Novel prognostic score of postoperative complications after transthoracic minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort study of 90 consecutive patients

Sex differences in survival following surgery for esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The impact of sex on the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer remains unclear. Evidence supports that sex- based disparities in esophageal cancer survival could be attributed to sex- specific risk exposures, such as age at diagnosis, race, socioeconomic status, smoking, drinking, and histological type. The aim of our study is to investigate the role of sex disparities in survival of patients who underwent surgery for esophageal cancer. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature in PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from December 1966 to February 2023, was held. Studies that reported sex-related differences in survival outcomes of patients who underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were identified. A total of 314 studies were included in the quantitative analysis. Statistically significant results derived from 1-year and 2-year overall survival pooled analysis with Relative Risk (RR) 0.93 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.90-0.97, I2 = 52.00) and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.85-0.95, I2 = 0.00), respectively (RR < 1 = favorable for men). In the postoperative complications analysis, statistically significant results concerned anastomotic leak and heart complications, RR: 1.08 (95% CI: 1.01-1.16) and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.52-0.75), respectively. Subgroup analysis was performed among studies with <200 and > 200 patients, histology types, study continent and publication year. Overall, sex tends to be an independent prognostic factor for esophageal carcinoma. However, unanimous results seem rather obscure when multivariable analysis and subgroup analysis occurred. More prospective studies and gender-specific protocols should be conducted to better understand the modifying role of sex in esophageal cancer prognosis.

Prediction of Morbidity and Mortality After Esophagectomy: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer has a complication rate of up to 60%. Prediction models could be helpful to preoperatively estimate which patients are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to determine the best prediction models for morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy and to identify commonalities among the models.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A systematic review was performed in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and was prospectively registered in PROSPERO ( https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , study ID CRD42022350846). Pubmed, Embase, and Clarivate Analytics/Web of Science Core Collection were searched for studies published between 2010 and August 2022. The Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool was used to assess the risk of bias. Extracted data were tabulated and a narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Of the 15,011 articles identified, 22 studies were included using data from tens of thousands of patients. This systematic review included 33 different models, of which 18 models were newly developed. Many studies showed a high risk of bias. The prognostic accuracy of models differed between 0.51 and 0.85. For most models, variables are readily available. Two models for mortality and one model for pulmonary complications have the potential to be developed further.

CONCLUSIONS

The availability of rigorous prediction models is limited. Several models are promising but need to be further developed. Some models provide information about risk factors for the development of complications. Performance status is a potential modifiable risk factor. None are ready for clinical implementation.

Preoperative DLco and FEV1 are correlated with postoperative pulmonary complications in patients after esophagectomy

Limited information is available regarding the association between preoperative lung function and postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in patients with esophageal cancer who undergo esophagectomy. This is a retrospective cohort study. Patients were classified into low and high lung function groups by the cutoff of the lowest fifth quintile of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) %predicted (%pred) and diffusing capacity of the carbon monoxide (DLco) %pred. The PPCs compromised of atelectasis requiring bronchoscopic intervention, pneumonia, and acute lung injury/acute respiratory distress syndrome. Modified multivariable-adjusted Poisson regression model using robust error variances and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) were used to assess the relative risk (RR) for the PPCs. A joint effect model considered FEV1%pred and DLco %pred together for the estimation of RR for the PPCs. Of 810 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy, 159 (19.6%) developed PPCs. The adjusted RR for PPCs in the low FEV1 group relative to high FEV1 group was 1.48 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.09-2.00) and 1.98 (95% CI = 1.46-2.68) in the low DLco group relative to the high DLco group. A joint effect model showed adjusted RR of PPCs was highest in patients with low DLco and low FEV1 followed by low DLco and high FEV1, high DLco and low FEV1, and high DLco and high FEV1 (Reference). Results were consistent with the IPTW. Reduced preoperative lung function (FEV1 and DLco) is associated with post-esophagectomy PPCs. The risk was further strengthened when both values decreased together.

Preoperative risk modelling for oesophagectomy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal cancer is a frequently observed and lethal malignancy worldwide. Surgical resection remains a realistic option for curative intent in the early stages of the disease. However, the decision to undertake oesophagectomy is significant as it exposes the patient to a substantial risk of morbidity and mortality. Therefore, appropriate patient selection, counselling and resource allocation is important. Many tools have been developed to aid surgeons in appropriate decision-making.

AIM

To examine all multivariate risk models that use preoperative and intraoperative information and establish which have the most clinical utility.

METHODS

A systematic review of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases was conducted from 2000-2020. The search terms applied were ((Oesophagectomy) AND (Risk OR predict OR model OR score) AND (Outcomes OR complications OR morbidity OR mortality OR length of stay OR anastomotic leak)). The applied inclusion criteria were articles assessing multivariate based tools using exclusively preoperatively available data to predict perioperative patient outcomes following oesophagectomy. The exclusion criteria were publications that described models requiring intra-operative or post-operative data and articles appraising only univariate predictors such as American Society of Anesthesiologists score, cardiopulmonary fitness or pre-operative sarcopenia. Articles that exclusively assessed distant outcomes such as long-term survival were excluded as were publications using cohorts mixed with other surgical procedures. The articles generated from each search were collated, processed and then reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. All risk models were appraised for clinical credibility, methodological quality, performance, validation, and clinical effectiveness.

RESULTS

The initial search of composite databases yielded 8715 articles which reduced to 5827 following the deduplication process. After title and abstract screening, 197 potentially relevant texts were retrieved for detailed review. Twenty-seven published studies were ultimately included which examined twenty-one multivariate risk models utilising exclusively preoperative data. Most models examined were clinically credible and were constructed with sound methodological quality, but model performance was often insufficient to prognosticate patient outcomes. Three risk models were identified as being promising in predicting perioperative mortality, including the National Quality Improvement Project surgical risk calculator, revised STS score and the Takeuchi model. Two studies predicted perioperative major morbidity, including the predicting postoperative complications score and prognostic nutritional index-multivariate models. Many of these models require external validation and demonstration of clinical effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

Whilst there are several promising models in predicting perioperative oesophagectomy outcomes, more research is needed to confirm their validity and demonstrate improved clinical outcomes with the adoption of these models.

Postoperative complications after a transthoracic esophagectomy or a transhiatal gastrectomy in patients with esophagogastric junctional cancers: a prospective nationwide multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancers are resected thorough esophagectomy or gastrectomy, with the incidence of postoperative complications influenced by the chosen procedure.

METHODS

In this prospective nationwide multicenter study, patients with cT2-T4 EGJ cancers were enrolled before surgery. Based on the protocol, surgeons performed a transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) or a transhiatal gastrectomy (THG) and dissected all lymph nodes prespecified as the standardized procedure. Postoperative complications were correlated with the clinical factors in each procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 345 patients were eligible for this study. TTE and THG were performed in 120 and 225 patients, respectively. Complications of Clavien-Dindo ≥ Grade II were found in 115/345 (33.3%) patients. Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was found only in the TTE group (p < 0.001). The incidence of other complications was not significantly different between the two groups. High body mass index (BMI) in the TTE group, male sex, and longer esophageal invasion in the THG group were significantly correlated with complications ≥ Grade II (p = 0.049, 0.037, and 0.019, respectively). Anastomotic leakage was most frequently observed (12.2%). Tumor size in the THG group (p = 0.02) was significantly associated with leakage. All six patients with ≥ Grade IV leakage underwent THG, whereas, none of the patients in the TTE group had leakage ≥ Grade IV (2.7% vs. 0%, p = 0.096).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical resection should be performed with utmost care, particularly in patients with a high BMI undergoing TTE, and in patients with larger tumors, longer esophageal invasion, or male patients undergoing THG.

Patient-Related Prognostic Factors for Anastomotic Leakage, Major Complications, and Short-Term Mortality Following Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to identify preoperative patient-related prognostic factors for anastomotic leakage, mortality, and major complications in patients undergoing oncological esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is a high-risk procedure with an incidence of major complications around 25% and short-term mortality around 4%.

METHODS

We systematically searched the Medline and Embase databases for studies investigating the associations between patient-related prognostic factors and anastomotic leakage, major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa), and/or 30-day/in-hospital mortality after esophagectomy for cancer.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine eligible studies identifying 37 prognostic factors were included. Cardiac comorbidity was associated with anastomotic leakage, major complications, and mortality. Male sex and diabetes were prognostic factors for anastomotic leakage and major complications. Additionally, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score > III and renal disease were associated with anastomotic leakage and mortality. Pulmonary comorbidity, vascular comorbidity, hypertension, and adenocarcinoma tumor histology were identified as prognostic factors for anastomotic leakage. Age > 70 years, habitual alcohol usage, and body mass index (BMI) 18.5-25 kg/m² were associated with increased risk for mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Various patient-related prognostic factors are associated with anastomotic leakage, major postoperative complications, and postoperative mortality following oncological esophagectomy. This knowledge may define case-mix adjustment models used in benchmarking or auditing and may assist in selection of patients eligible for surgery or tailored perioperative care.