Endoscopic palliation of malignant dysphagia: a challenging task in inoperable oesophageal cancer

Palliative Radiotherapy Versus Esophageal Stent Placement in the Management of Patients With Metastatic Esophageal Cancer

Background:Patients with advanced esophageal cancer often experience pain and dysphagia, yet the optimal palliative management remains unclear. This retrospective study evaluated outcomes and adverse effects of palliative radiotherapy (RT) compared with esophageal stenting among a cohort of U.S. veterans with metastatic esophageal cancer.Patients and Methods:We identified 1,957 veterans in the United States with metastatic esophageal cancer who received palliative RT to the esophagus or esophageal stenting, and assessed the risks of severe adverse effects, including esophageal fistula formation, perforation, obstruction, hemorrhage, and esophagitis. We determined palliative efficacy by evaluating pain and dysphagia scores before and after intervention. Multivariable analyses were used to control for potential confounding factors.Results:In our cohort, 1,593 patients underwent RT and 364 underwent esophageal stenting. The cumulative incidence of any severe adverse effect at 6 months was higher among patients who received stents compared with those who received RT (21.7% vs 12.4%;P<.0010). In multivariable analysis, patients who received stents had an increased risk of any severe adverse effect, including fistula, perforation, and hemorrhage (allP<.0500). Multivariable analysis also showed that, compared with stenting, RT was associated with more rapid and durable pain relief (P<.0010) with no difference in relief of dysphagia over time when accounting for pretreatment dysphagia scores (P=.1029).Conclusions:Compared with esophageal stenting, RT was associated with a decreased risk of adverse effects, greater pain relief, and equivalent relief of moderate to severe dysphagia over time. Unmeasured patient- or tumor-related factors could have influenced the choice of intervention, thereby impacting our study outcomes. To our knowledge, this is the largest study to date analyzing the comparative risks and benefits of palliative RT and esophageal stenting among patients with metastatic esophageal cancer.

Combined chemotherapy plus endostar with sequential stereotactic radiotherapy as salvage treatment for recurrent esophageal cancer with severe dyspnea: A case report and review of the literature

For the majority of inoperable esophageal cancer cases, chemoradiotherapy is the most suitable treatment option. Cetuximab may provide certain benefits, however, this can be an expensive therapy. Additionally, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) is typically contraindicated for esophageal cancer due to the potential for esophageal perforation and stenosis. The use of combined chemotherapy plus endostar with sequential SBRT for the treatment of esophageal squamous cancer has not been reported. In the current study, the case of a 71-year-old female with esophageal squamous cancer diagnosed 2 years prior is presented. Surgery and four cycles of cisplatin plus 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy had been administered. The patient showed recurrence at the paratracheal lymph node, exhibited severe dyspnea (grade III) and required a semi-liquid diet. Four cycles of the docetaxel, 5-fluorouracil and nedaplatin regimen plus endostar (3 mg; days 1-14; intravenously) with sequential SBRT (3300 cGy in 10 fractions) was administered. Following treatment, the symptoms of the patient completely disappeared, and objective efficacy evaluation indicated complete remission. At the time of writing, the patient is living without discomfort and the progression-free survival is >8 months. In conclusion, the present case indicates that combined treatment of chemotherapy and endostar with sequential stereotactic radiotherapy is a safe and effective option for the management of esophageal cancer.

Self-expanding metal stents for palliative treatment of esophageal carcinoma: risk factors for fatal massive bleeding

AIMS

To investigate the risk factors for the development of fatal massive bleeding after esophageal stenting in patients with malignant esophageal lesions.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 216 patients with malignant esophageal stricture and esophageal fistulae who received esophageal stents recruited from January 2005 to December 2010 from the Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University. The patients were divided into 2 groups on the basis of the occurrence of fatal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. We evaluated the significance of sex, tumor site, type of stent, stent location, concomitant radiotherapy, esophageal fistulae, and tracheal stent as factors contributing to the development of esophageal bleeding in the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Fatal bleeding developed in 6.9% (15/216) of patients. These patients developed massive hematemesis and died shortly thereafter. The mean and median survival times for the remaining 201 patients were 182.3 and 75.5 days, respectively. The incidence of fatal bleeding was significantly higher among patients with esophageal fistulas and in patients with concomitant tracheal stents compared with those with neither condition. No significant relationship was identified between the incidence of fatal bleeding and age, sex, stent type, stent location, or radiotherapy. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that the presence of esophageal fistula and concomitant tracheal stent were closely related to fatal postoperative bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of esophageal fistulae and concomitant tracheal stent are important factors contributing to heavy esophageal bleeding after esophageal stenting.

Endoscopic stenting and concurrent chemoradiotherapy for advanced esophageal cancer: A case-control study

AIM: To evaluate the role of endoscopic stenting with or without concurrent 3-dimensional conformal chemoradiotherapy (3D-CRT) in patients with inoperable esophageal cancer.

METHODS: Advanced esophageal cancer patients indicated for esophagectomy received esophageal stents. A part of patients completed 3D-CRT after stenting. Efficacy was assessed by endoscopy and computed tomographic scan before and 4 wk after completion of the treatment. The median survival, 3D-CRT toxicity and complications were compared between 3D-CRT and control groups.

RESULTS: From 1999 to 2008, 99 consecutive patients with T3/T4 disease and unsuitable for esophagectomy were placed with esophageal stents. Sixty-seven patients received 3D-CRT, while 36 patients treated with endoscopic stents alone were recruited as controls. After 3D-CRT treatment, the median tumor volume of 3D-CRT patients were reduced significantly from 43.7 ± 10.2 cm³ to 28.8 ± 8.5 cm³ (P < 0.05). The complete and partial response rate was 85.1%, and no response was 14.9%. After 3D-CRT, the incidence rate of T2 and T3 disease evident on CT scan increased to 78.4% while T4 decreased from 66.7% to 21.6% (P < 0.05). 3D-CRT Karnofsky Performance Status improved in 3D-CRT patients compared with the control group (P = 0.031). 3D-CRT patients had a longer survival than the control group (251.7 d vs 91.1 d, P < 0.05). And the median half-year survival rate in 3D-CRT group (91%) was higher than in the control group (50%, P < 0.05). The most common toxicity was leukocytopenia in the 3D-CRT group (46.7% vs 18.8%, P = 0.008). The control group had a higher rate of restenosis than the 3D-CRT group (81.3% vs 9.0%, P < 0.05). The rate of nephrotoxicity was increased in 3D-CRT as compared with the control group (31.3% vs 15.6%, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION: 3D-CRT can improve dysphagia in patients with inoperable esophageal carcinoma. 3D-CRT combined with stenting results in better survival as compared with endoscopic stents used alone.

Palliation of malignant esophageal obstruction and fistulas with self expandable metallic stents

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of self expandable metallic stents (SEMS) in patients with malignant esophageal obstruction and fistulas.

METHODS: SEMS were implanted in the presence of fluoroscopic guidance in patients suffering from advanced and non-resectable esophageal, cardiac and invasive lung cancer between 2002 and 2009. All procedures were performed under conscious sedation. All patients had esophagus obstruction and/or fistula. In all patients who required reintervention, recurrence of dysphagia, hemorrhage, and fistula formation were indications for further endoscopy. Patients’ files were scanned retrospectively and the obtained data were analyzed using SPSS 13.0 for Windows. The χ² test was used for categorical data and was analysis of variance for non-categorical data. Patients’ long-term survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS: Stents were successfully implanted in 90 patients using fluoroscopic guidance. Reasons for stent implantation in these patients were esophageal stricture (77/90, 85.5%), external pressure (8/90, 8.8%) and tracheo-esophageal fistula (5/90, 5.5%). Dysphagia scores (mean ± SD) were 3.37 ± 0.52 before and 0.90 ± 0.43 after stent implantation (P = 0.002). Intermittent, non-massive hemorrhage due to the erosion caused by the distal end of the stent in the stomach occurred in only one patient who received implementation at cardio-esophageal junction. Mean survival following stenting was 134.14 d (95% confidence interval: 94.06-174.21).

CONCLUSION: SEMS placement is safe and effective in the palliation of dysphagia in selected patients with malignant esophageal strictures.

Thirty-four cases of esophageal perforation: the experience of a district general hospital in the UK

Esophageal perforation is uncommon and traditionally has a high rate of morbidity and mortality. Our aim was to perform a 13-year retrospective review of the cases managed in our district general hospital. Thirty-four cases of esophageal perforation diagnosed between 1995 and 2008 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 20 males and 14 females with a median age of 64 (range 23-86) years. The etiology of the perforations were Boerhaave's syndrome (n= 19), therapeutic endoscopy (n= 9), diagnostic endoscopy (n= 2), gastric lavage injury (n= 1), foreign body (n= 1), blunt chest trauma (n= 1), and spontaneous tumor perforation (n= 1). Only 11 cases (32%) had evidence of surgical emphysema upon examination. In 50% of cases, another clinical diagnosis was initially suspected. Twenty-four were treated surgically and 10 cases managed non-operatively. Surgical treatment included thoracotomy with primary repair (n= 9), T-tube drainage (n= 7), emergency esophagectomy (n= 1), or intra-operative stent insertion (n= 1). Four cases had primary repair and fundal wrap via abdominal approach without thoracotomy. Two patients were treated with washout and drainage only. Eight patients died overall (in-hospital mortality 23.5%). Esophageal perforations are often initially misdiagnosed and the majority do not have surgical emphysema. There are a wide variety of methods to manage esophageal perforation. Management tailored to the location and size of perforation, degree of contamination, and underlying cause appears to result in a reasonable prognosis.