No abstract

BackgroundNeoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) plus surgery is a standard treatment for locally advanced oesophageal cancer. With this treatment, 29% of patients have a pathologically complete response in the resection specimen. This provides the rationale for investigating an active surveillance approach. The aim of this study is to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of active surveillance vs. standard oesophagectomy after nCRT for oesophageal cancer.MethodsThis is a phase-III multi-centre, stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. A total of 300 patients with clinically complete response (cCR, i.e. no local or disseminated disease proven by histology) after nCRT will be randomised to show non-inferiority of active surveillance to standard oesophagectomy (non-inferiority margin 15%, intra-correlation coefficient 0.02, power 80%, 2-sided α 0.05, 12% drop-out). Patients will undergo a first clinical response evaluation (CRE-I) 4–6 weeks after nCRT, consisting of endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies of the primary tumour site and other suspected lesions. Clinically complete responders will undergo a second CRE (CRE-II), 6–8 weeks after CRE-I. CRE-II will include 18F–FDG-PET-CT, followed by endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies and ultra-endosonography plus fine needle aspiration of suspected lymph nodes and/or PET- positive lesions. Patients with cCR at CRE-II will be assigned to oesophagectomy (first phase) or active surveillance (second phase of the study). The duration of the first phase is determined randomly over the 12 centres, i.e., stepped-wedge cluster design. Patients in the active surveillance arm will undergo diagnostic evaluations similar to CRE-II at 6/9/12/16/20/24/30/36/48 and 60 months after nCRT. In this arm, oesophagectomy will be offered only to patients in whom locoregional regrowth is highly suspected or proven, without distant dissemination. The main study parameter is overall survival; secondary endpoints include percentage of patients who do not undergo surgery, quality of life, clinical irresectability (cT4b) rate, radical resection rate, postoperative complications, progression-free survival, distant dissemination rate, and cost-effectiveness. We hypothesise that active surveillance leads to non-inferior survival, improved quality of life and a reduction in costs, compared to standard oesophagectomy.DiscussionIf active surveillance and surgery as needed after nCRT leads to non-inferior survival compared to standard oesophagectomy, this organ-sparing approach can be implemented as a standard of care.

The route of GE reconstruction after PD does not influence the postoperative incidence of DGE or other complications. The etiology and treatment of DGE, which occurs frequently after both procedures, need further investigation. The GE reconstruction after PD should be routed according to the surgeon's preference.

Objective Hartmann's procedure (HP) still remains the most frequently performed procedure in acute perforated diverticulitis, but it results in a end colostomy. Primary anastomosis (PA) with or without defunctioning loop ileostomy (DI) seems a good alternative. The aim of this study was to assess differences in the rate of stomal reversal after HP and PA with DI and to evaluate factors associated with postreversal morbidity in patients operated for acute perforated diverticulitis.Method All 158 patients who had survived emergency surgery for acute perforated diverticulitis in five teaching hospitals in The Netherlands between 1995 and 2005 and underwent HP or PA with DI were retrospectively studied. Age, gender, ASA-classification, severity of primary disease, delay of stoma reversal, surgeon's experience, surgical procedure and type of anastomosis were analysed in relation to outcome after stoma reversal.Results Of the 158 patients, 139 had undergone HP and 19 PA with DI. The reversal-rate was higher in patients with DI (14 ⁄ 19; 74%) compared to HP (63 ⁄ 139; 45%) (P = 0.027) Delay between primary surgery and stoma reversal was shorter after PA with DI compared with HP (3.9 vs 9.1 months; P < 0.001). Cumulative postreversal morbidity after HP was 44%. Early surgical complications occurred in 22 of 63 patients. Morbidity after DI reversal was 15% (P < 0.001). Three patients died after HP reversal, none died after DI reversal. Anastomotic leakage was observed in 10 patients after HP reversal. This was less frequently observed when the operation was performed by a specialist colorectal surgeon (10% vs 33%; P = 0.049) and when a stapled anastomosis was performed (4% vs 24%; P = 0.037).Conclusions Reversal of HP should only be performed by an experienced colorectal surgeon, preferably performing a stapled anastomosis, or probably not be performed at all, as it is accompanied by high postoperative morbidity and even mortality. It is important that these findings are taken in account for when performing primary emergency surgery for acute perforated diverticulitis.

In patients with pancreatic head cancer, the delay in surgery associated with PBD does not impair or benefit survival rate.