The purpose of this study was to directly compare CT with fluoroscopy for the diagnosis of occult anastomotic leak following oesophagectomy. Patients undergoing oesophagectomy and gastric conduit formation for the treatment of oesophageal cancer were eligible for inclusion. Imaging was performed 6-8 days post-operatively. Patients underwent multislice CT examination of the chest and abdomen with a bolus of oral contrast, followed by fluoroscopic water-soluble contrast swallow (with subsequent use of barium if this was normal). The studies were reviewed by a consultant radiologist, who was blinded to the results of the other modality. Images were reported as showing "no leak", "possible leak" or "definite leak". The presence of mediastinal gas or fluid or extraluminal contrast at CT was recorded. The clinical outcome after reinstituition of oral intake was used as a reference standard. Patient preference for modality was recorded. 52 patients were recruited. Four were found to have leak on CT and fluoroscopy. 11 had possible leak at CT, but normal fluoroscopy: 2 of these had a leak confirmed later, whereas 9 had no leak. 37 had normal CT and fluoroscopy findings, and remained clinically well. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were 100%, 80%, 40% and 100%, respectively, for CT, and 67%, 100%, 100% and 96%, respectively, for fluoroscopy. The positive predictive value of mediastinal air, air/fluid and extraluminal contrast were 25%, 75% and 50%, respectively. 35 patients found CT more tolerable. In conclusion, CT was better tolerated and more sensitive but less specific than fluoroscopy for detecting occult anastomotic leak.

No abstract

Aims: Doseeresponse curves suggest that higher doses of radiotherapy improve the complete response rate in rectal cancer. The UK adopted the EXPERT trial dose and fractionation, 45 Gy in 25 fractions to the pelvis with a sequential 9 Gy in five fractions to the gross tumour, in patients where the aim was to maximise the complete response. In the Oxford University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (Oxford, UK) we deliver a biological equivalent dose (BED5) in selected patients using intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with a simultaneous integrated boost (SIB) in 25 fractions. We carried out a retrospective analysis of our series to: (i) document the toxicity of this protocol; (ii) ascertain whether dose constraints from RTOG 0822 were appropriate; (iii) assess the response. Materials and methods: The demographics and treatment details for all consecutive patients treated with this protocol were collected using electronic systems. Patients received 45 Gy to the elective nodes and 52 Gy using a SIB to the gross tumour with capecitabine chemotherapy using IMRT or RapidArc plans. Acute toxicity was collected prospectively during weekly reviews. For the purpose of this study, a dedicated gastrointestinal radiologist reviewed all baseline and posttreatment magnetic resonance images and assigned a magnetic resonance tumour regression grade (mrTRG). Results: Seventy-one patients were identified. Seventy completed radiotherapy with a median overall treatment time of 34 days (range 32e36 days); 67.6% received full-dose chemotherapy, with 21.2% receiving a reduced dose. There was a 4.2% incidence of grade 3þ non-haematological toxicity and 1.5% grade 3 þ haematological toxicity. 4.2% were admitted during their radiotherapy, with one death due to a pelvic abscess. The RTOG 0822 constraints were achieved in !75% of cases, other than the high-dose bladder constraint. mrTRG 1e2 was seen in 47.8%, with mrTRG 1 seen in 23.9%. Conclusions: We suggest that our protocol shows acceptable acute toxicity, with promising mrTRG results, and could be adopted by centres as an IMRT equivalent dose for EXPERT dose and fractionation.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.