Surgical therapy of esophageal carcinoma: the influence of surgical approach and esophageal resection on cardiopulmonary function

Minimally invasive surgery is associated with decreased postoperative complications after esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Although some studies have compared esophagectomy outcomes by technique or approach, there is opportunity to strengthen our knowledge surrounding these outcomes. We aimed to perform a comprehensive comparison of esophagectomy postoperative complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2007-2018). Esophagectomies were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes and grouped by operative technique (Ivor Lewis, transhiatal, McKeown) and surgical approach (minimally invasive vs open esophagectomy). Twelve postoperative complications were compared. Significant complications underwent risk adjustment using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Analysis was performed on 13,457 esophagectomies: 11,202 (83.2%) open and 2255 (16.8%) minimally invasive. There were 7611 (56.6%) Ivor Lewis, 3348 (24.9%) transhiatal, and 2498 (18.6%) McKeown procedures. There were significant differences among the surgical techniques in 6 of 12 risk-adjusted complications. When comparing the outcomes of minimally invasive techniques, there were only significant differences in 2 of 12 complications: overall morbidity (minimally invasive Ivor Lewis 30.5%, minimally invasive transhiatal 43.4%, minimally invasive McKeown 40.3%, P = .0009) and infections (minimally invasive Ivor Lewis 15.4%, minimally invasive transhiatal 26.0%, minimally invasive McKeown 25.3%, P = .0003). Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery were less likely to have overall morbidity (odds ratio, 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.75), respiratory complications (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.68-0.87), urinary tract infection (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.43-0.88), renal complications (odds ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.81), bleeding complications (odds ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.43), and nonhome discharge (odds ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.45-0.64), and had shorter length of stay (9.7 vs 13.2 days, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy have lower rates of postoperative complications regardless of esophagectomy techniques. The minimally invasive approach was associated with reduced complication variance among 3 common esophagectomy techniques.

Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on esophagectomies in esophageal cancer: The superiority of minimally invasive surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous meta-analyses, with many limitations, have described the beneficial nature of minimal invasive procedures.

AIM

To compare all modalities of esophagectomies to each other from the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in a network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Reference Citation Analysis (https://www.referencecitationanalysis.com/) and CENTRAL databases to identify RCTs according to the following population, intervention, control, outcome (commonly known as PICO): P: Patients with resectable esophageal cancer; I/C: Transthoracic, transhiatal, minimally invasive (thoracolaparoscopic), hybrid, and robot-assisted esophagectomy; O: Survival, total adverse events, adverse events in subgroups, length of hospital stay, and blood loss. We used the Bayesian approach and the random effects model. We presented the geometry of the network, results with probabilistic statements, estimated intervention effects and their 95% confidence interval (CI), and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve to rank the interventions.

RESULTS

We included 11 studies in our analysis. We found a significant difference in postoperative pulmonary infection, which favored the minimally invasive intervention compared to transthoracic surgery (risk ratio 0.49; 95%CI: 0.23 to 0.99). The operation time was significantly shorter for the transhiatal approach compared to transthoracic surgery (mean difference -85 min; 95%CI: -150 to -29), hybrid intervention (mean difference -98 min; 95%CI: -190 to -9.4), minimally invasive technique (mean difference -130 min; 95%CI: -210 to -50), and robot-assisted esophagectomy (mean difference -150 min; 95%CI: -240 to -53). Other comparisons did not yield significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Based on our results, the implication of minimally invasive esophagectomy should be favored.

Combined Modality Therapy for Management of Esophageal Cancer: Current Approach Based on Experiences from East and West

Human evolutionary genetic divergence and distinctive environmental exposures have contributed to the development of clinicopathologic variations of esophageal cancer in Eastern and Western countries. Different treatment strategies have derived from the disparate regional experiences. Treatment strategy is more standardized in the West. Trimodality treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery is widely accepted as the standard treatment of locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Trimodality treatment has not been adopted in many Eastern countries, and standard treatment is neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Several randomized trials are ongoing that may alter the standard management of esophageal cancer worldwide.

An Update on Randomized Clinical Trials in Gastric Cancer

The optimal treatment of esophageal cancer is still being defined. The timing of surgical management and the application of chemotherapy and radiation in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings have been studied in several prospective, randomized, controlled trials. This article outlines some of the historical as well as updated research that has been published regarding the management of esophageal cancer.

Meta-analysis of Transhiatal Esophagectomy in carcinoma of esophagogastric junction, does it have an advantage?

PURPOSE

Compare the clinical outcome of Transhiatal Esophagectomy (THE) approach and open Thoracic Esophagectomy (TTE) approach in the carcinoma of esophagogastric junction (CEGJ).

METHODS

Relevant literature published until 2016 from PubMed, Cochrane Library, Ovid (Medline) and EMBASE were retrieved. Meta-analysis was achieved by using the Stata12 software.

RESULTS

A total of 18 studies and 2202 cases of patients were involved in this meta-analysis. THE showed to decrease the hospital stay, hospital mortality, surgical time, and blood loss in the operation. However, fewer lymph nodes would be yielded by this surgical option. A 5-year survival advantage of THE was only observed in North America subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Except the above operative related advantages, there was no clear evidence that THE has a further advantage in CEGJ.

Optimal surgical approach for esophageal cancer in the era of minimally invasive esophagectomy and neoadjuvant therapy

The optimal surgical technique for the potentially curative treatment of patients with esophageal cancer is still under debate. The transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) with limited lymphadenectomy mainly focuses on a decrease of postoperative morbidity and mortality by preventing a formal thoracotomy. The transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) with extended two-field lymphadenectomy attempts to improve the radicality of the resection and thus to increase locoregional tumor control, but is associated with increased postoperative morbidity. The recent introduction of different minimally invasive techniques probably decreases postoperative morbidity following TTE, with reduction of especially pulmonary complications, but high-quality evidence is still limited. It is widely agreed that extended lymphadenectomy as performed during TTE provides the benefit of more accurate staging, but its effect on improvement of survival is still debated. The literature on this topic is contradictory and the choice of surgical approach is primarily driven by personal opinions and institutional preferences. Moreover, the available evidence is mainly based on patients who underwent surgery alone without neoadjuvant therapy. Results of recent studies suggest that neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy abolishes any possibly positive effect of extended lymphadenectomy as performed during TTE on survival, but this effect should be confirmed in future research. This review gives an overview and reflects the authors' personal view on the role of TTE and THE in the treatment of potentially curative treatment of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer in the era of minimally invasive esophagectomy and neoadjuvant treatment and outlines future research perspectives.

Transhiatal Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

Survival for esophageal cancer has improved over the past four decades, probably as a result of a combination of more accurate staging, improved surgical outcomes, advances in adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies, and the increasing implementation of multimodality treatment. Surgical resection still remains the mainstay in the treatment of localized esophageal adenocarcinoma. Multiple techniques have been described for esophagectomy, which are based on either a transthoracic or transhiatal approach. Despite proponents of each technique touting potential advantages such as superior oncologic resection with more extensive transthoracic lymphadenectomy compared to the relatively limited morbidity and mortality with a transhiatal resection, the superiority of one technique over another is not clear and may be relegated to a topic of historical significance in the era of minimally invasive surgery. With the increased acceptance of neoadjuvant multimodality therapy, both approaches have been shown to have acceptable outcomes. And in the hands of experienced surgeons, both techniques can provide excellent short-term results. Moreover, surgeon and hospital volume have shown to be strongly associated with improved operative morbidity and oncologic outcomes, which may supersede the type of approach selected for an individual patient.

Radical lymphadenectomy in esophageal cancer: from the past to the present

Lymphadenectomy as an essential part of the surgical treatment has been one of the most controversial aspects in the management of esophageal cancers. The purpose of this article was to review the evolution, the current role, and the optimal extent of lymphadenectomy for the treatment of esophageal cancers. Studies discussing the outcome of esophagectomy with lymph nodes dissection and comparing among different extent of lymphadenectomy were used in the analysis. Several studies including recently published articles reveal that additional radical lymphadenectomy may be beneficial in some patients with non-extreme esophageal cancer undergoing esophagectomy, whereas two-field lymph node dissection is suitable for distal esophageal cancers regardless of the histology of the tumor. Minimally invasive surgery and neoadjuvant therapy combined with radical surgery seem to show more benefit in selected cases, but further studies should be required to clearly demonstrate their efficacy and safety. The expertise and experience of the surgeons should also be taken into account in determining the success of these radical procedures.

Endoscopic mucosal resection for staging and treatment of early esophageal carcinoma: a single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) has emerged for evaluation and treatment of esophageal nodules. We report our initial experience with EMR for T staging and management of early esophageal cancer.

METHODS

We reviewed patients undergoing EMR for esophageal adenocarcinoma between 2008 and 2013. The primary outcome measure was needed for esophagectomy. Secondary outcomes included complete eradication of adenocarcinoma, recurrence or persistence of cancer, nodal status for those undergoing esophagectomy, and complications of endoscopic treatment.

RESULTS

During the study period, 24 patients underwent EMR demonstrating carcinoma, and a grossly margin negative endoscopic resection was achieved in all cases. Ten patients (42 %) had evidence of submucosal invasion and were referred for esophagectomy. Patients with margin negative EMR (n = 10, 42 %) or positive radial margins (n = 4, 16 %) underwent endoscopic surveillance and treatment with radiofrequency ablation or repeat EMR as needed. Thirteen patients (93 %) with intramucosal cancer (IMC) have been successfully managed with ongoing endoscopic surveillance and treatment with a median follow-up of 15.5 months. One patient underwent esophagectomy due to recurrent IMC in the setting of long-segment multifocal high-grade dysplasia. There were no esophageal perforations, one patient developed a self-limited gastrointestinal hemorrhage following EMR, and one had an esophageal stricture following endoscopic management.

CONCLUSIONS

IMC can be successfully managed endoscopically and thus esophagectomy is avoided in a significant proportion of patients. Endoscopic management may be utilized in the setting of complete resection or radial margin involvement without evidence of submucosal invasion. Close endoscopic follow-up is of paramount importance even in those with negative margins, because recurrent disease may occur following EMR in these patients.

A personal perspective on controversies in the surgical management of oesophageal cancer

Significant disagreement and debate persist regarding several aspects of the optimal surgical management of oesophageal cancer. We address some of these issues based on our consecutive series of 165 patients undergoing oesophageal resection (reported in full elsewhere) and the available literature. The areas considered are controversial but we argue in favour of a 'traditional' two-stage open approach (Ivor-Lewis), leaving the pylorus alone, making no attempt to perform a radical lymphadenectomy and fashioning a hand sewn anastomosis.

Three-field transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy in the management of carcinoma esophagus-a single--center experience with a review of literature

BACKGROUND

The management of esophageal cancer continues to be riddled with controversies, even as more and more clinical trials are being conducted amid a remarkable change in histology and epidemiology. Significant variations exist in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer, and there is no consensus on the best surgical approach or the extent of lymphadenectomy. Interestingly, extended esophagectomy (three-field lymphadenectomy) has not been compared with transhiatal esophagectomy in a head-to-head fashion.

METHODS

We did a retrospective comparison of 111 consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for carcinoma of the esophagus, via either a transthoracic esophagectomy with three-field dissection (3F TTE) or transhiatal esophagectomy ("THE") at a regional cancer center in South India over a period of 5 years from 2002 to 2006. The primary outcome measure was 5-year disease-free (DFS) and the overall survival (OS). An exhaustive analysis of the short-term outcomes was also made.

RESULTS

The 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival were 52 and 49% in the 3F TTE group and 37 and 37%, respectively, in the "THE" group, which were not statistically significant. The short and the long-term outcomes in both the groups compared favorably with the other published series.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study possibly for the first time compares 3F TTE and "THE" in the management of resectable carcinoma of the esophagus. Although the survival outcomes of both the groups were not statistically different, 3F TTE did show a trend towards improved DFS and OS when compared to "THE" group. However, this being a retrospective study, the results of this analysis need to be verified in an adequately sized prospective randomized study.

Vagus-preserving technique during minimally invasive esophagectomy: the effects on cardiac parameters in a swine model

BACKGROUND

Cardiac complications are an important cause of morbidity and mortality observed after esophageal resections. We examined whether an high intrathoracic vagotomy during abdominothoracic esophagectomy would have an effect on intraoperative and early postoperative cardiac function in the setting of a minimally invasive resection. Two hypotheses were generated for this study: (1) Vagotomy would cause cardiac changes, and (2) vagus-preserving esophagectomy would prevent cardiac problems during resection and in the early postoperative phase.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty male pigs were operated on while cardiac parameters (heart rate [HR], cardiac index [CI], preload recruitable stroke work [PRSW], contractility speed [dp/dtmax], relaxation speed [dp/dtmin], and relaxation time [tau]) were monitored using a conductance catheter and the thermodilution method. Animals were randomized into 4 groups (each n = 7): (1) control, thoracoscopy only, (2) thoracoscopy with vagotomy, (3) esophageal resection with vagotomy, and (4) esophageal resection with vagus nerve preservation. To evaluate the first hypothesis, we compared groups 1 and 2; to evaluate the second hypothesis, we compared groups 3 and 4. HR, CI, PRSW, dp/dtmax, and tau were different in the 2 groups without resection (area under the curve; each P < .05). Vagotomy with esophagectomy resulted in nonsignificant differences between groups 3 and 4. The requirement for metoprolol administration to avoid severe tachycardia was greater in the groups that underwent vagotomy (P < .05; Fisher's exact test).

CONCLUSION

An high intrathoracic vagotomy results in loss of vagal tone and a greater rate of tachycardia during thoracoscopy and esophagectomy. There were no differences, however, in cardiac dynamics between the esophagectomy groups. Thus, vagal injury is not the sole reason for cardiac dysfunction after esophagectomy.

Surgical resection strategy and the influence of radicality on outcomes in oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical approach to tumours of the oesophagus and oesophagogastric junction remains controversial. The principal randomized trial comparing transhiatal (THO) and transthoracic (TTO) oesophagectomy showed no survival difference, but suggested that some subgroups of patients may benefit from the more extended lymphadenectomy typically conducted with TTO.

METHODS

This was a cohort study based on two prospectively created databases. Short- and long-term outcomes for patients undergoing THO and TTO were compared. The primary outcome measure was overall survival, with secondary outcomes including time to recurrence and patterns of disease relapse. A Cox proportional hazards model provided hazard ratios (HRs) and 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i.), with adjustments for age, tumour stage, tumour grade, response to chemotherapy and lymphovascular invasion.

RESULTS

Of 664 included patients (263 THO, 401 TTO), the distributions of age, sex and histological subtype were similar between the groups. In-hospital mortality (1·1 versus 3·2 per cent for THO and TTO respectively; P = 0·110) and in-hospital stay (14 versus 17 days respectively; P < 0·001) favoured THO. In the adjusted model, there was no difference in overall survival (HR 1·07, 95 per cent c.i. 0·84 to 1·36) or time to tumour recurrence (HR 0·99, 0·76 to 1·29) between the two operations. Local tumour recurrence patterns were similar (22·8 versus 24·4 per cent for THO and TTO respectively). No subgroup could be identified of patients who had benefited from more radical surgery on the basis of tumour location or stage.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in survival or tumour recurrence for TTO and THO.

Total oesophagectomy for squamous cell carcinoma with or without standard two field node dissection - a prospective study

Cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) is notorious for its advanced stage at the time of diagnosis with transmural invasion and early lymphatic spread in the majority of the patients. R0 resection is the aim of surgery with curative intent. Regarding the role of lymphadenectomy, as in any other solid organ cancer, there are opposing views. Some surgeons argue that the presence of lymph node involvement equals systemic disease and that survival remains unchanged despite removal of these lymph nodes. For others the presence of lymph node involvement, even at a distance from the primary tumor, justifies an aggressive approach with radical esophagectomy combined with lymphadenectomy. The purpose of this article is to compare standard two field lymph node dissection versus non formal lymph node dissection in carcinoma esophagus. The conclusions are based on the experience with 60 cases of carcinoma esophagus over 2 years. In our opinion total esophagectomy with 2-field lymphadenectomy is the standard surgery for resectable squamous cell carcinoma of esophagus. It improves the lymphnode yield thereby ensuring adequate staging of the disease. It can be performed with acceptable morbidity and mortality as the nonformal lymphadenectomy procedure. Locoregional recurrence following 2 field lymphadenectomy is significantly low as compared to nonformal lymphadenectomy procedure though the distant recurrence rate is same. 2 year disease free survival in this study shows advantage of 2 field lymphadenectomy compared to non formal lymphadenectomy procedure.

Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy with antegrade esophageal inversion for high-grade dysplasia and invasive esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

We examined the safety and effectiveness of antegrade laparoscopic inversion esophagectomy (LIE) for patients with multifocal high-grade dysplasia and distal esophageal cancer.

METHODS

We reviewed our experience with antegrade LIE, using an institutional research board-approved prospective database.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients with an average age of 64 years underwent LIE. Indications included multifocal high-grade dysplasia (n = 4), adenocarcinoma (n = 30), and squamous cell carcinoma (n = 2); 11 patients had undergone neoadjuvant chemoradiation. LIE was completed successfully in 34 (94%) patients, whereas 2 required a conversion to open transhiatal esophagectomy. LIE required 221 minutes to perform, with a median blood loss of 100 mL. R0 resection was achieved in 97% of cases with a median lymph node harvest 15. Median hospital stay was 8 days, and 61% of patients were discharged to their home. Postoperative complications included anastomotic leak (n = 11) and stricture (n = 18), atrial arrhythmia (n = 5), pneumonia (n = 4), and tracheoesophageal fistula (n = 2). Operative outcomes after neoadjuvant therapy did not differ from those for primary operative resection.

CONCLUSION

Antegrade LIE is a safe treatment approach for patients with high-grade dysplasia and distal esophageal cancer. Complete resection with an adequate lymph node harvest can be achieved consistently for primary operative resection or after neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Surgical treatment of esophageal carcinoma with curative intent: analysis of a single center experience

Background

We retrospectively reviewed our series of 76 patients who underwent esophagectomy, with curative intent, for esophageal carcinoma over the last 10 years.

Method

The mean age was 60 years ranging between 46 to 76 years. Fifty-seven patients had a squamous cell carcinoma and 19 patients had an adenocarcinoma. In 15 cases induction therapy was accomplished prior to surgery. A narrow gastric tube was used to restore continuity in 74 patients (97.3%). Medical records were reviewed and data analysis was performed.

Results

Peri-operative mortality was 2.6%. Overall survival at 1, 3 and 5 years was 85,5%, 67,7% and 52,7%, respectively, with no significant difference between the squamous cell disease group and the adenocarcinoma group. Although T factor and stage at the time of surgery influenced overall survival, the presence of nodal metastasis had the major impact on survival as confirmed by univariate and multivariate analysis with a 5 year survival rate of 32% regardless of the use or not of adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy and the pathologic stage.

Conclusions

Esophagectomy still represents a valid treatment for esophageal carcinoma in well selected patients. Both pT stage and N stage appear to be the most important factors determining survival for patients with completely resected esophageal carcinoma.

Surgical approaches to invasive adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction

Despite a plethora of data, the optimal surgical approach to invasive adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal (GE) junction remains controversial. To quote Dr. Valerie Rusch, "Strong individual preferences and some degree of surgical mystique often govern the selection of operation for resection of GE junction adenocarcinomas."1 The fırst of these controversies is whether the optimal open surgical approach should be via the transabdominal, transthoracic (two-incision Ivor Lewis or three-incision McKeown), or transhiatal route. Proponents of the transthoracic or transhiatal routes have voiced strong opinions on the potential advantages and disadvantages of each approach (Table 1). It is clear from most large retrospective series that, in experienced hands, excellent results can be achieved by either approach. The principal advantage of the transthoracic route is the ability to perform a radical mediastinal lymphadenectomy en bloc with the primary tumor, the theory being that a more aggressive lymph node dissection would be associated with an improved long-term outcome. To date, however, this association of a more aggressive lymphadenectomy with improved outcome has remained elusive in most gastrointestinal malignancies, including esophageal cancer. Proponents of the transhiatal approach cite similar lymph node retrieval rates, the potential for lower short-term morbidity, and the potential for similar long-term outcomes.2 With the advent of newer technology, the controversy regarding the optimal surgical approach to adenocarcinoma of the GE junction has evolved in yet another direction, with proponents of a minimally invasive approach, citing even lower perioperative morbidity and mortality, again with comparable or even superior long-term oncologic results.

Management of gastroesophageal junction tumors

Tumors of the gastroesophageal junction have historically been treated as either gastric or esophageal cancer depending on institutional preferences. The Siewert classification system was designed to provide a more precise means of characterizing these tumors. In general, surgical treatment of Siewert 1 tumors is via esophagectomy. Siewert 2 and 3 tumors may be treated with either esophagectomy with proximal gastrectomy or extended total gastrectomy provided negative margins are obtained. All but the earliest stage tumors should be considered for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Nitric oxide and endothelin-1 release after one-lung ventilation during thoracoabdominal esophagectomy

One-lung ventilation (OLV) is applied during esophagectomy to improve exposure during the thoracic part of the operation. Collapse of lung tissue, shunting of pulmonary blood flow, and changes in alveolar oxygenation during and after OLV may possibly induce an ischemia-reperfusion response in the lung, which may affect the pulmonary endothelium. Such a reaction might thereby contribute to the frequently occurring respiratory complications among these patients. In this small trial, 30 patients were randomized to either OLV (n= 16) or two-lung ventilation (TLV, n= 14) during esophagectomy. Central venous and arterial plasma samples were taken before and after OLV/TLV for analysis of nitrite and a metabolite of nitric oxide (NO), and also during the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 10th postoperative day for analysis of endothelin, another endothelium-derived vasoactive mediator. Lung biopsies were taken before and after OLV or TLV, and analyzed regarding immunofluorescence for isoform of NO synthase, a protein upregulated during inflammatory response and also vascular congestion. No changes in lung isoform of NO synthase immunofluorescence or vascular congestion were registered after neither OLV nor TLV. Plasma nitrite and endothelin levels were similar in the two study groups. We conclude that OLV does not seem to have any influence on key regulators of pulmonary vascular tone and inflammation, i.e. NO and endothelin. From this perspective, OLV seems to be a safe method, which defends its clinical position to facilitate surgical exposure during thoracoabdominal esophagectomy.

Transthoracic resection versus non-transthoracic resection for gastroesophageal junction cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the impact of transthoracic resection on long-term survival of patients with GEJ cancer and to compare the postoperative morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing transthoracic resection with those of patients who were not undergoing transthoracic resection.

METHOD

Searches of electronic databases identifying studies from Medline, Cochrane Library trials register, and WHO Trial Registration etc were performed. Outcome measures were survival, postoperative morbidity and mortality, and operation related events.

RESULTS

Twelve studies (including 5 RCTs and 7 non-RCTs) comprising 1105 patients were included in this meta-analysis, with 591 patients assigned treatment with transthoracic resection. Transthoracic resection did not increase the 5-y overall survival rate for RCTs and non-RCTs (HR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.80- 1.29 and HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.70- 1.14, respectively). Stratified by the Siewert classification, our result showed no obvious differences were observed between the group with transthoracic resection and group without transthoracic resection (P>0.05). The postoperative morbidity (RR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.48- 1.00 and OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.25- 1.22) and mortality (RD = -0.03, 95% CI -0.06- 0.00 and RD = 0.00, 95% CI -0.05- 0.05) of RCTs and non-RCTs did not suggest any significant differences between the two groups. Hospital stay was long with thransthoracic resection (WMD = -5.80, 95% CI -10.38- -1.23) but did not seem to differ in number of harvested lymph nodes, operation time, blood loss, numbers of patients needing transfusion, and reoperation rate. The results of sensitivity analyses were similar to the primary analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no significant differences of survival rate and postoperative morbidity and mortality between transthoracic resection group and non-transthoracic resection group. Both surgical approaches are acceptable, and that one offers no clear advantage over the other. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously since the qualities of included studies were suboptimal.

Transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy for the treatment of esophagogastric cancer: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To study the differences in short and long-term outcomes of transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND

Studies have compared transthoracic with transhiatal esophagectomy with varying results. Previous systematic reviews (1999, 2001) do not include the latest randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Systematic review of English-language studies comparing transthoracic with transhiatal esophagectomy up to January 31, 2010. Meta-analysis was used to summate the study outcomes. Methodological and surgical quality of included studies was assessed.

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies, comprising 5905 patients (3389 transthoracic and 2516 transhiatal) were included in the analysis. No study met all minimum surgical quality standards. Transthoracic operations took longer and were associated with a significantly longer length of stay. There was no difference in blood loss. The transthoracic group had significantly more respiratory complications, wound infections, and early postoperative mortality, whereas anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy rate was significantly higher in the transhiatal group. Lymph node retrieval was reported in 4 studies and was significantly greater in the transthoracic group by on average 8 lymph nodes. Analysis of 5-year survival showed no significant difference between the groups and was subject to significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of studies comparing transthoracic with transhiatal esophagectomy for cancer demonstrates no difference in 5-year survival, however lymphadenectomy and reported surgical quality was suboptimal in both groups and the transthoracic group had significantly more advanced cancer. The finding of equivalent survival should therefore be viewed with caution.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a case-control study of thoracoscope versus mediastinoscope assistance

OBJECTIVE

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been widely applied for esophageal carcinoma treatment. Thoracoscope-assisted transthoracic esophagectomy (TATTE) and mediastinoscope-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy (MATHE) are two kinds of MIE. The objective of this study is to compare these two methods with respect to surgical safety and survival.

METHODS

Single-institution experience with MATHE and TATTE was analyzed to assess morbidity, adequacy of tumor clearance, and survival. A pair-matched case-control study was performed to compare 54 patients who underwent either MATHE or TATTE between July 2000 and December 2009. Patients were matched by age, sex, comorbidity, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), tumor location, and stage.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences between the MATHE group and the TATTE group were: shorter operative time for MATHE (194.4 min) versus TATTE (228.1 min), less blood loss during operation in the TATTE group (142.6 ml) versus the MATHE group (214.6 ml), and more lymph nodes retrieved in the TATTE group (19.1 nodes) versus the MATHE group (11.4 nodes). There was no difference in survival between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

MATHE and TATTE are both technically feasible. TATTE can provide better visibility. TATTE has less blood loss compared with MATHE. More adequate tumor clearance in terms of lymph node dissection can be achieved with TATTE.

Comparison of esophagectomy with and without thoracotomy in a low-resource tertiary care center in a developing country

Esophageal cancer surgery is traditionally performed by a number of open surgical approaches. Open approaches require thoracotomy and laparotomy. Developments in instrumentation and optics have allowed the use of minimally invasive approaches to esophageal cancer, which had been traditionally managed by open operation. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) avoids thoracotomy and laparotomy and results in quicker return to normal functions and less morbidity. In this prospective study, we compared the immediate surgical and oncologic outcomes of patients who have undergone MIS with those who have had open surgery. From November 1, 2003 to March 30, 2006, 62 cases of carcinoma esophagus were operated in Surgical unit 3 (MIS unit) in the institute. Out of the 62 patients, 34 (54.8%) underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), and the remaining 28 patients (45.2%) underwent open surgery. Both operations were done by the same team of surgeons. The groups were compared in terms of perioperative outcomes, morbidity, mortality, and adequacy of oncologic excision. The average duration for MIS was 312.35 min (60-480 min), which was more than that of open group surgery whose average duration was 261.96 min (60-360 min). This difference was found to be not significant (P < 0.110). The average blood loss was 275.74 mL (200-500 mL) in minimally invasive group compared with 312.50 (200-500 mL) in open group (P-value 0.33). Four patients (11.76%) in MIS group had been converted to open surgery. Average duration of hospitalization was 11.9 (4-24) days in MIS group compared with 12.19 (5-24) days in open group (P-value 0.282). Nine (26.47%) patients in MIS group had developed major or minor morbidity. Similarly, eight (28.57%) patients in open group had morbidity. One patient each expired in each group. The morbidity and mortality rates were not statistically significant. There were four leaks (11.76%) in MIS group and three leaks (10.71%) in open group (P-value 0.85). Regarding the extent of nodal clearance, an average number of 9.5 (0-19) nodes were removed in MIS group compared with an average of 7.26 (0-12) nodes in open group (P-value 0.05). Better visibility and magnification enabled more number of lymph nodes to be removed in MIS group. MIE is oncologically safe compared with open surgery. It has almost similar postoperative course, morbidity pattern, and duration of hospital stay as open surgery. Increased duration of procedure compared with open surgery is a disadvantage of MIS, especially in the early part of learning curve.

Transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma: experience from a single tertiary care institution

BACKGROUND

There is a lot of controversy about the best surgical treatment for esophageal carcinoma.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 382 patients with carcinoma of the mid-to-distal esophagus underwent transthoracic or transhiatal esophagectomy. Early morbidity and mortality were compared. Principal endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

A total of 177 patients underwent transthoracic esophagectomy, and 205 patients underwent transhiatal esophagectomy. Demographic characteristics and characteristics of the tumor were similar in the two groups. Perioperative and postoperative morbidity was higher after transhiatal esophagectomy. In-hospital mortality was also higher after transhiatal esophagectomy. The median follow-up was 4.3 years. Estimated 3-year DFS rates were 44.63 and 31.21%, whereas the 3-year OS rates were 57.06 and 41.46% for the transthoracic and transhiatal groups, respectively (statistically significant). Also, the estimated 5-year DFS rates were 26.55 and 21.46%, whereas the 5-year OS rates were 32.76 and 30.24% for the transthoracic and transhiatal groups, respectively (statistically not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

Transhiatal esophagectomy was associated with higher perioperative and postoperative morbidity and in-hospital mortality than transthoracic esophagectomy. The DFS and OS were higher in the transthoracic group and were statistically significant at 3 years but statistically insignificant at 5 years.

[Surgical management of early cancer in Barrett's esophagus]

The indication of surgical resection for early cancer in Barrett's esophagus is based on the risk of lymph node extension, which is conditioned by the depth of the lesions. Even if the high resolution endosonography is more sensitive than conventional endosonography for differentiating mucosal from submucosal lesions, it may be lacking for intermediate lesions (m3 and sm1). Macroscopic criteria are useful for identifying high-risk lesions. In contentious cases, endoscopic resection may be considered as a biopsy to determine the further treatment. The endoscopic resection is indicated for mucosal lesions in selected patients. Surgery remains the standard treatment for early cancer in Barrett's esophagus. The transhiatal resection is indicated for high-risk T1a mucosal lesions. The transthoracic resection is indicated for submucosal lesions.

Transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy for distal esophageal cancer: which is superior?

A best evidence topic in cardiothoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) or transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) resection provides superior outcomes for patients with distal esophageal cancer. Two hundred and sixteen papers were found using the reported search, of which six represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. We conclude that THE is associated with significantly less pulmonary complications as well as fewer wound infections, chylous leakage but a higher rate of cardiac complications, vocal cord paralysis and anastomotic leakage as compared with TTE. Overall, THE is associated with a reduced perioperative morbidity as evidenced by with a shorter hospital stay and decreased in-hospital mortality rates. With regard to long-term outcomes, although there is no evidence that TTE or THE result in different overall long-term survival rates, there is some evidence that TTE offers superior five-year survival rate in a sub-group of patients with a limited number of involved lymph nodes.

Transhiatal versus transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer continues to represent a formidable challenge for both patients and clinicians. Relative 5-year survival rates for patients have improved over the past three decades, probably linked to a combination of improved surgical outcomes, progress in systemic chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and the increasing acceptance of multimodality treatment. Surgical treatment remains a fundamental component of the treatment of localized esophageal adenocarcinoma. Multiple approaches have been described for esophagectomy, which can be thematically grouped under two major categories: either transthoracic or transhiatal. The main controversy rests on whether a more extended resection through thoracotomy provides superior oncological outcomes as opposed to resection with relatively limited morbidity and mortality through a transhiatal approach. After numerous trials have addressed these issues, neither approach has consistently proven to be superior to the other one, and both can provide excellent short-term results in the hands of experienced surgeons. Moreover, the available literature suggests that experience of the surgeon and hospital in the surgical management of esophageal cancer is an important factor for operative morbidity and mortality rates, which could supersede the type of approach selected. Oncological outcomes appear to be similar after both procedures.

Advances in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer

Surgical resection remains the predominant modality in the management of esophageal cancer. Transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy are the procedures that are most frequently performed. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is feasible but will require further evaluation with well-designed trials and long-term follow-up before it can be widely adopted. Technical improvements have lowered the rate of cervical anastomotic leak and improved the management of thoracic anastomotic leak. Outcome studies demonstrated that the optimal mortality, morbidity, and survival outcomes are obtained when esophageal resections are performed by experienced surgeons in high-volume institutions.

Surgical factors influence the outcome after Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis for adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: a consecutive series of 240 patients at an experienced center

BACKGROUND

Despite a considerable number of randomized studies, the surgical approach to locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) I and II is still discussed controversially. Thus, we evaluated the surgical risk and outcome after an abdominothoracic esophagectomy (Ivor-Lewis) with intrathoracic anastomosis as standard procedure.

METHODS

Between 1998 and 2006, a total of 240 consecutive patients underwent standardized right thoracoabdominal esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy and intrathoracic anastomosis (Ivor-Lewis operation) for AEG I (n = 206) or AEG II (n = 34). A total of 157 patients (65.4%) had neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Postoperative morbidity occurred in 17.9% (43 of 240). Overall mortality was 3.8% (9 of 240). The majority of patients (4 of 9) died because of severe pulmonary complications (44.4%) irrespective of surgical complications. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not increase morbidity or mortality. The median overall survival was 51 months. Multivariate analysis including age >75 years, clinical response to chemotherapy, complications, R-category and N-category revealed R-category (P = .005; relative risk [RR] 0.32, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 0.14-0.70) and complications (P < .001, RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.35) as independent prognostic factors for all patients. Complications was the only independent prognostic factor (P < .001, RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.08-0.35) for the R0 resected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

At an experienced center, Ivor-Lewis resection is a safe surgical procedure. Outcome of patients was significantly influenced by surgical factors such as complete resection and complications. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not lead to higher morbidity and mortality. The high mortality from non-surgery-related complications emphasizes the importance of careful preoperative evaluation of comorbidities and patient selection.

[Not Available]

C. Mariette, G. Piessen, C. Vons Lymph node invasion is the principal prognostic factor in cancers of the stomach and esophagus which have a tendency to early lymphatic spread.The anatomy of regional lymph node groupings is described and standard and extended types of lymphadenectomy are defined. We discuss he role of lymph node dissection - particularly extended lymphadenectomy - and assess whether there is demonstrable benefit in terms of morbidity and mortality, loco-regional recurrence, and survival. Articles from the surgical literature with the highest levels of evidence are analyzed. Practical guidelines for treatment choice are proposed.

[Not Available]

C. Mariette, G. Piessen, C. Vons Lymph node invasion is the principal prognostic factor in cancers of the stomach and esophagus which have a tendency to early lymphatic spread.The anatomy of regional lymph node groupings is described and standard and extended types of lymphadenectomy are defined. We discuss he role of lymph node dissection - particularly extended lymphadenectomy - and assess whether there is demonstrable benefit in terms of morbidity and mortality, loco-regional recurrence, and survival. Articles from the surgical literature with the highest levels of evidence are analyzed. Practical guidelines for treatment choice are proposed.

Avaliação da reconstrução do trato alimentar com tubo gástrico ou colônico na esofagectomia por câncer de esôfago

OBJETIVO: Relatar a experiência com as principais técnicas de reconstrução do trato alimentar após esofagectomia por câncer de esôfago. METODOS: Foram analisados retrospectivamente 68 pacientes submetidos à esofagectomia entre fevereiro de 1997 e novembro de 2005. Todos os pacientes incluídos no estudo foram submetidos à esofagectomia com reconstrução com tubo gástrico ou colônico e anastomose cervical. RESULTADOS: A idade média foi de 55,4 anos (25-74 anos), 50 pacientes eram do sexo masculino e 18 pacientes do sexo feminino, 27 pacientes apresentavam o tumor localizado no esôfago médio e 41 pacientes no esôfago distal, sendo carcinoma epidermóide em 35 pacientes e adenocarcinoma em 33 pacientes. A ressecção foi por via transtorácica em 35 indivíduos e por via transhiatal em 33. A reconstrução com tubo gástrico se deu em 58 pacientes e com tubo colônico em 10 pacientes. A morbidade total da série foi de 52,9%. A mortalidade operatória foi de 5,8%. A sobrevida média foi de 35 meses. CONCLUSÃO: A esofagectomia com reconstrução com tubo gástrico e anastomose cervical é factível tecnicamente, sendo um procedimento realizado de rotina nos pacientes portadores de câncer de esôfago com indicação cirúrgica. Utilizamos, e recomendamos, a reconstrução com tubo colônico principalmente nos pacientes com cirurgia prévia no estômago ou quando da necessidade de ressecção ampliada deste, impossibilitando a confecção da reconstrução do trânsito alimentar com a gastroplastia.

One-lung ventilation during thoracoabdominal esophagectomy elicits complement activation

BACKGROUND

One-lung ventilation (OLV) during thoracoabdominal esophagectomy may induce an inflammatory response that can contribute to the induction and propagation of frequently occurring postoperative respiratory distress. Markers of such a response might be detected in the pulmonary as well as in the systemic circulation. Inflammation and tissue damage may be key pathogenetic pathways and we hypothesized that 1-lung ventilation may induce an inflammatory cascade reflected by markers for such a response.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty patients with esophageal cancer were randomized to OLV (n = 16) or 2-lung ventilation (TLV; n = 14) during the thoracic part of the operation. Compounds involved in inflammation and coagulation were measured perioperatively and during the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 10th postoperative d.

RESULTS

During the perioperative phase, the proinflammatory cytokine interleukin-6 and thrombin, measured as thrombin-antithrombin complexes, started to increase. Thrombin, which can induce complement activation, peaked at the end of surgery and interleukin-6 at the 1st to 2nd postoperative d, but there were no differences between the OLV and TLV groups. C3a and terminal complement complex (TCC) started to increase on the 2nd postoperative d and continued to do so for the rest of the study period. The increase of TCC was significantly higher in the OLV group compared to the TLV group, whereas C3a attained similar levels in the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

OLV is associated with an augmented inflammatory response as reflected by the activation of the TCC. This may induce pulmonary tissue damage and recruitment of inflammatory cells.

Video-assisted esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Video-assisted surgery for esophageal cancer is an advanced surgical technique. It has been developed on the basis of the concept of minimally invasive surgery. Given that there are several options regarding the operative procedures for thoracic esophageal cancer, several laparoscopic approaches have been proposed. The first video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy through a right thoracoscopic approach and the first transhiatal esophagectomy were reported in the early 1990s. A mediastinoscope-assisted esophagectomy has also been reported as a substitute for a blunt dissection of the esophagus. Moreover, a video-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy by right thoracotomy with intrathoracic anastomosis has also been performed. Furthermore, laparoscopic gastric mobilization and gastroplasty are also widely accepted substitutions for open laparotomy. This article reviews the literature on the laparoscopic approaches for esophageal cancer.

Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the mid/distal esophagus: five-year survival of a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether extended transthoracic esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma of the mid/distal esophagus improves long-term survival.

BACKGROUND

A randomized trial was performed to compare surgical techniques. Complete 5-year survival data are now available.

METHODS

A total of 220 patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus (type I) or gastric cardia involving the distal esophagus (type II) were randomly assigned to limited transhiatal esophagectomy or to extended transthoracic esophagectomy with en bloc lymphadenectomy. Patients with peroperatively irresectable/incurable cancer were excluded from this analysis (n = 15). A total of 95 patients underwent transhiatal esophagectomy and 110 patients underwent transthoracic esophagectomy.

RESULTS

After transhiatal and transthoracic resection, 5-year survival was 34% and 36%, respectively (P = 0.71, per protocol analysis). In a subgroup analysis, based on the location of the primary tumor according to the resection specimen, no overall survival benefit for either surgical approach was seen in 115 patients with a type II tumor (P = 0.81). In 90 patients with a type I tumor, a survival benefit of 14% was seen with the transthoracic approach (51% vs. 37%, P = 0.33). There was evidence that the treatment effect differed depending on the number of positive lymph nodes in the resection specimen (test for interaction P = 0.06). In patients (n = 55) without positive nodes locoregional disease-free survival after transhiatal esophagectomy was comparable to that after transthoracic esophagectomy (86% and 89%, respectively). The same was true for patients (n = 46) with more than 8 positive nodes (0% in both groups). Patients (n = 104) with 1 to 8 positive lymph nodes in the resection specimen showed a 5-year locoregional disease-free survival advantage if operated via the transthoracic route (23% vs. 64%, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

There is no significant overall survival benefit for either approach. However, compared with limited transhiatal resection extended transthoracic esophagectomy for type I esophageal adenocarcinoma shows an ongoing trend towards better 5-year survival. Moreover, patients with a limited number of positive lymph nodes in the resection specimen seem to benefit from an extended transthoracic esophagectomy.

Increased permeability-oedema and atelectasis in pulmonary dysfunction after trauma and surgery: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Trauma and surgery may be complicated by pulmonary dysfunction, acute lung injury (ALI) and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), but the mechanisms are incompletely understood.

METHODS

We evaluated lung capillary protein permeability non-invasively with help of the 67Ga-transferrin pulmonary leak index (PLI) technique and extravascular lung water (EVLW) by the transpulmonary thermal-dye dilution technique in consecutive, mechanically ventilated patients in the intensive care unit within 24 h of direct, blunt thoracic trauma (n = 5, 2 with ARDS), and within 12 h of indirect trauma by transhiatal oesophagectomy (n = 8), abdominal surgery for cancer (n = 6) and bone surgery (n = 4). We studied transfusion history, haemodynamics, oxygenation and mechanics of the lungs. The lung injury score (LIS, 0-4) was calculated. Plain radiography was also done to judge densities and atelectasis.

RESULTS

The PLI and EVLW were elevated above normal in 61 and 30% of patients, respectively, and the PLI directly related to the number of red cell concentrates given (rs = 0.69, P < 0.001), without group differences. Oxygenation, lung mechanics, radiographic densities and thus the LIS (1.0 [0.25-3.5]) did not relate to PLI and EVLW. However, groups differed in oxygenation and airway pressures and impaired oxygenation related to the number of radiographic quadrants with densities (rs = 0.55, P = 0.007). Thoracic trauma patients had a worse oxygenation requiring higher airway pressures and thus higher LIS than the other patient groups, unrelated to PLI and EVLW but attributable to a higher cardiac output and thereby venous admixture. Finally, patients with radiographic signs of atelectasis had more impaired oxygenation and more densities than those without.

CONCLUSION

The oxygenation defect and radiographic densities in mechanically ventilated patients with pulmonary dysfunction and ALI/ARDS after trauma and surgery are likely caused by atelectasis rather than by increased permeability-oedema related to red cell transfusion.

Lymph node dissection in surgical treatment of esophageal neoplasms

The optimal lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer remains controversial. The choice of surgical access determines to a great extent the type of lymphadenectomy possible. En bloc resections and three-field lymphadenectomy are concepts pioneered in the West and East, respectively; both should be performed in specialized centers because such extended lymph node dissection has substantial morbidity rates. Recent focus in research is on refining the indications for these procedures. Patient management strategies should be individualized.

Extent of Surgical Resection for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinomas

The early-stage lymphatic dissemination in esophageal cancer poses challenges for adequate surgical treatment. The role of extensive lymph node dissections remains a matter of debate. Results of the only available large randomized controlled trial suggest that fit patients who have esophageal cancer are treated best by a transthoracic esophagectomy with extended en bloc (two-field) lymphadenectomy. For less fit patients or patients who have junctional or cardiac tumors, transhiatal esophageal resection could suffice. In patients who have truly "early" adenocarcinoma (ie, with high-grade dysplasia or intramucosal carcinoma) endoscopic resectional or ablative treatments may be suitable. When the tumor invades the submucosal layer, the high risk for lymph node involvement and tumor recurrence probably necessitates more extensive treatment schedules for definitive cure.