We aim to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing R0 esophagectomy by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) with outcomes after surgery alone performed by surgeons working independently in a UK cancer unit. An historical control group of 77 consecutive patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer and undergoing surgery with curative intent by six general surgeons between 1991 and 1997 (54 R0 esophagectomies) were compared with a group of 67 consecutive patients managed by the MDT between 1998 and 2003 (53 R0 esophagectomies, 26 patients received multimodal therapy). The proportion of patients undergoing open and closed laparotomy and thoracotomy decreased from 21% and 5%, respectively, in control patients, to 13% and 0% in MDT patients (chi2 = 11.90, DF = 1, P = 0.001; chi2 = 5.45, DF = 1, P = 0.02 respectively). MDT patients had lower operative mortality (5.7%vs. 26%; chi2 = 8.22, DF = 1, P = 0.004) than control patients, and were more likely to survive 5 years (52%vs. 10%, chi2 = 15.05, P = 0.0001). In a multivariate analysis, MDT management (HR = 0.337, 95% CI = 0.201-0.564, P < 0.001), lymph node metastases (HR = 1.728, 95% CI = 1.070-2.792, P = 0.025), and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade (HR = 2.207, 95% CI = 1.412-3.450, P = 0.001) were independently associated with duration of survival. Multidisciplinary team management and surgical subspecialization improved outcomes after surgery significantly for patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer.

ObjectivesThe management of incidentally detected gallbladder polyps on radiological examinations is contentious. The incidental radiological finding of a gallbladder polyp can therefore be problematic for the radiologist and the clinician who referred the patient for the radiological examination. To address this a joint guideline was created by the European Society of Gastrointestinal and Abdominal Radiology (ESGAR), European Association for Endoscopic Surgery and other Interventional Techniques (EAES), International Society of Digestive Surgery – European Federation (EFISDS) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE).MethodsA targeted literature search was performed and consensus guidelines were created using a series of Delphi questionnaires and a seven-point Likert scale.ResultsA total of three Delphi rounds were performed. Consensus regarding which patients should have cholecystectomy, which patients should have ultrasound follow-up and the nature and duration of that follow-up was established. The full recommendations as well as a summary algorithm are provided.ConclusionsThese expert consensus recommendations can be used as guidance when a gallbladder polyp is encountered in clinical practice.Key Points• Management of gallbladder polyps is contentious • Cholecystectomy is recommended for gallbladder polyps >10 mm • Management of polyps <10 mm depends on patient and polyp characteristics • Further research is required to determine optimal management of gallbladder polyps

No abstract

ObjectivesThis retrospective cohort study developed a prognostic model incorporating PET texture analysis in patients with oesophageal cancer (OC). Internal validation of the model was performed.MethodsConsecutive OC patients (n = 403) were chronologically separated into development (n = 302, September 2010-September 2014, median age = 67.0, males = 227, adenocarcinomas = 237) and validation cohorts (n = 101, September 2014-July 2015, median age = 69.0, males = 78, adenocarcinomas = 79). Texture metrics were obtained using a machine-learning algorithm for automatic PET segmentation. A Cox regression model including age, radiological stage, treatment and 16 texture metrics was developed. Patients were stratified into quartiles according to a prognostic score derived from the model. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS).ResultsSix variables were significantly and independently associated with OS: age [HR =1.02 (95% CI 1.01-1.04), p < 0.001], radiological stage [1.49 (1.20-1.84), p < 0.001], treatment [0.34 (0.24–0.47), p < 0.001], log(TLG) [5.74 (1.44–22.83), p = 0.013], log(Histogram Energy) [0.27 (0.10–0.74), p = 0.011] and Histogram Kurtosis [1.22 (1.04–1.44), p = 0.017]. The prognostic score demonstrated significant differences in OS between quartiles in both the development (X2 143.14, df 3, p < 0.001) and validation cohorts (X2 20.621, df 3, p < 0.001).ConclusionsThis prognostic model can risk stratify patients and demonstrates the additional benefit of PET texture analysis in OC staging.Key points• PET texture analysis adds prognostic value to oesophageal cancer staging.• Texture metrics are independently and significantly associated with overall survival.• A prognostic model including texture analysis can help risk stratify patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00330-017-4973-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.