Complications and survival after hybrid and fully minimally invasive oesophagectomy

Calcifications in the descending thoracic aorta predict postoperative anastomotic leakages after esophagectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak is one of the most feared complications of esophagectomy. Previous studies have suggested a potential link between aortic calcifications detected on routine preoperative CT scans and increased risk of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy. This study aims to investigate whether clinicians' assessment of aortic calcifications can predict the occurrence of anastomotic leaks in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer.

METHODS

A long-term follow-up was conducted on consecutive patients with esophageal cancer who underwent elective open esophagectomy at a Finnish tertiary hospital. Aortic calcifications were evaluated based on CT scans and categorized on a 0-3 scale reflecting the number of calcifications in the affected segment of the aorta. Reviewers assessing the calcifications were blinded to clinical details and postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

The study included 97 patients (median age: 64 years and range: 43-78; 20% female), with a median follow-up time of 1307 (2-1540) days. Among them, 22 patients (23%) had postoperative anastomotic leak. We observed a significant association between calcifications in the descending aorta and a higher risk of anastomotic leak (p = 0.007), as well as an earlier occurrence of leak postoperatively (p = 0.013). However, there was no association between aortic calcifications and increased mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Presence of calcifications in the descending aorta is independently associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leaks following esophagectomy for cancer. Identifying patients at higher risk for this complication could facilitate appropriate pre- and postoperative interventions, as well as enable earlier diagnosis and treatment to mitigate the severity of the complication.

Long-term survival outcomes of esophageal cancer after minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Objectives

The aim of this study was to determine the long-term overall and disease-free survival and factors associated with overall survival in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing a totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MILE) at a safety-net hospital.

Methods

This was a single-center retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent MILE from September 2013 to November 2017. Overall and disease-free survival were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier estimates, and hazard ratios (HR) were derived from multivariable Cox regression models.

Results

Ninety-six patients underwent MILE during the study period. Overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 83.2%, 61.9%, and 55.9%, respectively. Disease-free survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 83.2%, 60.6%, and 47.5%, respectively. Overall survival (p < 0.001) and disease-free survival (p < 0.001) differed across pathological stages. By multivariable analysis, increasing age (HR, 1.06; p = 0.02), decreasing Karnofsky performance status score (HR, 0.94; p = 0.002), presence of stage IV disease (HR, 5.62; p = 0.002), locoregional recurrence (HR, 2.94; p = 0.03), and distant recurrence (HR, 4.78; p < 0.001) were negatively associated with overall survival. Overall survival significantly declined within 2 years and was independently associated with stage IV disease (HR, 3.29; p = 0.04) and distant recurrence (HR, 5.78; p < 0.001).

Conclusion

MILE offers favorable long-term overall and disease-free survival outcomes. Age, Karnofsky performance status score, stage IV, and disease recurrence are shown to be prognostic factors of overall survival. Prospective studies comparing long-term outcomes after different MIE approaches are warranted to validate survival outcomes after MILE.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-022-02518-0.

Completely minimally invasive versus hybrid Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy for oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junctional cancer: a UK multi-centre comparative study

BACKGROUND

Limited robust evidence exists comparing outcomes following completely minimally invasive oesophagectomy (CMIO) to hybrid oesophagectomy (HO) in the treatment of resectable oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junctional (GOJ) cancer. This multi-centre study aims to assess postoperative morbidity between HO and CMIO according to the full Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) complication platform.

METHODS

All consecutive patients undergoing an Ivor-Lewis HO or Ivor-Lewis CMIO for cancer between 2016 and 2018 in three UK tertiary centres were included. The primary study outcome was 30-day overall complications, evaluated by the ECCG complication subgroups. Secondary outcomes included survival outcomes and perioperative parameters between the two approaches.

RESULTS

Of the 382 patients included, 228 (59.7%) patients had HOs and 154 (40.3%) patients had CMIOs with no inter-group baseline differences. Patients undergoing CMIO experienced less 30-day postoperative complications compared to those under undergoing HO (43.5% vs 57.0%, p = 0.010). ECCG defined pulmonary and infective complications were less frequent in the CMIO group. Anastomotic leak rates and oncological outcomes were similar between the two groups. Independent predictors of 30-day postoperative complications include surgical approach with HO and high ASA grade on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Ivor-Lewis CMIO demonstrates superior short-term surgical outcomes when compared to Ivor-Lewis HO with no compromise in oncological feasibility. Anastomotic leak rates were equivalent between both groups. A robust randomised controlled trial is required to validate the findings of this study.

Outcome of microscopically non-radical oesophagectomy for oesophageal and oesophagogastric junctional cancer: nationwide cohort study

Background

Microscopically non-radical (R1) oesophageal cancer resection has been associated with worse survival. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for R1 resection and to investigate how this affects long-term survival.

Methods

The Swedish National Register for Oesophageal and Gastric Cancer was used to identify all patients who underwent oesophageal cancer resection with curative intent between 2006 and 2017. Risk factors for R1 resection were assessed by multivariable logistic regression analysis, and factors predicting 5-year survival identified by multivariable Cox regression.

Results

The study included 1460 patients. Surgical margins were involved microscopically in 142 patients (9.7 per cent). The circumferential resection margin was involved in 114 (7.8 per cent), the proximal margin in 53 (3.6 per cent), and the distal margin in 29 (2.0 per cent). In 30 specimens (2.1 per cent), two or all three margins were involved. Independent risk factors for R1 resection were male sex, low BMI, absence of neoadjuvant treatments, and clinical T4 disease. The 5-year survival rate for the entire cohort was 42.2 per cent, but only 18.0 per cent for those who had an R1 resection. Independent risk factors for death within 5 years of resection were male sex, age above 60 years, normal BMI, ASA fitness grade III, intermediate-level education, R1 resection (hazard ratio 1.80, 95 per cent c.i. 1.40 to 2.32), clinical T3 disease, and clinical lymph node metastasis.

Conclusion

R1 resection is common and predicts poor 5-year survival. Absence of neoadjuvant treatment is a risk factor for R1 resection.