Comparison between endoscopic and surgical resection of mucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett’s esophagus at two high-volume centers. Ann Surg. 2011;254:67-72. [PMID: 21532466 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e31821d4bf6]

Should endoscopic mucosal resection be attempted for cT2N0 esophageal cancer?

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) can be an effective therapy for superficial esophageal cancer. Many patients with cT2 invasion by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) receive surgery but are subsequently found to have superficial disease. The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety profile and the added value of attempting EMR for EUS-staged cT2N0 esophageal cancer. A retrospective review was performed at a single institution from 2008 to 2017. Patients who were staged cT2N0 by EUS were identified from a prospectively maintained surgical database. Among 75 patients identified for analysis, 30 underwent an attempt at EMR. No perforations or other immediate complications occurred. EMR was more likely to be attempted among older patients (P = 0.001) with smaller tumor size (P < 0.001) and diminished SUVmax (P = 0.001). At the time of treatment, EMR was successful in clearing all known disease among 17/30 patients, with 12 representing pT1a or less and 5 representing pT1b with negative margins. Among the 17 patients for whom EMR was able to clear all known disease, there were no recurrences or cancer-related deaths. Although all the patients were staged as cT2N0 by EUS, many patients were identified by EMR to have superficial disease. There were no perforations or other adverse events related to EMR. Furthermore, EMR cleared all known disease among 17 patients with no known recurrences or cancer-related deaths. The results indicate that EMR for cT2N0 esophageal cancer is a safe diagnostic option that is therapeutic for some.

Resection of early esophageal neoplasms: The pendulum swings from surgical to endoscopic management

Esophageal cancer is a highly lethal disease and is the sixth leading cause of cancer related mortality in the world. The standard treatment is esophagectomy which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This led to development of minimally invasive, organ sparing endoscopic therapies which have comparable outcomes to esophagectomy in early cancer. These include endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection. In early squamous cell cancer, endoscopic submucosal dissection is preferred as it is associated with cause specific 5-year survival rates of 100% for M1 and M2 tumors and 85% for M3 and SM1 tumors and low recurrence rates. In early adenocarcinoma, endoscopic resection of visible abnormalities is followed by ablation of the remaining flat Barrett’s mucosa to prevent recurrences. Radiofrequency ablation is the most widely used ablation modality with others being cryotherapy and argon plasma coagulation. Focal endoscopic mucosal resection followed by radiofrequency ablation leads to eradication of neoplasia in 93.4% of patients and eradication of intestinal metaplasia in 73.1% of patients. Innovative techniques such as submucosal tunneling with endoscopic resection are developed for management of submucosal tumors of the esophagus. This review includes a discussion of various endoscopic techniques and their clinical outcomes in early squamous cell cancer, adenocarcinoma and submucosal tumors. An overview of comparison between esophagectomy and endoscopic therapy are also presented.

Clinical outcomes of endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection compared with conventional endoscopic submucosal dissection for superficial esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is the standard treatment for superficial esophageal cancer. However, it has limitations in case of large superficial esophageal squamous cell neoplasms (SESCNs), in which submucosal injection cannot attain satisfactory lifting effects. Thus, endoscopic submucosal tunnel dissection (ESTD) was introduced as a new treatment for SESCNs presenting satisfying results. Many studies have tried to verify the efficacy of ESTD, yet no meta-analysis has been published until now.

METHODS

We searched the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang, and CNKI dating up to February 1, 2019. Studies comparing the clinical outcomes of ESTD and ESD for superficial esophageal cancers were enrolled. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale was used to evaluate the quality of these studies. Eight articles were included that involved a total of 625 superficial esophageal cancer patients.

RESULTS

Our analysis revealed that ESTD is superior to ESD as it has higher en bloc resection rate, shorter operation time, and lower recurrence rate 1 year after operation. The R0 resection rate and postoperative adverse event rate of ESTD group is comparable with ESD group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study implicates that ESTD is a potentially superior treatment to ESD for superficial esophageal cancer.

Endoscopic or Surgical Resection for Gastro-Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Early gastro-esophageal cancer is staged as m1 to m3 depending on the infiltration of the anatomical layers of the mucosa or, analogously, as sm1 to sm3 depending on the depth of infiltration into the submucosa. The risk of lymph node metastases is low in mucosal carcinoma but increases with the depth of infiltration into the submucosa.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in MEDLINE, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry.

RESULTS

New technologies such as narrow-band imaging have improved the endo- scopic diagnosis and staging of early gastro-esophageal cancer. The development of endoscopic submucosal dissection has led to a higher R0 resection rate, a lower risk of recurrence, and an increase in the number of endoscopic resections that are performed with curative intent. In squamous-cell carcinoma of the esophagus, surgical oncological esophagectomy is indicated if the cancer infiltrates into the third mucosal layer (T1a, m3) or deeper. In esophageal adenocarcinoma, the prevalence of lymph node metastases is low if the cancer is restricted to the mucosa and in- creases only when the submucosa is infiltrated. In the current German S3 guideline, endoscopic resection is recommended for intramucosal adenocarcinoma as long as there are no further histopathological risk factors. Lymph node metastasis in gastric carcinoma begins in the deep mucosal infiltration stage (m3). If certain special con- ditions ("extended criteria") are met, carcinoma expanding into the first submucosal layer (sm1) can be removed endoscopically. All further stages must be treated with total or subtotal gastrectomy with systematic D2 lymphadenectomy.

CONCLUSION

Borderline cases between endoscopic and surgical resection of early carcinoma of the esophagus or stomach must be managed with an interdisciplinary treatment algorithm. If there is a risk of lymph node metastasis, surgical oncological resection is indicated. Such resections of gastroesophageal cancer in the locally advanced stage should always be part of a multimodal treatment approach.

Challenges in Endoscopic Therapy of Dysplastic Barrett's Esophagus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is the only known measurable factor associated with esophageal adenocarcinoma. The development of endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) has transformed the way BE is managed. Given the fairly recent development of EET, its role in BE is still evolving.

RECENT FINDINGS

This paper discusses the challenges that endoscopists face at the preprocedural, intraprocedural, and postprocedural stages of BE management. These include challenges in risk stratification, dysplasia detection, ablation methods and dosimetry, choice of resection technique, and management of refractory disease. Despite the advances in EET in BE, there remain challenges that this review focuses on. Future research into these challenges will optimize ablation techniques and strategies in the future.

A model based on endoscopic morphology of submucosal esophageal squamous cell carcinoma for determining risk of metastasis on lymph nodes

BACKGROUND

It is important to identify patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in T1b stage that are the least likely to metastasize on the lymph nodes, to undergo endoscopic resection, especially for the patients unfit for esophagectomy. The relationship between endoscopic morphology and frequency of nodal metastasis has never been well studied. The aims of the study were to investigate the predictive value of endoscopic morphology for lymphatic metastasis, and to develop a risk stratification model in submucosal (T1b) ESCC.

METHODS

Pathologic variables of patients with T1b ESCC who underwent esophagectomy from 2006 through 2016 were collected and divided into training sets (patients between 2006 and 2011) and validation sets (patients between 2012 and 2016). The endoscopic morphology of the tumor was determined by analyzing endoscopic reports according to the Paris classification. The correlation between the clinicopathological factors and nodal metastasis was examined. A prediction model was developed to estimate the risk of metastasis using these predictors.

RESULTS

A total of 175 patients were included in this study. A tumor with an endoscopic shape of flat type (0-II type as Paris classification was defined) was significantly related to lower risk of lymphatic metastasis with the frequency of 15.5% (OR: 3.049, 95% CI: 1.363-6.819, P=0.005). The combination of endoscopic morphology with other pathologic characteristics including lymphovascular invasion, length of tumor, depth of tumor invasion into submucosa, and tumor differentiation improved the predictive value of the nodal metastasis. The risk stratification model was developed with a C-index of 0.726 (95% CI: 0.702-0.751), which identified a low risk subgroup with a lymph node rate of 7.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that when a tumor is in flat shape (0-II type) it is related to a less lymphatic metastasis, and the combination of the endoscopic morphology with the other four pathologic variables can yield a more robust approach to predict the risk of lymphatic metastasis in submucosal ESCC.

Endoscopic Resection in the Esophagus

The article is a review of the principles behind endoscopic resection of esophageal dysplasia and early cancers. The techniques of endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection are reviewed, and the supporting literature compared. Endoscopic resection is compared with esophagectomy for the management of these lesions and current areas of controversy with regard to T1b lesions and gastroesophageal reflux following resection are addressed.

Comparison of endoscopic submucosal dissection and surgery for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been widely accepted for treating superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC). However, long-term outcomes of ESD and esophagectomy for SESCC have not been compared. We compared the clinical outcomes of ESD and esophagectomy in a matched cohort.

METHODS

Patients who underwent ESD and esophagectomy for SESCC were included. We selected SESCCs without obvious submucosal invasion from the surgical database by reviewing endoscopic images. To minimize the effect of selection bias, propensity score matching was performed. Overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and metachronous RFS were compared between the 2 groups. Adverse event rates were also compared.

RESULTS

In a matched cohort of 120 pairs, OS, DSS, and RFS were comparable between the 2 groups. The 5-year OS, DSS, and RFS rates were 93.9% versus 91.2%, 100% versus 97.4%, and 92.8% versus 95.3% for the ESD and esophagectomy groups, respectively. The metachronous RFS was worse in the ESD group than in the esophagectomy group (P = .004). The 5-year metachronous RFS rates were 90.3% versus 100% for the ESD and esophagectomy groups, respectively. The esophagectomy group showed a higher overall adverse event rate than the ESD group (55.5% vs 18.5%, P < .0001). In each subgroup of mucosal and submucosal cancer, OS, DSS, and RFS were also comparable between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

ESD provides long-term outcomes comparable with esophagectomy in patients with SESCC without endoscopic evidence of obvious submucosal invasion. ESD should be considered as the first-line treatment for these patients.

Impact of the development of an endoscopic eradication program for Barrett's esophagus with high grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma on the frequency of surgery

Background and aims  The impact of the advent of an institutional endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) program on surgical practice for Barrett's esophagus (BE)-associated high grade dysplasia (HGD) or suspected T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is unknown. The aims of this study are to evaluate the different endoscopic modalities used during development of our EET program and factors associated with the use of EET or surgery for these patients after its development. Methods  Patients who underwent primary endoscopic or surgical treatment for BE-HGD or early EAC at our hospital between January 1992 and December 2014 were retrospectively identified. They were categorized by their initial modality of treatment during the first year, and the impact over time for choice of therapy was assessed by multivariable logistic regression. Results  We identified 386 patients and 80 patients who underwent EET and surgery, respectively. EET included single modality therapy in 254 (66 %) patients and multimodal therapy in 132 (34 %) patients. Multivariable logistic regression showed that, for each subsequent study year, EET was more likely to be performed in patients who were older ( P  = 0.0009), with shorter BE lengths ( P  < 0.0001), and with a pretreatment diagnosis of HGD ( P  = 0.0054) compared to surgical patients. The diagnosis of EAC did not increase the utilization of EET compared to surgery as time progressed ( P  = 0.8165). Conclusion  The introduction of an EET program at our hospital increased the odds of utilizing EET versus surgery over time for initial treatment of patients who were older, had shorter BE lengths or the diagnosis of BE-HGD, but not in patients with EAC.

Upregulation of insulin-like growth factor II mRNA-binding protein 3 (IMP3) has negative prognostic impact on early invasive (pT1) adenocarcinoma of the esophagus

PURPOSE

Therapeutic decisions in esophageal adenocarcinomas (EAC) restricted to mucosa (pT1a) or submucosa (pT1b) depend mainly on classic histomorphology-based criteria like tumor grading or lymphovascular invasion with limited success. There is a strong need for reliable pre-therapeutical biomarker-based evaluation also applicable on endoscopically obtained biopsies.

METHODS

Patients who underwent esophagectomy due to EAC in a high volume center between 1999 and 2016 were included. Tissue microarrays (TMA) were retrospectively established from the formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded material of the resected specimens and immunohistochemically stained using a monoclonal primary antibody specific for IMP3. IMP3 staining intensity was scored manually according to a 3-tier-scoring system (negative, weak and strong).

RESULTS

371 EACs were interpretable for analysis. 109 patients (29%) had early invasive (pT1a/pT1b) and 262 patients (71%) locally advanced EAC (> pT2). 259 EACs (70%) revealed positive immunostaining for IMP3 including 167 strongly and 92 weakly positive. Early EAC had significantly lower IMP3 expression compared to advanced tumor stages (p < 0.0001). IMP3 positive pT1 EAC revealed higher levels of lymph node metastases (LNM) (p = 0.0001) and pT1b tumors showed higher rates of IMP3 positivity compared to pT1a (p = 0.007). Subdividing the submucosa in thirds, there was a significant trend for higher IMP3 expression with deeper tumor infiltration from pT1a to pT1b (sm3) (p = 0.0001). There was an association between IMP3 expression and shortened survival in pT1 EAC (p = 0.038).

CONCLUSIONS

IMP3 expression correlates with depth of tumor infiltration, rate of LNM and is associated with worse outcome. Thus, IMP3 might be useful for therapeutic decisions in early-invasive EAC.

Early esophageal cancer: the significance of surgery, endoscopy, and chemoradiation

Early carcinomas of the esophagus are histologically classified as adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma and microscopically subdivided into mucosal and submucosal carcinomas depending on infiltration depth. The prevalence of lymph node metastasis in mucosal carcinoma remains low. However, lymph node metastases arise frequently from tumors with submucosal infiltration, with increasing prevalence in the deeper submucosal sublayers. According to current German guidelines, endoscopic resection is the recommended treatment in mucosal adenocarcinoma without histologic risk factors (lymphatic invasion 1, vascular invasion 1, >grade 2, R1-margin). In superficial submucosal infiltration without histologic risk factors, endoscopic resection can be considered. In squamous cell carcinoma, endoscopic resection is indicated up to middle layer mucosal carcinoma. Beyond these criteria, surgical resection should be considered. The gold standard is a subtotal transthoracic esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy. Total esophagectomy is performed in cervical esophageal carcinoma and transhiatal extended gastrectomy in carcinoma of the cardia. Minimally invasive procedures show good oncologic results and reduce the morbidity of radical esophagectomy. Reduced morbidity might be an argument for surgical resection in borderline cases between endoscopic and surgical resection. In early squamous cell cancer, the combination of endoscopic resection and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is a therapeutic option with promising results.

Management of Early-Stage Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus: Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection

Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia and early-stage adenocarcinoma is amenable to curative treatment by endoscopic resection. Histopathological correlation has established that mucosal cancer has minimal risk of nodal metastases and that long-term complete remission can be achieved. Although surgery is the gold-standard treatment once there is submucosal involvement, even T1sm1 (submucosal invasion ≤ 500 μm) cases without additional risk factors for nodal metastases might also be cured with endoscopic resection. Endoscopic resection is foremost an initial diagnostic procedure, and once histopathological assessment confirms that curative criteria are met, it will be considered curative. Endoscopic resection may be achieved by endoscopic mucosal resection, which, although easy to perform with relatively low risk, is limited by an inability to achieve en bloc resection for lesions of size more than 1.5 cm. Conversely, the technique of endoscopic submucosal dissection is more technically demanding with higher risk of complications but is able to achieve en bloc resection for lesions larger than 1.5 cm. Endoscopic submucosal dissection would be particularly important in specific situations such as suspected submucosal invasion and lesion size more than 1.5 cm. In other situations, since endoscopic resection would always be combined with radiofrequency ablation to ablate the remaining Barrett's epithelium, piecemeal endoscopic mucosal resection would suffice since any remnant superficial invisible dysplasia would be ablated.

Endoscopic Treatment of Early-Stage Esophageal Cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Esophageal cancer is a leading cause of global cancer-related mortality. Here, we discuss the major endoscopic treatment modalities for management of early esophageal cancer (EEC).

RECENT FINDINGS

Advances in endoscopic imaging and therapy have shifted the paradigm of managing early esophageal cancers. Though esophagectomy remains the preferred management for advanced cancers, guidelines now recommend endoscopic resection followed by ablative therapy for early (Tis and T1a) cancers. Available data suggests endoscopic treatment is comparable to surgery with regard to overall and cancer-specific survival with lower procedural morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic modalities are emerging as frontline treatment options for patients with early esophageal cancers. Accurate clinical staging with assessment of disease extent, tumor grade, and risk of nodal metastases is crucial when determining eligibility for endoscopic management of EEC. High-quality routine surveillance endoscopy is critical in patients who have undergone resection and/or ablation.

Nomogram to predict lymph node metastasis in patients with early oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Lymph node status is crucial in determining the prognosis for early oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). This study aimed to develop and validate a nomogram for the prediction of lymph node metastasis in patients with early SCC.

Methods

A prediction model was developed in a derivation cohort of patients with clinicopathologically confirmed early SCC. Patients who underwent oesophagectomy for pT1 SCC between January 2010 and December 2013 were identified from an institutional database. Risk factors for lymph node metastasis were assessed using a binary logistic regression modelling technique. A nomogram for the prediction of lymph node metastasis was constructed using the results of multivariable analyses. For internal validation, bootstraps with 1000 resamples were performed. The predictive performance of the nomogram was measured by Harrell's concordance index (C-index). An independent cohort from the same hospital was used to validate the nomogram. This cohort included consecutive patients with early SCC who underwent oesophagectomy from January 2014 to December 2015.

Results

The derivation cohort included 281 patients. Four variables associated with lymph node metastasis were included in the model: depth of tumour invasion (odds ratio (OR) 4·37, 95 per cent c.i. 1·59 to 12·03; P = 0·004), grade of differentiation (OR 4·47, 1·02 to 19·70; P = 0·048), tumour size (OR 2·52, 1·11 to 5·75; P = 0·028) and lymphovascular invasion (OR 6·58, 2·54 to 17·05; P &lt; 0·001). The C-index was 0·790 (95 per cent c.i. 0·717 to 0·864) in the derivation cohort and 0·789 (0·709 to 0·869) for the validation cohort (198 patients).

Conclusion

A validated nomogram for patients with early oesophageal SCC can predict the risk of lymph node metastasis.

Survival Implications of Increased Utilization of Local Excision for cT1N0 Esophageal Cancer

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that patients with cT1N0 esophageal cancer undergoing local excision would have lower survival compared with esophagectomy due to potential discordant staging.

BACKGROUND

Local excision has become an attractive alternative for management of early esophageal cancer, avoiding the morbidity of esophagectomy. It is uncertain if occult nodal metastasis impacts survival.

METHODS

An observational study was conducted using the National Cancer Database (1998-2012) for patients with clinical T1N0 esophageal cancer who underwent local excision (n = 1625) or esophagectomy (n = 3255).

RESULTS

The proportion of patients undergoing local excision increased from 12% in 1998 to 50% in 2012 (P < 0.001). After esophagectomy, 61% of cT1N0 cancers had concordant clinical and pathological staging, with 5.2% having positive nodal disease; 37% were staged concordant after local excision, with excess missing data (60%). Ninety-day mortality was 7.4% after esophagectomy compared with 2.8% after local excision (P < 0.001). While no significant difference was seen in unadjusted survival, adjusted Cox regression analysis indicated worse survival after esophagectomy compared with local excision for all cases [hazard ratio (HR) 1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-1.95] and for patients with concordant staging (HR 1.68, 95% CI 1.23-2.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Local excision for cT1N0 esophageal cancer has increased over time. Contrary to our hypothesis, despite incomplete nodal staging, patients undergoing local excision have favorable survival, particularly in the adenocarcinoma subgroup. This may reflect early differences in mortality due to differences in procedure-related complications and/or selection bias. As this study has limited power to compare outcomes between T1a and T1b cancers, further analysis is warranted.

Upper gastrointestinal malignancies in 2017: current perspectives and future approaches

The advent of immune checkpoint inhibitors (PD-1, PD-L1 and CTLA-4) has resulted in unprecedented long-term remissions of unresectable cancers. The efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors was recently demonstrated in gastrointestinal malignancies with mismatch repair deficiencies (dMMR). Pembrolizumab became the first tissue-agnostic US FDA-approved drug based on the presence of the predictive biomarker dMMR. In addition, the FDA in 2017 approved pembrolizumab for PD-L1-positive advanced gastric cancer in third-line and second-line hepatocellular therapy. Novel treatment strategies such as using anti-carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) bispecific T cells have led to remarkable responses in microsatellite instability-low colorectal cancer. Other major breakthroughs in treating upper gastrointestinal malignancies in 2017 are discussed.

Diagnosis and treatment of superficial esophageal cancer

Endoscopy allows for the screening, early diagnosis, treatment and follow up of superficial esophageal cancer. Endoscopic submucosal dissection has become the gold standard for the resection of superficial squamous cell neoplasia. Combinations of endoscopic mucosal resection and radiofrequency ablation are the mainstay of the management of Barrett’s associated neoplasia. However, protruded, non-lifting or large lesions may be better managed by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Novel ablation tools, such as argon plasma coagulation with submucosal lifting and cryoablation balloons, are being developed for the treatment of residual Barrett’s esophagus, since iatrogenic strictures still hamper the development of extensive circumferential resections in the esophagus. Optimal surveillance modalities after endoscopic resection are still to be determined. The assessment of the risk of lymph-node metastases, as well as of the need for additional treatments based on qualitative and quantitative histological criteria, balanced to the patient’s condition, requires a dedicated multidisciplinary team decision process. The need for trained endoscopists, expert pathologists and surgeons, and specialized multidisciplinary meetings underlines the role of expert centers in the management of superficial esophageal cancer.

Outcomes after endoscopic mucosal resection or esophagectomy for submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is a diagnostic and potentially therapeutic option for patients with submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma. However, there are significant concerns regarding the risk of lymph node metastasis. Our purpose was to construct a comparative effectiveness analysis comparing recurrence patterns after therapeutic EMR or esophagectomy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent therapeutic EMR or esophagectomy from 2007 to 2015 with pathologically staged submucosal adenocarcinoma were identified from a departmental database. Cancer-related outcomes were compared among an unmatched as well as a propensity matched cohort. Risk stratification was also used to compare results among those with a low, medium, or high risk of nodal metastasis.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients met criteria for analysis, among whom 23 underwent therapeutic EMR with esophageal preservation and 49 underwent esophagectomy. Median follow-up was 43 months. Patients who underwent esophagectomy had larger, deeper tumors. Esophageal preservation was associated with an increased risk of local recurrence (P = .01), but not distant recurrence (P = .44). After propensity matching, there continued to be no difference in distant recurrence rate (P = .66). In a risk-stratified analysis, low-risk patients showed no recurrences or cancer-related deaths, however, high-risk patients showed a trend toward increased distant recurrence after therapeutic EMR.

CONCLUSIONS

Esophageal preservation after therapeutic EMR was associated with an increased risk of local recurrence. Among low-risk patients, either strategy resulted in excellent cancer control. However, among high-risk patients, esophageal preservation showed a trend toward increased distant failure. These findings should prompt further investigation to determine optimal treatment for patients with submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Does delayed esophagectomy after endoscopic resection affect outcomes in patients with stage T1 esophageal cancer? A propensity score-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Although endoscopic resection (ER) may be sufficient treatment for early-stage esophageal cancer, additional treatment is recommended when there is a high risk of cancer recurrence. It is unclear whether delaying esophagectomy by performing and assessing the success of ER affects outcomes as compared with immediate esophagectomy without ER. Additionally, long-term survival after sequential ER and esophagectomy required further investigation.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2015, 48 patients with stage T1 esophageal cancer underwent esophagectomy after ER with curative intent at our institution. Two-to-one propensity score methods were used to identify 96 matched-control patients who were treated with esophagectomy only using baseline patient, tumor characteristics and surgical approach. Time from initial evaluation to esophagectomy, relapse-free survival, overall survival, and postoperative complications were compared between the propensity-matched groups.

RESULTS

In the ER + esophagectomy group, the time from initial evaluation to esophagectomy was significantly longer than in the esophagectomy only group (114 vs. 8 days, p < 0.001). The incidence of dense adhesion (p = 0.347), operative time (p = 0.867), postoperative surgical complications (p = 0.966), and postoperative length of hospital stay (p = 0.125) were not significantly different between the groups. Moreover, recurrence-free survival and overall survival were also similar between the two groups (p = 0.411 and p = 0.817, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of stage T1 esophageal cancer with ER prior to esophagectomy did not increase the difficulty of performing esophagectomy or the incidence of postoperative complications and did not affect survival after esophagectomy. These results suggest that ER can be recommended for patients with stage T1 cancer even if esophagectomy is warranted eventually.

[New S3 guideline for esophageal cancer : Important surgical aspects]

The current German S3 guideline represents the recommendations for the diagnosis and therapy of squamous cell carcinomas and adenocarcinomas of the esophagus based on evidence from the literature and interdisciplinary expert consensus. Esophagogastroscopy with biopsy, endosonography, and spiral CT scan of the neck, thorax, and abdomen are decisive in staging and the choice of therapy. For a curative approach, surgery, especially transthoracic esophagectomy and gastric pull-up, is the most important therapeutic option, except in the case of mucosal carcinomas or cervical squamous cell carcinomas. The significance of total minimally invasive esophageal resection or a hybrid technique is still uncertain. In category cT3 or resectable cT4 tumors, neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy should be performed in squamous cell carcinomas or adenocarcinomas. Alternatively, perioperative chemotherapy can be carried out in adenocarcinoma. Palliative resections should be avoided and replaced by interventional procedures for palliation.

Surgical Treatment of High-Grade Dysplasia and Early Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

The treatment of early-stage esophageal cancer and high-grade dysplasia of the esophagus has changed significantly in recent years. Many early tumors that were traditionally treated with esophagectomy can now be resected with endoscopic therapy alone. These new endoscopic modalities can offer similar survival outcomes without the associated morbidity of a major operation. However, a number of these cases may still require surgical intervention as the best treatment option.

METHODS

The current scientific literature, national and international guidelines were reviewed for recommendations regarding optimal treatment of early esophageal malignancy.

RESULTS

The primary advantage of surgery over endoscopic treatment lies in the reduced risk of recurrence as well as the ability to assess harvested lymph nodes for regional disease. We recommend that esophageal tumors that have invaded into the submucosa (T1b) or beyond should be treated with an esophagectomy. In addition, dysplastic lesions and cancers that demonstrate poorly differentiated pathology or lymphovascular or perineural invasion should be surgically resected. Finally, large tumors, multifocal lesions, tumors within a long segment of Barrett's esophagus, tumors adjacent to a hiatal hernia, tumors that cannot be resected enbloc with endoscopic techniques should also be treated with an esophagectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

When performed at high-volume centers in experienced hands, esophagectomy can have consistently good outcomes for high-grade dysplasia and early esophageal cancers, and should be considered as a treatment option.

Treatment disparities affect outcomes for patients with stage I esophageal cancer: a national cancer data base analysis

Background

To examine patterns of care and outcomes for patients with stage I esophageal cancer (EC) in the United States.

Methods

We identified patients in the National Cancer Data Base diagnosed with stage I EC from 2004 to 2012 and grouped them by primary treatment: esophagectomy (Eso), local excision (LE), concurrent chemoradiation (CRT), or observation (Obs). Multinomial logistic regression was used to predict receipt of treatments. Overall survival (OS) was estimated by Kaplan-Meier methods adjusted for inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and Cox proportional hazard regressions.

Results

Of 5,480 patients, 2,312 (42%) underwent Eso, 1,250 (23%) LE, 758 (14%) CRT, and 1,160 (21%) Obs. LE use increased over time from 17% to 29% while Obs declined from 26% to 19%. Patients least likely to undergo surgery were older, had greater comorbidity, were uninsured, were treated at non-academic centers, and were Black. The rate of surgery for Black patients was half of that for White patients (33% vs. 67%). Postoperative mortality rates were higher after Eso vs. LE at 30 days (2.9% vs. 0.5%; P<0.001) and at 90 days (5.5% vs. 1.4%, P<0.001). Five-year OS was 59% with Eso, 63% LE, 29% CRT, and 31% Obs (P<0.001). On multivariate analysis, outcomes were best after LE [vs. Eso: hazard ratio (HR) =1.15, 95% CI: 1.01-1.30, P=0.037; CRT: HR =2.41, 95% CI: 2.09-2.78, P<0.001; Obs: HR =3.79, 95% CI: 3.33-4.32, P<0.001).

Conclusions

Disparities are evident in the care of patients with stage I EC throughout the United States. LE was associated with favorable outcomes compared to Eso, CRT, and Obs.

Esophagectomy versus endoscopic resection for patients with early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma: A National Cancer Database propensity-matched study

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic resection has been rapidly adopted in the treatment of early-stage esophageal tumors. We compared the outcomes after esophagectomy or endoscopic resection for stage T1a adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database for patients with T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent esophagectomy or endoscopic resection and generated a balanced cohort with 735 matched pairs using propensity-score matching. We then performed a multivariable Cox regression analysis on the matched and unmatched cohorts.

RESULTS

We identified 2173 patients; 1317 (60.6%) underwent esophagectomy, and 856 (39.4%) underwent endoscopic resection. In the unmatched cohort, patients who underwent esophagectomy were younger, more often not treated in academic settings, and more likely to have comorbidities (30.4% vs 22.5%, P = .002). They had longer hospital stays and more readmissions than patients who underwent endoscopic resection. Factors positively affecting overall survival were younger age, resection at an academic medical center, and lower Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score. In the matched cohort, patients who underwent esophagectomy had longer hospital stays and were more likely to be readmitted within 30 days (7.0% vs 0.6%, P < .001). When a time period-specific partition was applied, endoscopic resection had a lower death hazard 0 to 90 days after resection (hazard ratio, 0.15; P = .003), but this was reversed for survival greater than 90 days (hazard ratio, 1.34; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, survival appears equivalent after endoscopic resection or esophagectomy, but endoscopic resection is associated with shorter hospital stays, fewer readmissions, and less 90-day mortality. In patients surviving more than 90 days, esophagectomy may provide better overall survival.

Endoscopic Treatment Versus Esophagectomy for Early-Stage Esophageal Cancer: a Population-Based Study Using Propensity Score Matching

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic treatment (ET) is an alternative for selected patients with early-stage esophageal cancer. The primary aim of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) and esophageal cancer-specific survival (ECSS) of such patients after ET or esophagectomy.

METHODS

Propensity score matching (PSM) and Cox regression analysis were used to compare OS and ECSS of 2661 patients with ET or esophagectomy for early-stage (Tis-T1N0M0) disease. Patient information was retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Subgroup analyses by T stage and tumor histology were also performed.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in age, sex ratio, year of diagnosis, cancer site, cancer stage, differentiation grade, tumor histology, tumor size, lymph nodes examined, and receipt of radiation therapy in the two treatment groups. PSM created 621 patient pairs. Multivariate analysis found no significant differences in OS (HR = 1.216, P = 0.279) or ECSS (HR = 0.692, P = 0.179) in the esophagectomy and ET groups. The results were similar for subgroup analyses limited to stage Tis, T1a, and T1b patients. ET was also associated with similar OS and ECSS in esophageal adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma patients.

CONCLUSION

In this population-based study using PSM, patients with stage Tis and T1N0M0 esophageal cancer with ET had OS and ECSS comparable to those treated by esophagectomy after adjusting for clinical variables. The results support ET as an alternative to esophagectomy in early esophageal cancer.

Pilot-study on the feasibility of sentinel node navigation surgery in combination with thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without esophagectomy in early esophageal adenocarcinoma patients

High-risk submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma's might be treated curatively by means of radical endoscopic resection, followed by thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without concomitant esophagectomy. A preclinical study has shown the feasibility and safety of this approach; however, no studies are performed in a clinical setting. In addition, sentinel node navigation surgery could be valuable in tailoring the extent of the lymphadenectomy. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy without esophagectomy (phase I) and sentinel node navigation surgery (phase II) in patients with early esophageal adenocarcinoma. Patients with T1N0M0 early esophageal adenocarcinoma scheduled for esophagectomy without neoadjuvant therapy were included. Phase I: Two-field, esophagus preserving, thoracolaparoscopic lymphadenectomy was performed, followed by esophagectomy in the same session. Primary outcome parameters were the number of lymph nodes resected, and number of retained lymph nodes in the esophagectomy specimen. Phase II: A radioactive tracer was injected endoscopically the day before surgery. Static imaging was performed 15 and 120 minutes after injection. The day of surgery, sentinel node navigation surgery followed by esophagectomy was performed. Primary outcome parameters were the percentage of patients with a detectable sentinel node, and the concordance between static imaging and probe-based detection of sentinel node. Phase I: Five patients were included, and a median of 30 (IQR: 25-46) lymph nodes was resected. A median of 6 (IQR: 2-9) retained lymph nodes was found in the esophagectomy specimen. No acute adverse events occurred, but near the end of lymphadenectomy esophageal discoloration was observed, possibly indicating ischemia. Phase II: In all five included patients sentinel nodes could be visualized and resected, at a median of 3 (IQR: 2-5) locations. There was a high concordance between imaging and probe-based detection of sentinel nodes. In conclusion, sentinel node navigation surgery followed by lymphadenectomy without concomitant esophagectomy seems feasible in patients with high-risk submucosal early esophageal adenocarcinoma. More evidence is however needed before applying this technique in clinical practice.

Safety and efficacy of endoscopic spray cryotherapy for esophageal cancer

Although surgery is traditionally the standard of care for esophageal cancer, esophagectomy carries significant morbidity. Alternative endoscopic therapies are needed for patients who are not candidates for conventional treatment. The objective of this study is to assess the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of spray cryotherapy of esophageal adenocarcinoma. This study includes patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma who had failed or were not candidates for conventional therapy enrolled retrospectively and prospectively in an open-label registry and patients in a retrospective cohort from 11 academic and community practices. Endoscopic spray cryotherapy was performed until biopsy proven local tumor eradication or until treatment was halted due to progression of disease, patient withdrawal or comorbidities. Eighty-eight patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (median age 76, 80.7% male, mean length 5.1 cm) underwent 359 treatments (mean 4.4 per patient). Tumor stages included 39 with T1a, 25 with T1b, 9 with unspecified T1, and 15 with T2. Eighty-six patients completed treatment with complete response of intraluminal disease in 55.8%, including complete response in 76.3% for T1a, 45.8% for T1b, 66.2% for all T1, and 6.7% for T2. Mean follow-up was 18.4 months. There were no deaths or perforations related to spray cryotherapy. Strictures developed in 12 of 88 patients (13.6%) but were present before spray cryotherapy in 3 of 12. This study suggests that endoscopic spray cryotherapy is a safe, well-tolerated, and effective treatment option for early esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Outcome with Primary En-bloc Esophagectomy for Submucosal Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Intramucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma can be reliably treated endoscopically. Controversy exists about the use of endotherapy versus esophagectomy for submucosal tumors. Increasingly endotherapy is considered for submucosal tumors in part because of the presumed high mortality with esophagectomy and the perceived poor prognosis in patients with nodal disease. This study was designed to assess survival following primary en bloc esophagectomy (EBE) in patients with submucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC).

METHODS

This is a retrospective review of all patients who underwent EBE for submucosal EAC between 1998 and 2015. No patient had neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

There were 32 patients (28M/4F; median age 64 years). The median tumor size was 1.5 cm (0.4-8.0), and the median number of resected nodes was 48 (23-85). There was one perioperative death. Lymph node metastases were present in 7 patients (22%). There was one involved node in four patients and 2, 3, and 31 nodes in one patient each. The one N3 patient received adjuvant therapy. The median follow-up was 87 months. Overall survival at 5 and 10 years was 84 and 70% respectively. Disease-specific survival at 10 years was 90%. Eight patients died, but only three deaths (9%) were related to EAC. Disease-specific survival at 10 years in node-positive patients was 71%.

CONCLUSIONS

Survival after primary en bloc esophagectomy for submucosal adenocarcinoma was excellent even in node-positive patients. Mortality with esophagectomy was low and far less than the 22% risk of node metastases in patients with submucosal tumor invasion. Esophagectomy should remain the preferred treatment for T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Tumor location is a risk factor for lymph node metastasis in superficial Barrett's adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Endoscopic treatment is indicated for superficial Barrett's adenocarcinoma (BA) with a negligible risk of lymph node metastasis (LNM). However, risk factors associated with LNM in superficial BA are still not well characterized. The aim of the current study was to clarify risk factors for LNM of superficial BA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted in 87 consecutive patients with BA that was resected at National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan between 1990 and 2013. We assessed tumor size, macroscopic type, histological type, tumor depth of invasion, lymphovascular invasion and tumor location to analyze factors associated with LNM. Tumor location was classified into following 2 groups according to Siewert classification: 1) BA of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ-BA) as those having their center within 1 cm proximal from the EGJ; and 2) Esophageal-BA as those having their center at 1 cm or more proximal to the EGJ. EGJ was defined as distal end of the palisade vessels.

RESULTS

 LNM was detected in 10 (11 %) patients. Univariable analysis revealed that tumor size, tumor depth of invasion, histological type of mixed differentiated and undifferentiated-type adenocarcinoma, lymphovascular invasion and tumor location of esophageal-BA were significantly associated with LNM. Multivariable analysis revealed that tumor location of esophageal-BA [odds ratio 7.8 (95 %CI: 1.3 - 48.1)] was a potential risk factor for LNM.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study demonstrated that tumor location is a potential risk factor for LNM in BA. Therefore, indications for endoscopic treatment of esophageal-BA and EGJ-BA could be different.

Role of EUS in patients with suspected Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia or early esophageal adenocarcinoma: impact on endoscopic therapy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic therapy is the standard treatment for high-grade dysplasia and some cases of T1a esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), but it is not appropriate for deeply invasive disease. Data on the value of EUS for patient selection for endoscopic or surgical resection are conflicting. We investigated the outcome of esophageal EUS for the staging and treatment selection of patients with treatment-naive, premalignant Barrett's esophagus (BE) and suspected superficial EAC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients who underwent EUS for staging of treatment-naive, suspected premalignant BE and superficial EAC from January 2006 to June 2014. All patients referred for endoscopic therapy routinely underwent EUS. Patients with esophageal masses, squamous cell cancers, previous neoadjuvant therapy, or unrelated pathologies were excluded. Each patient's final diagnosis was verified by EMR, esophagectomy, or forceps biopsy sampling. Test characteristics of EUS were calculated.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-five patients (mean age, 68 years; 86% male) with BE, a Prague C mean of 2.8 cm, and a Prague M mean of 4.5 cm were staged (pT0, 78% [6% nondysplastic, 24% low-grade dysplasia, 42% high-grade dysplasia]; pT1a, 14%; pT1b, 7%; and pT2, 1%). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy for patient selection to endoscopic (T1aN0 or less) or surgical therapy with EUS TN staging were 50%, 93%, 40%, 95%, and 90%, respectively. Comparable rates were achieved for patients with nodular BE. Overstaging occurred in 7% of patients, and EUS selected 11% for incorrect treatment modalities compared with pathologic staging.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the limited value of EUS suggested in the latest American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for BE management.

Using the National Cancer Database to create a scoring system that identifies patients with early-stage esophageal cancer at risk for nodal metastases

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic resection is gaining popularity as a treatment for early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma, particularly for T1a tumors. The goal of this study was to create a scoring system to reflect the risk of nodal metastases in early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma to be used after endoscopic resection to better individualize treatment.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with T1a or T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma who underwent esophagectomy. We identified variables affecting nodal metastases using multivariable logistic regression, which we then used to create a scoring system. We stratified the model for T1a or T1b tumors, tested model discrimination, and validated the models by refitting in 1000 bootstrap samples. C-statistics greater than 0.7 were considered relevant.

RESULTS

We identified 1283 patients with T1a or T1b tumors; 146 had nodal metastases (11.4%). Tumor category (pT1a vs pT1b), grade, and size and the presence of angiolymphatic invasion significantly affected the risk of nodal metastases. We assigned points to each variable and added them to get a risk score. In patients with T1a tumors, less than 3% of patients with a risk score of 3 or less had nodal metastases, whereas 16.1% of patients with a risk score of 5 or greater had nodal metastases. In patients with T1b tumors, less than 5% of patients with a risk score of 2 or less had nodal metastases, whereas 41% of patients with a score of 6 or greater had nodal metastases (c-statistic = 0.805).

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed scoring system seems to be useful in discriminating risk of nodal metastases in patients with T1a or T1b esophageal adenocarcinoma and may be useful in directing patients who received endoscopic resection to esophagectomy or careful follow-up.

Esophagectomy for Superficial Esophageal Neoplasia

Endoscopic therapies have become the standard of care for most cases of Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal adenocarcinoma. Despite a rapid and dramatic evolution in treatment paradigms, esophagectomy continues to occupy a place in the therapeutic armamentarium for superficial esophageal neoplasia. The managing physician must remain cognizant of the limitations of endoscopic approaches and consider surgical resection when they are exceeded. Esophagectomy, performed at experienced centers for appropriately selected patients with early-stage disease can be undertaken with the expectation of cure as well as low mortality, acceptable morbidity, and good long-term quality of life.

Endoscopic ultrasound in oncology: An update of clinical applications in the gastrointestinal tract

An accurate staging is necessary to select the best treatment and evaluate prognosis in oncology. Staging usually begins with noninvasive imaging such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging or positron emission tomography. In the absence of distant metastases, endoscopic ultrasound plays an important role in the diagnosis and staging of gastrointestinal tumors, being the most accurate modality for local-regional staging. Its use for tumor and nodal involvement in pre-surgical evaluation has proven to reduce unnecessary surgeries. The aim of this article is to review the current role of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis and staging of esophageal, gastric and colorectal cancer.

Evolution in the Treatment of Esophageal Disease at a Single Academic Institution: 2004-2013

INTRODUCTION

Management of benign and malignant esophageal disease has changed rapidly over the past decade. The aim of this study was to analyze evolution in surgical management of esophageal disease at a single academic medical center during this period.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We reviewed a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent esophagectomy between 2004 and 2013. Patient, institutional, treatment, and outcomes variables were reviewed.

RESULTS

317 patients were analyzed. Median age was 63.5 years; 80% were male. Average inhospital mortality rate was 3.8%. Operative indications changed significantly from 2004 to 2013, with more operations performed for invasive malignancy (77% vs. 95%) and fewer for high-grade dysplasia (12% vs. 3%, P = .008). In 2004, Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was the most common surgical technique, but the three-field technique was the operation of choice in 2013. A minimally invasive approach was used in 19% of cases in 2004 and 100% of cases in 2013 (P < .001). Anastomotic leak ranged from 0% to 21% with no significant difference over the study period (P = .18). Median lymph node harvest increased from seven to 18 nodes from 2004 to 2013 (P = .001). Hospital length of stay decreased from 15 to 8 days (P = .001). In 2013, 79% of patients were discharged to home, compared to 73% in 2004 (P = .04).

DISCUSSION

Over the last decade, our treatment of esophageal disease has evolved from a predominantly open Ivor Lewis to a minimally invasive three-field approach. Operations for malignancy have also increased dramatically. Postoperative complications and mortality were not significantly changed, but were consistently low during the latter years of the study.

Screening and Preventive Strategies in Esophagogastric Cancer

Gastric adenocarcinoma, esophageal adenocarcinoma, and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma are among the most prevalent and deadly of malignancies worldwide. Screening and prevention programs will be critical to finally improving outcomes in these diseases. For gastric adenocarcinoma, screening in high-risk populations has significantly reduced mortality. More research is needed on screening high-risk individuals in low-risk populations. For esophageal adenocarcinoma, work is needed to develop efficient and effective techniques in mass screening programs. For most Western populations, current screening is not cost effective. Avoiding environmental risk factors is critical to reducing the incidence of this deadly illness.

Endoscopic mucosal resection versus esophagectomy for intramucosal adenocarcinoma in the setting of barrett's esophagus

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy has been the standard of care for patients with intramucosal adenocarcinoma (IMC) in the setting of Barrett's esophagus. It is, however, associated with significant post-operative morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) offers a minimally invasive approach with lesser morbidity. This study investigates the transition from esophagectomy to EMR for IMC with respect to eradication rates, post-operative morbidity, and long-term survival.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with IMC from 2005 to 2013 were identified retrospectively. Beginning in 2009, preferred initial therapy for IMC transitioned from esophagectomy to EMR. Esophagectomy was performed either through a transthoracic or transhiatal technique. EMR was repeated until resolution of IMC on pathology or progression of disease. Continuous data are expressed as mean (SD) and analyzed using Student's t test. Categorical data are presented as number (%) and analyzed using Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

We identified 23 patients; 12 patients underwent esophagectomy and 11 patients underwent EMR as initial therapy. Patients were similar with respects to age, gender, and comorbidity index. Most tumors arose from short segment (vs long segment) Barrett's (esophagectomy: 9 (75%) vs. EMR: 10 (91%), p = 0.59) and one patient in each group had superficial invasion into the submucosa (T1sm1), the remainder having mucosal disease. Esophagectomy was associated with 7 (58%) minor complications and 2 (17%) major complications (respiratory failure, anastomotic leak), whereas there were no complications related to EMR (p < 0.01). EMR successfully eradicated IMC in 10 patients (91%) with one progressing to esophagectomy. Patients required 2 (1) endoscopies to achieve eradication. There was one mortality in each group on long-term follow-up (log-rank test, p = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

EMR was successful in eradicating IMC in 10/11 patients with similar long-term recurrence and mortality to esophagectomy patients. Patients with IMC may benefit from EMR as initial therapy by obviating the need for a complex and morbid operation.

Probe confocal laser endomicroscopy in the therapeutic endoscopic management of Barrett's dysplasia

Background

Endoscopic management of Barrett’s esophagus (BE) depends on the histological stage of BE and includes the following: follow up, endotherapy with thermal ablation, and piecemeal or monobloc endoscopic resection (ER). We know that biopsies are unreliable in 20-75% of cases. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficiency of probe confocal laser endomicroscopy (pCLE) in the diagnosis of the histological stage of BE, compared with the final histological results after ER.

Methods

This retrospective study was based on a prospective registry of patients referred for management of BE-associated dysplasia. The inclusion criteria were dysplasia associated with BE on pre-resection biopsy and endoscopic resection of the examined areas. CLE examinations (pCLEs) were performed using the Gastroflex^® probe (Maunakea company). ER was sufficient to ensure that the target area was resected. The following four potential diagnoses were considered: normal or inflammatory mucosa, metaplasia (BE), low-grade dysplasia (LGD), and high-grade dysplasia/esophageal adenocarcinoma (HGD/EAC).

Results

The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in the detection of HGD/EAC were 92.9%, 71.4% and 80% for pCLE, and 78.6%, 61.9%, and 68.6% for histological biopsy, respectively. The differences in favor of pCLE were not statistically significant (P=0.2); however, in 13 patients with irregularities of the mucosa without elevated or depressed lesions (2 HGD/EAC and 11 non-HGD/EAC), pCLE led to positive redirection of therapy in 70% (9/13) of cases.

Conclusion

In the absence of visible lesions, pCLE appears to lead to correct diagnoses and to aid real-time decisions regarding therapeutic management.

Is endoscopic ultrasound examination necessary in the management of esophageal cancer?

Despite substantial efforts at early diagnosis, accurate staging and advanced treatments, esophageal cancer (EC) continues to be an ominous disease worldwide. Risk factors for esophageal carcinomas include obesity, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hard-alcohol use and tobacco smoking. Five-year survival rates have improved from 5% to 20% since the 1970s, the result of advances in diagnostic staging and treatment. As the most sensitive test for locoregional staging of EC, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) influences the development of an optimal oncologic treatment plan for a significant minority of patients with early cancers, which appropriately balances the risks and benefits of surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. EUS is costly, and may not be available at all centers. Thus, the yield of EUS needs to be thoughtfully considered for each patient. Localized intramucosal cancers occasionally require endoscopic resection (ER) for histologic staging or treatment; EUS evaluation may detect suspicious lymph nodes prior to exposing the patient to the risks of ER. Although positron emission tomography (PET) has been increasingly utilized in staging EC, it may be unnecessary for clinical staging of early, localized EC and carries the risk of false-positive metastasis (over staging). In EC patients with evidence of advanced disease, EUS or PET may be used to define the radiotherapy field. Multimodality staging with EUS, cross-sectional imaging and histopathologic analysis of ER, remains the standard-of-care in the evaluation of early esophageal cancers. Herein, published data regarding use of EUS for intramucosal, local, regional and metastatic esophageal cancers are reviewed. An algorithm to illustrate the current use of EUS at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center is presented.

SURGERY VERSUS ENDOSCOPIC THERAPIES FOR EARLY CANCER AND HIGH-GRADE DYSPLASIA IN THE ESOPHAGUS: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer occurs as a local disease in 22% of cases, and a minority of this disease is limited to the mucosa or submucosa (early lesions). Endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, photodynamic therapy, laser therapy, and argon plasma coagulation have emerged as alternatives to surgical resection for early lesions.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review is to identify studies that statistically compare survival, disease-free survival, morbidity and mortality associated with the procedure, and mortality associated with cancer in the endoscopic versus surgical therapies.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review using MEDLINE, COCHRANE, EMBASE, EBSCO, LILACS, Library University of Sao Paulo, BVS, and SCOPE.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trial, controlled clinical trial, clinical trial, and cohort study.

CRITERIA

- Studies that statistically compare survival, disease-free survival, morbidity and mortality associated with the procedure, and mortality associated with cancer in patients who underwent endoscopic and surgical therapy for early lesions of esophageal cancer.

DATA EXTRACTION

Independent extraction of the articles by two authors using predefined data fields, including study quality indicators.

LIMITATION

Only retrosprospective cohort studies comparing the endoscopic and surgical therapies were recovered.

RESULTS

The survival rates after 3 and 5 years were different and exhibited superiority with the surgical therapies over time. Endoscopy is superior in the control of mortality related to cancer with a high rate of disease recurrence. With regard to the comorbidity and the mortality associated with the procedure, endoscopy is superior.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence from clinical trials. In this systematic review, surgical therapies showed superiority for survival, and endoscopic therapies showed superiority in the control of mortality related to cancer with a high rate of disease recurrence; also, for the comorbidity and the mortality associated with the procedure, endoscopy is superior. Prospective, controlled trials with large sample sizes are necessary to confirm the results of the current analysis.

[Barrett's esophagus and carcinoma: Recommendations of the S2k guideline 2014 and the S3 guideline 2015]

In the current S2k guideline for gastroesophageal reflux disease and the new S3 guideline for esophageal cancer, histopathological evaluation of Barrett's esophagus has been revised and supplemented. The histological diagnosis of Barrett's esophagus still requires the proof of a specialized intestinal metaplastic epithelium (columnar epithelium with goblet cells). Barrett mucosa must be classified as negative, unclear/doubtful, and positive concerning the intraepithelial neoplasia (IEN)/dysplasia according to the current WHO guideline. Each IEN should be confirmed by an external second opinion due to poor interobserver variability. The pathological classification is of decisive importance here, since the recommended monitoring intervals are based solely on the ground of proved IEN. Risk factors in endoscopic resection specimens such as depth of infiltration (m1-m4; sm1-sm3; distance in µm); angioinvasion (L, V); grading and lateral/basal resection margin have to be reported. In surgical specimens, the reference of the tumor center to the gastroesophageal junction and in the neoadjuvant situation the tumor regression should be documented.

Endotherapy in case of relapse of neoplastic Barrett's esophagus after successful initial endoscopic resection

BACKGROUND

Endotherapy in cases of neoplastic Barrett esophagus (BE) relapse after successful initial endoscopic management is commonly accepted, but few studies analyze this topic and also take into account the metachronous lesions.

AIMS

To evaluate the efficiency of endotherapy in the case of neoplastic BE relapse after successful complete endoscopic eradication of neoplastic BE and metaplastic BE.

METHODS

Retrospective review of medical records was collected in a computerized and prospective manner between 2000 and 2015, in a single tertiary care center. Recurrence was defined by histological presence of high-grade dysplasia or superficial adenocarcinoma at least 6 months after the end of successful initial endotherapy.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were assessed (1F/17 M). Delay between initial treatment and relapse was 16.6 months (range 6-33). Endotherapy for relapse obtained a sustained and complete remission for 8/18 (44%) patients, with an average endoscopic follow-up of 28 months. The complication rate of endotherapy was 6%. Surgical management was required in 33% (2 pT2N0M0, 2 pTisN0M0, 1 pTm2N0M0 and 1 pTm3N0M0) and salvage radiochemotherapy in 17% (3/18). One patient treated by 6 sessions of ER was considered as a failure given the multiple sessions of endotherapy. Multivariate analysis showed that length of BE (>5 cm), late stenosis adverse events and the quality of vertical margin during initial ER are predictive factors for disease-free survival (p value < 0.01, Hazard Ratio up to 0.076).

CONCLUSION

Endotherapy could be a treatment for management of neoplastic BE relapse, but should be carefully used, with strict follow-up.

Simple preoperative risk scale accurately predicts perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy

Surgery remains one of the major treatment options available to patients with esophageal cancer, with high mortality in certain cohorts. The aim of this study was to develop a simple preoperative risk scale based on patient factors, hospital factors, and tumor pathology to predict the risk of perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was used to create the risk scale. Patients who underwent open or laparoscopic transhiatal and transthoracic esophageal resection were identified using International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition codes. Patients <18 years and those with peritoneal disease were excluded. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to define a predictive model of perioperative mortality and to create a simple risk scale. From 1998 to 2011, a total of 23 751 patients underwent esophagectomy. The observed overall perioperative mortality rate for this cohort was 7.7%. Minimally invasive techniques, and operations performed in higher volume centers were protective, whereas increasing age, comorbidities and diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma were independent predictors of mortality. Based on this population, a risk scale from 0-16 was created. The calibration revealed a good agreement between the observed and risk scale-predicted probabilities. A set of sensitivity/specificity analyses was then performed to define normal (score 0-7) and high risk (score 8-16) patients for clinical practice. Mortality in patients with a score of 0-7 ranged from 1.3-7.6%, compared with 10.5-34.5% in patients with a score of 8-16. This simple preoperative risk scale may accurately predict the risk of perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy and can be used as a clinical tool for preoperative counseling.

Current Endoscopic Approaches for the Treatment of Barrett Esophagus

Barrett esophagus (BE) is the only identifiable premalignant condition for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), a cancer associated with a poor 5-year survival rate. The stepwise pathologic progression of BE to invasive cancer provides an opportunity to halt progression and potentially decrease incidence and ultimately the morbidity and mortality related to this lethal cancer. Endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) in patients at increased risk of progression to invasive EAC (intramucosal EAC, high-grade dysplasia, and low-grade dysplasia) is a practice that is endorsed by multiple societies and has replaced esophagectomy as the standard of care for these patients. Although the effectiveness, safety, and durability of EET have been demonstrated in several studies, this review addresses the several challenges with EET that need to be considered to optimize patient outcomes. Finally, the critical role of training, competence, and quality indicators in EET are emphasized in this era of value-based health care practice.

Standardised reporting protocol for endoscopic resection for Barrett oesophagus associated neoplasia: expert consensus recommendations

Endoscopic resection (ER) is considered the therapy of choice for intraepithelial neoplasia associated with visible lesions and T1a adenocarcinoma. Pathologists are bound to encounter specimens collected via these techniques more frequently in their practice. A standardised protocol for handling, grossing, and assessing ER specimens should be adopted to ensure that all prognostic information and characteristics influencing treatment are included in reports (see Supplementary Video Abstract, http://links.lww.com/PAT/A22). The entire specimen should be appropriately oriented, processed and assessed. An ER specimen will commonly show intraepithelial neoplasia or invasive carcinoma. There are essential features that should be recorded if invasive carcinoma is found as they dictate further management and follow-up. These features are the margin status, depth of invasion, degree of differentiation and presence or absence of lymphovascular invasion. Important features such as duplication of muscularis mucosae should be recognised to avoid misinterpretation of depth of invasion. Key diagnostic and prognostic elements that are essential for optimal clinical decisions have been included in the reporting format proposed by the Structured Pathology Reporting committee of the Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (RCPA).

Outcomes of submucosal (T1b) esophageal adenocarcinomas removed by endoscopic mucosal resection

AIM

To investigate the outcomes and recurrences of pT1b esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) following endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and associated treatments.

METHODS

Patients undergoing EMR with pathologically confirmed T1b EAC at two academic referral centers were retrospectively identified. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on treatment following EMR: Endoscopic therapy alone (group A), endoscopic therapy with either chemotherapy, radiation or both (group B), surgical resection (group C) or no further treatment/lost to follow-up (< 12 mo) (group D). Pathology specimens were reviewed by a central pathologist. Follow-up data was obtained from the academic centers, primary care physicians and/or referring physicians. Univariate analysis was performed to identify factors predicting recurrence of EAC.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients with T1b EAC underwent EMR, of which 32 (60%) had adequate follow-up ≥ 12 mo (median 34 mo, range 12-103). There were 16 patients in group A, 9 in group B, 7 in group C and 21 in group D. Median follow-up in groups A to C was 34 mo (range 12-103). Recurrent EAC developed overall in 9 patients (28%) including 6 (38%) in group A (median: 21 mo, range: 6-73), 1 (11%) in group B (median: 30 mo, range: 30-30) and 2 (29%) in group C (median 21 mo, range: 7-35. Six of 9 recurrences were local; of the 6 recurrences, 5 were treated with endoscopy alone. No predictors of recurrence of EAC were identified.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic therapy of T1b EAC may be a reasonable strategy for a subset of patients including those either refusing or medically unfit for esophagectomy.