as the primary treatment was chosen for 62 patients. EVAC was the most common NOM (62.9%), and the most common operative management (OM) was anastomotic redo (53.8%). Diversion was the OM for 7 patients, of whom 3 patients died. Primary treatment proved successful in 40 patients. Among them, EVAC alone was successful in 35.9% of patients. Globally, endoscopic treatment, including EVAC, was successful in 79.0% of NOM and 55.7% of MALs. NOM and OM were chosen as secondary treatments for 27 and 10 patients, respectively. Secondary treatment proved successful in 21 patients. CONCLUSION: The incidence of MALs after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is approximately 13%. Endoscopic techniques have a success rate of almost 80%, with EVAC representing a significant part of this treatment process.

Outcomes after Surgical Treatment of Oesophagogastric Cancer with Synchronous Liver Metastases: A Multicentre Retrospective Cohort Study.

Approximately 10-12% of patients with oesophageal or gastric cancer (OGC) present with oligometastatic disease at diagnosis. It remains unclear if there is a role for radical surgery in these patients. We aimed to assess the outcomes of OGC patients who underwent simultaneous treatment for the primary tumour and synchronous liver metastases. Patients with OGC who underwent surgical treatment between 2008 and 2020 for the primary tumour and up to five synchronous liver metastases aiming for complete tumour removal or ablation (i.e., no residual tumour) were identified from four institutional databases. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Secondary outcomes were disease-free survival and postoperative outcomes. Thirty-one patients were included, with complete follow-up data for 30 patients. Twenty-six patients (84%) received neoadjuvant therapy followed by response evaluation. Median OS was 21 months [IQR 9-36] with 2- and 5-year survival rates of 43% and 30%, respectively. While disease recurred in 80% of patients (20 of 25 patients) after radical resection, patients with a solitary liver metastasis had a median OS of 34 months. The number of liver metastases was a prognostic factor for OS (solitary metastasis aHR 0.330; p-value = 0.025). Thirty-day mortality was zero and complications occurred in 55% of patients. Long-term survival can be achieved in well-selected patients who undergo surgical resection of the primary tumour and local treatment of synchronous liver metastases. In particular, patients with a solitary liver metastasis seem to have a favourable prognosis.

Clinical predictors of postoperative complications in the context of enhanced recovery (ERAS) in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer.

The overall frequency of postoperative complications in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer diverges between studies. We evaluated the frequency and assessed the relationship between complications and demographic and clinical features. For this observational study, data were extracted from the ERAS Registry managed by the University of Verona, Italy. Patients were evaluated and compared for postoperative complications according to the consensus-based classification and the Clavien-Dindo scale. The study population was 877 patients: 346 (39.5%) with esophageal and 531 (60.5%) with gastric cancer; 492 (56.2%) reported one or more postoperative complications, 213 (61.6%) of those with esophageal and 279 (52.5%) of those with gastric cancer. When stratified by consensus-based classification, patients with esophageal cancer reported general postoperative complications more frequently (p < 0.001) than those with gastric cancer, but there was no difference in postoperative surgical complications between the two groups. Multiple logistic regression models revealed an association between postoperative complications and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.36), operation time (adjusted OR, 1.08; 95% CI 1.00-1.15), and days to solid diet intake (adjusted OR, 1.39; 95% CI 1.20-1.59). Complications in patients with esophageal and gastric cancer are frequent, even in those treated according to ERAS principles, and are often associated with comorbidities, longer operative time, and longer time to solid diet intake.