BackgroundElderly patients who undergo esophagectomy for cancer often have a high prevalence of coexisting diseases, which may adversely affect their postoperative course. We determined the relationship of advanced age (i.e., ≥70 years) with outcome and evaluated age as a selection criterion for surgery.MethodsBetween January 1991 and January 2007, we performed a curative-intent extended transthoracic esophagectomy in 234 patients with cancer of the esophagus. Patients were divided into two age groups: <70 years (group I; 170 patients) and ≥70 years (group II; 64 patients).ResultsBoth groups were comparable regarding comorbidity (American Society of Anesthesiologists classification), and tumor and surgical characteristics. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 6.2% (group I, 5%, vs. group II, 11%, P = 0.09). Advanced age was not a prognostic factor for developing postoperative complications (odds ratio, 1.578; 95% confidence interval, 0.857–2.904; P = 0.143). The overall number of complications was equal with 58% in group I vs. 69% in group II (P = 0.142). Moreover, the occurrence of complications in elderly patients did not influence survival (P = 0.174). Recurrences developed more in patients <70 years (58% vs. 42%, P = 0.028). The overall 5-year survival was 35%, and, when included, postoperative mortality was 33% in both groups (P = 0.676).The presence of comorbidity was an independent prognostic factor for survival (P = 0.002).ConclusionsAdvanced age (≥70 years) has minor influence on postoperative course, recurrent disease, and survival in patients who underwent an extended esophagectomy. Age alone is not a prognostic indicator for survival. We propose that a radical resection should not be withheld in elderly patients with limited frailty and comorbidity.

Radicality and LN ratio are strong prognostic factors. High radicality and adequate nodal assessment are guaranteed by an extended transthoracic approach.

BackgroundIn esophageal cancer, circumferential resection margins (CRMs) are considered to be of relevant prognostic value, but a reliable definition of tumor-free CRM is still unclear. The aim of this study was to appraise the clinical prognostic value of microscopic CRM involvement and to determine the optimal limit of CRM.MethodsTo define the optimal tumor-free CRM we included 98 consecutive patients who underwent extended esophagectomy with microscopic tumor-free resection margins (R0) between 1997 and 2006. CRMs were measured in tenths of millimeters with inked lateral margins. Outcome of patients with CRM involvement was compared with a statistically comparable control group of 21 patients with microscopic positive resection margins (R1).ResultsA cutoff point of CRM at ≤1.0 mm and >1.0 mm appeared to be an adequate marker for survival and prognosis (both P < 0.001). The outcome in patients with CRMs ≤1.0 and >0 mm was equal to that in patients with CRM of 0 mm (P = 0.43). CRM involvement was an independent prognostic factor for both recurrent disease (P = 0.001) and survival (P < 0.001). Survival of patients with positive CRMs (≤1 mm) did not significantly differ from patients with an R1 resection (P = 0.12).ConclusionInvolvement of the circumferential resection margins is an independent prognostic factor for recurrent disease and survival in esophageal cancer. The optimal limit for a positive CRM is ≤1 mm and for a free CRM is >1.0 mm. Patients with unfavorable CRM should be approached as patients with R1 resection with corresponding outcome.

No abstract

The role of primary tumor resection (PTR) in synchronous patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who had unresectable metastases and few or absent symptoms of their primary tumor is unclear. Studying subgroups with low postoperative mortality may identify patients who potentially benefit from PTR.OBJECTIVE To determine the difference in 60-day mortality between patients randomized to systemic treatment only vs PTR followed by systemic treatment, and to explore risk factors associated with 60-day mortality.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS CAIRO4 is a randomized phase 3 trial initiated in 2012 in which patients with mCRC were randomized to systemic treatment only or PTR followed by systemic treatment with palliative intent. This multicenter study was conducted by the Danish and Dutch Colorectal Cancer Group in general and academic hospitals in Denmark and the Netherlands. Patients included between August 2012 and December 2019 with histologically proven colorectal cancer, unresectable metastases, and a primary tumor with few or absent symptoms were eligible.INTERVENTIONS Systemic treatment, consisting of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab vs PTR followed by fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy with bevacizumab. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe aim of the current analysis was to compare 60-day mortality rates in both treatment arms. A secondary aim was the identification of risk factors for 60-day mortality in the treatment arms. These aims were not predefined in the study protocol.RESULTS A total of 196 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (112 [57%] men; median [IQR] age, 65 [59-70] years). Sixty-day mortality was 3% (95% CI, 1%-9%) in the systemic treatment arm and 11% (95% CI, 6%-19%) in the PTR arm (P = .03). In a per-protocol analysis, 60-day mortality was 2% (95% CI, 1%-7%) vs 10% (95% CI, 5%-18%; P = .048). Patients with elevated serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, and/or neutrophils who were randomized to PTR had a significantly higher 60-day mortality than patients without these characteristics.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Patients with mCRC who were randomized to PTR followed by systemic treatment had a higher 60-day mortality than patients randomized to systemic treatment. Especially patients randomized to the PTR arm with elevated serum levels of lactate dehydrogenase, neutrophils, aspartate aminotransferase, and/or alanine aminotransferase were at high risk of postoperative mortality. Final study results on overall survival have to be awaited.

Aim: In this feasibility study we investigated whether magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide (USPIO) can be used to identify regional and distant lymph nodes, including mediastinal and celiac lymph node metastases in patients with oesophageal cancer.Patients and methods: Ten patients with a potentially curative resectable cancer of the oesophagus were eligible for this study. All patients included in the study had positive lymph nodes on conventional staging (including endoscopic ultrasound, computed tomography and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography). Nine patients underwent MRI + USPIO before surgery. Results were restricted to those patients who had both MRI + USPIO and histological examination. Results were compared with conventional staging and histopathologic findings.Results: One patient was excluded due to expired study time. Five out of 9 patients underwent an exploration; in 1 patient prior to surgery MRI + USPIO diagnosed liver metastases and in 3 patients an oesophageal resection was performed. USPIO uptake in mediastinal lymph nodes was seen in 6 out of 9 patients; in 3 patients non-malignant nodes were not visible. In total, 9 lymph node stations (of 6 patients) were separately analysed; 7 lymph node stations were assessed as positive (N1) on MRI+USPIO compared with 9 by conventional staging. According to histology findings, there was one false-positive and one false-negative result in MRI + USPIO. Also, conventional staging modalities had one false-positive and one false-negative result. MRI + USPIO had surplus value in one patient. Not all lymph node stations could be compared due to unforeseen explorations. No adverse effects occurred after USPIO infusion.Conclusion: MRI+USPIO identified the majority of mediastinal and celiac (suspect) lymph nodes in 9 patients with oesophageal cancer. MRI+USPIO could have an additional value in loco-regional staging; however, more supplementary research is needed.

We aim to determine the effect of splenectomy on clinical outcome in patients with cancer of the distal esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) after a curative intended resection. From January 1991 to July 2004, 210 patients underwent a potentially curative gastroesophageal resection with an extended nodal dissection. The study group was divided into: group I with splenectomy, consisting of 66 patients (31.4%), and group II without splenectomy, of 144 patients. Splenectomy was performed for oncological reasons. Medical records were reviewed retrospectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 27 patients (40.9%) in group I and in 68 patients (47.2%) in group II (P = 0.4). The overall mortality was not significantly different between both groups (P = 0.7). There was a higher administration of red blood cells during surgery (P < or = 0.001), increased operating room (OR) time (P < or = 0.001) and longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay (P = 0.01) in group I. Independent prognostic factors for survival were outcome of surgery, nodal metastases, gender, complications and ICU stay. Sepsis was a strong prognostic factor among the complications. The 1 and 2-year survival was significantly higher in group II; 75% and 67% (P = 0.032) compared to 69% and 56% (P = 0.017) in group I, respectively. However, the 5-year survival was not different in both groups (29% in group I and 60% in group II, P = 0.191). Splenectomy had no marked effect on mortality and morbidity after curative resection of esophageal cancer. Splenectomy had a significant increase in blood transfusions with prolonged OR time and ICU stay and decreased short-term survival.

Our study suggests that the clinical value for a routinely performed contrast examination is debatable. We recommend performing a contrast examination based on clinical suspicion and clinical signs of anastomotic leakage including sepsis, fever > or = 39.0 degrees C and leukocytosis > or = 20 x 10(9)/ml.