Cost-effectiveness of Laparoscopic vs Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: An Economic Evaluation Alongside a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Laparoscopic gastrectomy is rapidly being adopted worldwide as an alternative to open gastrectomy to treat gastric cancer. However, laparoscopic gastrectomy might be more expensive as a result of longer operating times and more expensive surgical materials. To date, the cost-effectiveness of both procedures has not been prospectively evaluated in a randomized clinical trial.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic compared with open gastrectomy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this multicenter randomized clinical trial of patients undergoing total or distal gastrectomy in 10 Dutch tertiary referral centers, cost-effectiveness data were collected alongside a multicenter randomized clinical trial on laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy for resectable gastric adenocarcinoma (cT1-4aN0-3bM0). A modified societal perspective and 1-year time horizon were used. Costs were calculated on the individual patient level by using hospital registry data and medical consumption and productivity loss questionnaires. The unit costs of laparoscopic and open gastrectomy were calculated bottom-up. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated with the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire, in which a value of 0 indicates death and 1 indicates perfect health. Missing questionnaire data were imputed with multiple imputation. Bootstrapping was performed to estimate the uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness. The study was conducted from March 17, 2015, to August 20, 2018. Data analyses were performed between September 1, 2020, and November 17, 2021.

Interventions

Laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Evaluations in this cost-effectiveness analysis included total costs and QALYs.

Results

Between 2015 and 2018, 227 patients were included. Mean (SD) age was 67.5 (11.7) years, and 140 were male (61.7%). Unit costs for initial surgery were calculated to be €8124 (US $8087) for laparoscopic total gastrectomy, €7353 (US $7320) for laparoscopic distal gastrectomy, €6584 (US $6554) for open total gastrectomy, and €5893 (US $5866) for open distal gastrectomy. Mean total costs after 1-year follow-up were €26 084 (US $25 965) in the laparoscopic group and €25 332 (US $25 216) in the open group (difference, €752 [US $749; 3.0%]). Mean (SD) QALY contributions during 1 year were 0.665 (0.298) in the laparoscopic group and 0.686 (0.288) in the open group (difference, -0.021). Bootstrapping showed that these differences between treatment groups were relatively small compared with the uncertainty of the analysis.

Conclusions and Relevance

Although the laparoscopic gastrectomy itself was more expensive, after 1-year follow-up, results suggest that differences in both total costs and effectiveness were limited between laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. These results support centers' choosing, based on their own preference, whether to (de)implement laparoscopic gastrectomy as an alternative to open gastrectomy.

Trends in surgical techniques for the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer: the 2022 update

The aim of this study was to evaluate the current practice in surgical techniques for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer surgery worldwide and to compare the results to the previous surveys in 2007 and 2014. An online survey was sent out among surgical members of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Disease of the Esophagus, the International Gastric Cancer Association, the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland and Dutch gastroesophageal surgeons via the network of the investigators. In total, 260 surgeons completed the survey representing 52 countries and 6 continents; Europe 56%, Oceania 14%, Asia 14%, South-America 9%, North-America 7%. Of the responding surgeons, 39% worked in a hospital that performed >51 esophagectomies per year. Total minimally invasive esophagectomy was the preferred technique (53%) followed by hybrid esophagectomy (26%) of which 7% consisted of a minimally invasive thoracic phase and 19% of a minimally invasive abdominal phase. Total open esophagectomy was preferred by 21% of the respondents. Total minimally invasive esophagectomy was significantly more often performed in high-volume centers compared with non-high-volume centers (P = 0.002). Robotic assistance was used in 13% during the thoracic phase and 6% during the abdominal phase. Minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy has become the preferred approach for esophagectomy. Although 21% of the surgeons prefer an open approach, 26% of the surgeons perform a hybrid procedure which may reflect further transition towards the use of total minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Outcomes of Combined Peritoneal and Local Treatment for Patients with Peritoneal and Limited Liver Metastases of Colorectal Origin: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Almost half of all colorectal cancer (CRC) patients will experience metastases at some point, and in the majority of cases, multiple organs will be involved. If the peritoneum is involved in addition to the liver, the current guideline-driven treatment options are limited. The reported overall survival ranges from 6 to 13 months for the current standard of care (systemic treatment). This study aimed to evaluate morbidity and clinical long-term outcomes from a combined local treatment of hepatic metastases with cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) used to treat peritoneal metastases.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase.com, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Studies evaluating the clinicopathologic data of patients who had both peritoneal and hepatic metastases treated with CRS-HIPEC were included provided sufficient data on the primary outcomes (overall and disease-free survival) were presented. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS).

Results

Patients treated for peritoneal and liver metastases (PMLM group) had a pooled mean survival of 26.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.4–30.4 months), with a 3-year survival rate of 34% (95% CI 26.7–42.0%) and a 5-year survival rate of 25% (95% CI 17.3–33.8%). Surgical complications occurred more frequently for these patients than for those with peritoneal metastasis only (40% vs 22%; p = 0.0014), but the mortality and reoperation rates did not differ significantly.

Conclusion

This systematic review showed that CRS and HIPEC combined with local treatment of limited liver metastasis for selected patients is feasible, although with increased morbidity and an association with a long-term survival rate of 25%, which is unlikely to be achievable with systemic treatment only.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10925-y.

Worldwide Practice in Gastric Cancer Surgery: A 6-Year Update

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to evaluate the current status of gastric cancer surgery worldwide and update the changes compared to a previous survey in 2014.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was sent to surgical members of the International Gastric Cancer Association, pilot centers of the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Diseases of the Esophagus, and the Australian and New Zealand Gastric and Oesophageal Surgeons Association in addition to participants of the 2019 International Gastric Cancer and European Society for Diseases of the Esophagus congresses. Topics addressed included hospital volume, staging, perioperative treatment, surgical approach, anastomotic techniques, lymphadenectomy, and palliative management.

RESULTS

Between June 2019 and January 2020, 165 respondents from 44 countries completed the survey. In total, 80% worked in a hospital performing >20 gastrectomies annually. Staging laparoscopy and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography were preferred by 68 and 26% for advanced cancer, and 90% offered perioperative chemo(radio)therapy to patients. For early cancer, a minimally invasive surgical approach was preferred by 65% for distal and by 50% for total gastrectomy. For advanced cancer, this was preferred by 39% for distal and by 33% for total gastrectomy. And 84% favored a stapled anastomosis, and 14% created a jejunal pouch as reconstruction during total gastrectomy. A D2 lymphadenectomy was preferred for distal as well as for total gastrectomy, in both early (62 and 71%) and advanced (84 and 89%) cancer.

CONCLUSION

This international survey demonstrates that perioperative chemotherapy and a D2 lymphadenectomy have now become the preferred treatment for gastric cancer. A minimally invasive surgical approach has gained popularity.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer (LOGICA): A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The oncological efficacy and safety of laparoscopic gastrectomy are under debate for the Western population with predominantly advanced gastric cancer undergoing multimodality treatment.

METHODS

In 10 experienced upper GI centers in the Netherlands, patients with resectable (cT1-4aN0-3bM0) gastric adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. No masking was performed. The primary outcome was hospital stay. Analyses were performed by intention to treat. It was hypothesized that laparoscopic gastrectomy leads to shorter hospital stay, less postoperative complications, and equal oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Between 2015 and 2018, a total of 227 patients were randomly assigned to laparoscopic (n = 115) or open gastrectomy (n = 112). Preoperative chemotherapy was administered to 77 patients (67%) in the laparoscopic group and 87 patients (78%) in the open group. Median hospital stay was 7 days (interquartile range, 5-9) in both groups (P = .34). Median blood loss was less in the laparoscopic group (150 v 300 mL, P < .001), whereas mean operating time was longer (216 v 182 minutes, P < .001). Both groups did not differ regarding postoperative complications (44% v 42%, P = .91), in-hospital mortality (4% v 7%, P = .40), 30-day readmission rate (9.6% v 9.1%, P = 1.00), R0 resection rate (95% v 95%, P = 1.00), median lymph node yield (29 v 29 nodes, P = .49), 1-year overall survival (76% v 78%, P = .74), and global health-related quality of life up to 1 year postoperatively (mean differences between + 1.5 and + 3.6 on a 1-100 scale; 95% CIs include zero).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic gastrectomy did not lead to a shorter hospital stay in this Western multicenter randomized trial of patients with predominantly advanced gastric cancer. Postoperative complications and oncological efficacy did not differ between laparoscopic gastrectomy and open gastrectomy.

Management and outcome of cervical versus intrathoracic manifestation of cervical anastomotic leakage after transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer

The aim of this study was to evaluate management strategies and related outcomes for cervical versus intrathoracic manifestation of cervical anastomotic leakage after transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer with gastric conduit reconstruction. Patients with esophageal cancer undergoing transthoracic esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis from October 2003 to December 2014 were identified from a prospectively acquired database. Management strategies and related outcomes among patients with anastomotic leakage confined to the neck were compared to patients with intrathoracic manifestation of anastomotic leakage. From a total of 286 patients, leakage of the cervical anastomosis occurred in 60 patients (21%) at a median time of 7 days after esophagectomy. Leakage was confined to the neck in 23 of 60 patients (38%), whereas 37 of 60 patients (62%) presented with intrathoracic spread. Leakages with intrathoracic manifestation were more frequently accompanied by a positive SIRS score compared to leakages confined to the neck (73% vs. 35%, respectively; P = 0.004). Drainage of the anastomotic leakage through the neck wound was effective in all of 23 patients (100%) with cervical manifestation. In patients with intrathoracic manifestation, mediastinal drainage through the neck was successful in 15 of 37 patients (41%), whereas 22 patients (59%) required an intervention through the thoracic cavity. Compared to patients with leakage confined to the neck, patients with intrathoracic manifestation showed prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay (median 6 vs. 2 days, respectively; P = 0.001), hospital stay (median 34 vs. 19 days, respectively; P < 0.001), and time to oral intake (32 vs. 23 days, respectively; P = 0.018). Intrathoracic manifestation of cervical anastomotic leakage occurs in more than half of patients with anastomotic leakage after transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer. A SIRS reaction should raise the suspicion of intrathoracic spread of leakage. Intrathoracic manifestation can be managed effectively by mediastinal drainage through the neck in 41% of patients, but a reintervention through the thoracic cavity is required in 59%. Intrathoracic manifestation of leakage results in prolonged ICU/hospital stay and delays time to oral intake compared with leakage confined to the neck.

Worldwide trends in surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer

The aim of this study was to evaluate the worldwide trends in surgical techniques for esophageal cancer surgery by comparing it to our survey from 2007. In addition, new questions were added for gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. An international survey on surgery of esophageal and GEJ cancer was performed among surgical members of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Disease of the Esophagus, the International Gastric Cancer Association. Also, surgeons from personal networks were contacted. The participants filled out a web based questionnaire about surgical strategies for esophageal and gastroesophageal cancer. The overall response rate was 478/1147 (42%). The respondents represented 49 different countries and 6 different continents. The annual cumulative number of esophageal and gastric resections per surgeon was low (≤11) in 11%, medium (11-21) in 17%, and high (≥21) in 72% of respondents. In a subgroup analysis of esophageal surgeons the number of high volume surgeons increased from 45 to 54% over the past 7 years. The preferred lymph node dissection was two-field in 86%. A gastric conduit was the preferred method of reconstruction in 95%. In 2014, the preferred approach to esophagectomy was minimally invasive transthoracic in 43%, compared with 14% in 2007. In minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy the cervical anastomosis was favored in 54% of respondents in 2014 compared with 87% in 2007. The preferred technique of construction of the cervical anastomosis was hand-sewn in 64% and stapled in 36%, whereas the thoracic anastomosis was stapled in 77% and hand-sewn in 23%. The preferred surgical approach for Siewert type 1 tumors (5-1 cm proximal of the GEJ) was esophagectomy in 93% of respondents, whereas 6% favored gastrectomy and 3% combined a distal esophagectomy with a proximal gastrectomy. For Siewert type 2 tumors (1-2 cm from the GEJ) an extended gastrectomy was favored by 66% of respondents, followed by esophagectomy in 27% and total gastrectomy in 7%. Siewert type 3 tumors (2-5 cm distal of the GEJ) were preferably treated with gastrectomy in 90% of respondents, esophagectomy in 6%, and extended gastrectomy in 4%. The preferred curative surgical treatment of esophageal cancer is minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy with a two-field lymph node dissection and gastric conduit reconstruction. A strong worldwide trend toward minimally invasive surgery is observed. The preferred surgical treatment of GEJ tumors is esophagectomy for Siewert type 1 tumors and gastrectomy for Siewert type 3 tumors. The majority of surgeons favor an extended gastrectomy for Siewert type 2 tumors.

Esophageal and Gastric Cancer Pearl: a nationwide clinical biobanking project in the Netherlands

Esophageal and gastric cancer is associated with a poor prognosis since many patients develop recurrent disease. Treatment requires specific expertise and a structured multidisciplinary approach. In the Netherlands, this type of expertise is mainly found at the University Medical Centers (UMCs) and a few specialized nonacademic centers. Aim of this study is to implement a national infrastructure for research to gain more insight in the etiology and prognosis of esophageal and gastric cancer and to evaluate and improve the response on (neoadjuvant) treatment. Clinical data are collected in a prospective database, which is linked to the patients' biomaterial. The collection and storage of biomaterial is performed according to standard operating procedures in all participating UMCs as established within the Parelsnoer Institute. The collected biomaterial consists of tumor biopsies, blood samples, samples of malignant and healthy tissue of the resected specimen and biopsies of recurrence. The collected material is stored in the local biobanks and is encoded to respect the privacy of the donors. After approval of the study was obtained from the Institutional Review Board, the first patient was included in October 2014. The target aim is to include 300 patients annually. In conclusion, the eight UMCs of the Netherlands collaborated to establish a nationwide database of clinical information and biomaterial of patients with esophageal and gastric cancer. Due to the national coverage, a high number of patients are expected to be included. This will provide opportunity for future studies to gain more insight in the etiology, treatment and prognosis of esophageal and gastric cancer.

The Oncological Value of Omentectomy in Gastrectomy for Cancer

AIM

The aim of this study was to determine the oncologic value of omentectomy in patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with gastric cancer that underwent gastrectomy with curative intent between April 2012 and August 2015 were prospectively analyzed. The greater omentum was separately marked during operation and pathologically evaluated for the presence of omental lymph nodes and tumor deposits.

RESULTS

In total, 50 patients were included. The greater omentum harbored lymph nodes in nine (18 %) patients. The omental lymph nodes contained metastases in one (2 %) patient, still free of disease after 20 months. Omental tumor deposits were found in four (8 %) patients; one died <30 days postoperative and three developed peritoneal carcinomatosa after 4, 4, and 8 months. Patients with omental tumor deposits had a significantly reduced 1-year disease-free survival compared to patients without tumor deposits (0 vs. 58.7 %, p = 0.003). No predictive factors for omental tumor involvement could be identified.

CONCLUSION

Omental lymph node metastases or tumor deposits are present in 10 % of Western European patients undergoing gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Omentectomy has a prognostic and oncologic value in the curative treatment of patients with gastric cancer. As no predictive factors for omental tumor involvement could be identified, omentectomy should be the standard in gastrectomy for gastric cancer patients.

Worldwide practice in gastric cancer surgery

AIM: To evaluate the current status of gastric cancer surgery worldwide.

METHODS: An international cross-sectional survey on gastric cancer surgery was performed amongst international upper gastro-intestinal surgeons. All surgical members of the International Gastric Cancer Association were invited by e-mail to participate. An English web-based survey had to be filled in with regard to their surgical preferences. Questions asked included hospital volume, the use of neoadjuvant treatment, preferred surgical approach, extent of the lymphadenectomy and preferred anastomotic technique. The invitations were sent in September 2013 and the survey was closed in January 2014.

RESULTS: The corresponding specific response rate was 227/615 (37%). The majority of respondents: originated from Asia (54%), performed > 21 gastrectomies per year (79%) and used neoadjuvant chemotherapy (73%). An open surgical procedure was performed by the majority of surgeons for distal gastrectomy for advanced cancer (91%) and total gastrectomy for both early and advanced cancer (52% and 94%). A minimally invasive procedure was preferred for distal gastrectomy for early cancer (65%). In Asia surgeons preferred a minimally invasive procedure for total gastrectomy for early cancer also (63%). A D1+ lymphadenectomy was preferred in early gastric cancer (52% for distal, 54% for total gastrectomy) and a D2 lymphadenectomy was preferred in advanced gastric cancer (93% for distal, 92% for total gastrectomy)

CONCLUSION: Surgical preferences for gastric cancer surgery vary between surgeons worldwide. Although the majority of surgeons use neoadjuvant chemotherapy, minimally invasive techniques are still not widely adapted.

Staging of adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction

BACKGROUND

Clinical staging of adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) determines the curative treatment regimen containing either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy followed by either gastrectomy or esophagectomy. The value of current diagnostic tools is a matter of debate.

METHODS

A prospective database (2003-2013) was used to identify 266 consecutive patients with adenocarcinoma of the GEJ in order to evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and computed tomography (CT) regarding tumor localization according to Siewert, nodal status and its consequences on treatment strategy.

RESULTS

Overall accuracy in determining tumor localization was 73% for endoscopy/EUS and 61% for CT (p = 0.018). With endoscopy/EUS, the accuracy was 97%, 66% and 75% respectively for type I, II and III. With CT this was respectively 69%, 57% and 80%. The overall accuracy for determining N-status (N0/N+) per patient was 75% for EUS and 71% for CT. Accuracy for determining a positive nodal station in patients without neoadjuvant therapy was 77% for EUS and 71% for CT (p = 0.001). Accuracy for detecting positive upper mediastinal nodes was 80-92%, whereas for peritumoral and abdominal nodes this was 50-80% in both EUS and CT. In 8/266 patients (3%) the type of surgery changed due to intraoperative findings. A radical resection was performed in 233 patients (88%).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the suboptimal accuracy of determining tumor localization with EUS and CT, in only a small number of patients an intraoperative change of surgical treatment was needed. EUS is superior to CT in determining nodal status and tumor localization in GEJ tumors.

Laparoscopic gastrectomy in Western European patients with advanced gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The advantage of laparoscopic gastrectomy compared to open gastrectomy has been established in Asian patient series with early gastric cancer. However, its feasibility in Western European patients with locally advanced gastric cancer is unknown.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2014 70 consecutive patients with advanced gastric cancer underwent laparoscopic gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection. A Billroth II reconstruction was performed after distal gastrectomy. In case of total gastrectomy a jejunal J-pouch reconstruction was performed.

RESULTS

Total gastrectomy was performed in 56 patients and distal gastrectomy in 14 patients. Perioperative chemotherapy was administered in 45/70 (64%) patients. A radical resection was achieved in 63/70 (90%). The median number of dissected lymph nodes was 17 (2-62). The median intraoperative blood loss was 305 (30-2700) milliliters. The median postoperative hospital stay was 11 (5-91) days. The 30-day mortality was 4.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic gastrectomy can be performed in Western European patients with advanced gastric cancer and meets the oncologic standard with low intraoperative blood loss and short hospital stay.

Laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer, a multicenter prospectively randomized controlled trial (LOGICA-trial)

Background

For gastric cancer patients, surgical resection with en-bloc lymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of curative treatment. Open gastrectomy has long been the preferred surgical approach worldwide. However, this procedure is associated with considerable morbidity. Several meta-analyses have shown an advantage in short-term outcomes of laparoscopic gastrectomy compared to open procedures, with similar oncologic outcomes. However, it remains unclear whether the results of these Asian studies can be extrapolated to the Western population. In this trial from the Netherlands, patients with resectable gastric cancer will be randomized to laparoscopic or open gastrectomy.

Methods

The study is a non-blinded, multicenter, prospectively randomized controlled superiority trial. Patients (≥18 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0-3b, M0) gastric adenocarcinoma and European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 are eligible to participate in the study after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 210) will be included in one of the ten participating Dutch centers and are randomized to either laparoscopic or open gastrectomy. The primary outcome is postoperative hospital stay (days). Secondary outcome parameters include postoperative morbidity and mortality, oncologic outcomes, readmissions, quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

Discussion

In this randomized controlled trial laparoscopic and open gastrectomy are compared in patients with resectable gastric cancer. It is expected that laparoscopic gastrectomy will result in a faster recovery of the patient and a shorter hospital stay. Secondly, it is expected that laparoscopic gastrectomy will be associated with a lower postoperative morbidity, less readmissions, higher cost-effectiveness, better postoperative quality of life, but with similar mortality and oncologic outcomes, compared to open gastrectomy. The study started on 1 December 2014. Inclusion and follow-up will take 3 and 5 years respectively. Short-term results will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient.

Trial registration

NCT02248519

Long-term quality of life after oesophagectomy with gastric conduit interposition for cancer

BACKGROUND

Gaining insight in long-term health-related quality of life more than 1year after oesophagectomy will assist clinical decision-making and inform patients about the long-term consequences of surgery.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, all consecutive patients who underwent oesophageal resection with gastric interposition for cancer at a tertiary referral centre between January 2007 and July 2012 were included. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) quality of life questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and QLQ-OES18 were sent to all patients alive without recurrence more than 1year after surgery.

RESULTS

The questionnaires were completed by 92 of 100 patients. Median duration of follow-up after surgery at completing the questionnaire was 36months (range: 12-75). Global quality of life scores were similar to a general population reference group (76±19 versus 78±17; p=0.26). However, patients scored significantly worse compared to the general population reference group on physical-, role-, cognitive- and social functioning (p<0.001). Neoadjuvant therapy and minimally invasive oesophagectomy were associated with significantly better health-related quality of life (HRQL) and symptom scores (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Global HRQL more than 1year after oesophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction is comparable to the general Dutch background population, while specific functional and symptom scores are significantly worse. Neoadjuvant therapy and minimally invasive surgery are associated with quality of life benefits in long-term survivors.

Oncologic Long-Term Results of Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Thoraco-Laparoscopic Esophagectomy with Two-Field Lymphadenectomy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Open transthoracic esophagectomy is the worldwide gold standard in the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer. Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer may be associated with reduced blood loss, shorter intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and less cardiopulmonary morbidity; however, long-term oncologic results have not been reported to date.

METHODS

Between June 2007 and September 2011, a total of 108 patients with potentially resectable esophageal cancer underwent RAMIE at the University Medical Centre Utrecht, with curative intent. All data were recorded prospectively.

RESULTS

Median duration of the surgical procedure was 381 min (range 264-636). Pulmonary complications were most common and were observed in 36 patients (33 %). Median ICU stay was 1 day, and median overall postoperative hospital stay was 16 days. In-hospital mortality was 5 %. The majority of patients (78 %) presented with T3 and T4 disease, and 68 % of patients had nodal-positive disease (cN1-3). In 65 % of patients, neoadjuvant treatment (chemotherapy 57 %, chemoradiotherapy 7 %, radiotherapy 1 %) was administered, and in 103 (95 %) patients, a radical resection (R0) was achieved. The median number of lymph nodes was 26, median follow-up was 58 months, 5-year overall survival was 42 %, median disease-free survival was 21 months, and median overall survival was 29 months. Tumor recurrence occurred in 51 patients and was locoregional only in 6 (6 %) patients, systemic only in 31 (30 %) patients, and combined in 14 (14 %) patients.

CONCLUSION

RAMIE was shown to be oncologically effective, with a high percentage of R0 radical resections and adequate lymphadenectomy. RAMIE provided good local control with a low percentage of local recurrence at long-term follow up.

Surgical treatments for esophageal cancers

The following, from the 12th OESO World Conference: Cancers of the Esophagus, includes commentaries on the role of the nurse in preparation of esophageal resection (ER); the management of patients who develop high-grade dysplasia after having undergone Nissen fundoplication; the trajectory of care for the patient with esophageal cancer; the influence of the site of tumor in the choice of treatment; the best location for esophagogastrostomy; management of chylous leak after esophagectomy; the optimal approach to manage thoracic esophageal leak after esophagectomy; the choice for operational approach in surgery of cardioesophageal crossing; the advantages of robot esophagectomy; the place of open esophagectomy; the advantages of esophagectomy compared to definitive chemoradiotherapy; the pathologist report in the resected specimen; the best way to manage patients with unsuspected positive microscopic margin after ER; enhanced recovery after surgery for ER: expedited care protocols; and long-term quality of life in patients following esophagectomy.

Prophylactic Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy with Jejunal Pouch Reconstruction in Patients Carrying a CDH1 Germline Mutation

BACKGROUND

For patients with an identified germline E-cadherin-1 (CDH1) mutation, prophylactic gastrectomy is the treatment of choice to eliminate the high risk of developing diffuse gastric cancer. Laparoscopic total gastrectomy with jejunal pouch reconstruction is a novel approach that may be especially suitable in these patients.

METHODS

Patients with a germline CDH1 mutation who underwent prophylactic laparoscopic total gastrectomy with jejunal pouch were included in our prospective database.

RESULTS

A total of 11 patients with a median age of 40 (22-61) years were included. The average operative time was 4:26 ± 0:49 h and the average blood loss was 219 ± 155 ml. Median length of hospital stay was 10 (7-27) days. In two patients, an esophagojejunal anastomotic leakage occurred (grade 4). The leakages were seen in patient numbers 2 and 3, which may be a result of a learning curve. The latter eight patients did not develop anastomotic leakage. Pulmonary complications occurred in one patient with atelectasis and in one patient with pneumonia (grade 2). The 60-day mortality rate was 0 %. Multiple foci of intramucosal diffuse gastric signet ring cell carcinoma were found in the resection specimen of 9/11 (82 %) patients. All 11/11 (100 %) resections were microscopically radical.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic laparoscopic total gastrectomy with jejunal pouch reconstruction in patients with a CDH1 germline mutation is feasible and safe. In 82 % of patients, foci of intramucosal diffuse gastric signet ring cell carcinoma in the resection specimen were found.

Surgical treatment of adenocarcinomas of the gastro-esophageal junction

BACKGROUND

Patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) may undergo either esophagectomy or gastrectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of surgical therapy with regard to postoperative outcome and survival in patients with Siewert type II tumors.

METHODS

A prospective database of 266 consecutive patients with surgically resectable GEJ adenocarcinomas from 2003 to 2013 was analyzed. The surgical approach was based on preoperative imaging and intraoperative findings.

RESULTS

According to the histopathological analysis, 67 patients (25 %) had type I tumor, 176 patients (66 %) had type II tumor, and 16 patients (6 %) had type III tumor. In total, 86 % were treated with esophagectomy and 14 % with gastrectomy. Overall 5-year survival was 38 %. In type II patients, the type of operation did not significantly influence overall survival on multivariate analysis (p = 0.606). A positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) at the site of the esophagus was more common with gastrectomy (29 vs. 11 %; p = 0.025). No significant differences in mortality, morbidity, or disease recurrence were found. In patients with type II tumors, upper mediastinal nodal involvement (subcarinal, paratracheal, and aortapulmonary window) was found in 11 % of the patients. In 34 % of patients treated with esophagectomy, paraesophageal lymph nodes metastases were harvested compared with 5 % of patients treated with gastrectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with a type II GEJ adenocarcinoma, a positive CRM was more common with gastrectomy. Esophagectomy provides for a more complete para-esophageal lymphadenectomy. Furthermore, the high prevalence of mediastinal nodal involvement indicates that a full lymphadenectomy of these stations should be considered.

Calcification of arteries supplying the gastric tube: a new risk factor for anastomotic leakage after esophageal surgery

PURPOSE

To evaluate the association between the amount and location of calcifications of the supplying arteries of the gastric tube, as determined with a vascular calcification scoring system, and the occurrence of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy with gastric tube reconstruction in patients with esophageal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Institutional review board approval was obtained, and the informed consent requirement was waived for this retrospective study. Consecutive patients who underwent elective esophagectomy for cancer with gastric tube reconstruction and cervical anastomosis between 2003 and 2012 were identified from a prospective database. Vascular calcification scores were retrospectively assigned by reviewing the routine preoperative computed tomographic (CT) images. In patients with anastomotic leakage, presence and severity of calcifications of the aorta (score of 0-2), celiac axis (score of 0-2), right postceliac arteries (common hepatic, gastroduodenal, and right gastroepiploic arteries; score of 0-1), and left postceliac arteries (splenic and left gastroepiploic arteries, score of 0-1) along with patient- and procedure-related characteristics were compared with those of patients without leakage by using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 246 patients, 58 (24%) experienced anastomotic leakage. No significant differences in patient-related factors were found between patients with leakage and those without leakage, with the exception of more chronic use of steroids in the leakage group (7% [four of 58] vs 0% [0 of 188], P = .003). At univariate analysis, leakage was more common in patients with calcification of the aorta (27% [28 of 102] and 35% [13 of 37] vs 16% [17 of 107], P = .029) and the right postceliac arteries (55% [six of 11] vs 22% [52 of 235], P = .013). At multivariate analysis, both minor (odds ratio, 2.00; 95% confidence interval: 1.02, 3.94) and major (odds ratio, 2.87; 95% confidence interval: 1.22, 6.72) aortic calcifications were associated with leakage. Also, an independent association with leakage was found for calcifications of the right postceliac arteries (odds ratio, 4.22; 95% confidence interval: 1.24, 14.4).

CONCLUSION

Atherosclerotic calcification of the aorta and right postceliac arteries that supply the gastric tube is an independent risk factor for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy.

End-to-end cervical esophagogastric anastomoses are associated with a higher number of strictures compared with end-to-side anastomoses

BACKGROUND

Leakage and benign strictures occur frequently after esophagectomy. The objective of this study was to analyze the outcome of hand-sewn end-to-end versus end-to-side cervical esophagogastric anastomoses.

METHODS

A series of 390 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction was analyzed.

RESULTS

The end-to-end technique was performed in 112 (29 %) patients and the end-to-side in 278 (71 %) patients. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 20 (18 %) patients with an end-to-end anastomosis versus 58 (21 %) patients with an end-to-side anastomosis (p = 0.50). A higher incidence in anastomotic strictures was seen in end-to-end anastomoses (48 (43 %)) compared with end-to-side anastomoses (89 (32 %); p = 0.04). Moreover, a median of 11 (7-17) dilations was necessary in patients with a benign anastomotic stricture in the end-to-end group compared with four (2-8) dilations in patients with a benign anastomotic stricture in the end-to-end group (p < 0.036). After multivariate analysis, the difference in anastomotic leakage rates remained nonsignificant (p = 0.74), whereas anastomotic stricture rate and number of dilations were higher in the end-to-end group (p = 0.03 and p = 0.01, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The technique of anastomosis is not significantly related to anastomotic leakage rate. However, patients with end-to-end anastomoses develop postoperative strictures more frequently, requiring a higher number of dilations compared to end-to-side anastomoses.

[Surgical treatment of gastric cancer: focus on centralisation and laparoscopic resections]

Approximately 2000 patients are diagnosed with gastric carcinoma in the Netherlands each year; about 500 will be eligible for curative surgical treatment. The 5-year survival rate after therapy aimed at curing the condition is 45%, which can increase by an average of 10% if perioperative chemotherapy is added to the treatment regimen. Surgical treatment consists of a distal or total gastrectomy with spleen-preserving lymphadenectomy. Centralising this type of treatment leads to less postoperative mortality and better oncological outcomes. There are indications that laparoscopic surgery can accelerate postoperative recovery time. There are insufficient long-term data on outcomes of laparoscopic surgery to date to be able to conclude whether the laparoscopic or open approach to total gastric resection is preferable.

Laparoscopic total gastrectomy versus open total gastrectomy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The possible advantages of laparoscopic (assisted) total gastrectomy (LTG) versus open total gastrectomy (OTG) have not been reviewed systematically. The aim of this study was to systematically review the short-term outcomes of LTG versus OTG in the treatment of gastric cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Embase was conducted. All original studies comparing LTG with OTG were included for critical appraisal. Data describing short-term outcomes were pooled and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of eight original studies that compared LTG (n = 314) with OTG (n = 384) in patients with gastric cancer fulfilled quality criteria and were selected for review and meta-analysis. LTG compared with OTG was associated with a significant reduction of intraoperative blood loss (weighted mean difference = 227.6 ml; 95 % CI 144.3-310.9; p < 0.001), a reduced risk of postoperative complications (risk ratio = 0.51; 95 % CI 0.33-0.77), and shorter hospital stay (weighted mean difference 4.0 = days; 95 % CI 1.4-6.5; p < 0.001). These benefits were at the cost of longer operative time (weighted mean difference = 55.5 min; 95 % CI 24.8-86.2; p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality rates were comparable for LTG (0.9 %) and OTG (1.8 %) (risk ratio = 0.68; 95 % CI 0.20-2.36).

CONCLUSION

LTG shows better short term outcomes compared with OTG in eligible patients with gastric cancer. Future studies should evaluate 30- and 60-day mortality, radicality of resection, and long-term follow-up in LTG versus OTG, preferably in randomized trials.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open transthoracic esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer, a randomized controlled trial (ROBOT trial)

BACKGROUND

For esophageal cancer patients, radical esophagolymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of multimodality treatment with curative intent. Transthoracic esophagectomy is the preferred surgical approach worldwide allowing for en-bloc resection of the tumor with the surrounding lymph nodes. However, the percentage of cardiopulmonary complications associated with the transthoracic approach is high (50 to 70%).Recent studies have shown that robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy (RATE) is at least equivalent to the open transthoracic approach for esophageal cancer in terms of short-term oncological outcomes. RATE was accompanied with reduced blood loss, shorter ICU stay and improved lymph node retrieval compared with open esophagectomy, and the pulmonary complication rate, hospital stay and perioperative mortality were comparable. The objective is to evaluate the efficacy, risks, quality of life and cost-effectiveness of RATE as an alternative to open transthoracic esophagectomy for treatment of esophageal cancer.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is an investigator-initiated and investigator-driven monocenter randomized controlled parallel-group, superiority trial. All adult patients (age ≥ 18 and ≤ 80 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0-3, M0) esophageal carcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus and with European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 will be assessed for eligibility and included after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 112) with resectable esophageal cancer are randomized in the outpatient department to either RATE (n = 56) or open three-stage transthoracic esophageal resection (n = 56). The primary outcome of this study is the percentage of overall complications (grade 2 and higher) as stated by the modified Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications.

DISCUSSION

This is the first randomized controlled trial designed to compare RATE with open transthoracic esophagectomy as surgical treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. If our hypothesis is proven correct, RATE will result in a lower percentage of postoperative complications, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay, but with at least similar oncologic outcomes and better postoperative quality of life compared with open transthoracic esophagectomy. The study started in January 2012. Follow-up will be 5 years. Short-term results will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Dutch trial register: NTR3291 ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01544790.

[Acute renal failure due to Cortinarius poisoning]

BACKGROUND

Ingestion of certain Cortinarius species may lead to renal failure. In the Netherlands, this type of poisoning has not been previously described.

CASUS

A 58-year-old female presented with headache, vomiting and oliguria, preceded by a few days of burning, painful thirst and malaise. She had acute and irreversible renal failure of unknown cause. History revealed that two days before the onset of her symptoms, she had eaten a ragout prepared with mushrooms that were picked in a forest. A renal biopsy demonstrated interstitial nephritis with proximal tubular necrosis. In the leftovers of the ragout two fragments of Cortinarius mushroom, probably belonging to the complex of Cortinarius cinnamomeus (cinnamon webcap), were found. First signs and symptoms, and the course are compatible with those described in the literature on Cortinarius poisoning. Despite haemodialysis and administration of acetylcysteine and glucocorticoids, her renal function did not recover.

CONCLUSION

This case is the first description of mushroom poisoning by a species of the genus Cortinarius in the Netherlands.