PurposeThe efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRT) plus surgery for locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains controversial. In this trial, we compared the survival and safety of NCRT plus surgery with surgery alone in patients with locally advanced ESCC.Patients and MethodsFrom June 2007 to December 2014, 451 patients with potentially resectable thoracic ESCC, clinically staged as T1-4N1M0/T4N0M0, were randomly allocated to NCRT plus surgery (group CRT; n = 224) and surgery alone (group S; n = 227). In group CRT, patients received vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 IV day 1, or 25 mg/m2 IV on days 1 to 4 every 3 weeks for two cycles, with a total concurrent radiation dose of 40.0 Gy administered in 20 fractions of 2.0 Gy on 5 days per week. In both groups, patients underwent McKeown or Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. The primary end point was overall survival.ResultsThe pathologic complete response rate was 43.2% in group CRT. Compared with group S, group CRT had a higher R0 resection rate (98.4% v 91.2%; P = .002), a better median overall survival (100.1 months v 66.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.96; P = .025), and a prolonged disease-free survival (100.1 months v 41.7 months; hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.78; P < .001). Leukopenia (48.9%) and neutropenia (45.7%) were the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events during chemoradiotherapy. Incidences of postoperative complications were similar between groups, with the exception of arrhythmia (group CRT: 13% v group S: 4.0%; P = .001). Peritreatment mortality was 2.2% in group CRT versus 0.4% in group S (P = .212).ConclusionThis trial shows that NCRT plus surgery improves survival over surgery alone among patients with locally advanced ESCC, with acceptable and manageable adverse events.

Standardized methods provide contemporary international benchmarks for reporting outcomes after esophagectomy.

No abstract

Objective: Our aim was to validate the prognostic relevance in NSCLC of potential residual tumor (R) descriptors, including the proposed International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer definition for uncertain resection, referred to as R(un).Methods: A total of 14,712 patients undergoing resection with full R status and survival were analyzed. The following were also evaluated: whether fewer than three N2 stations

Background: Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) has been shown to reduce major postoperative complications compared with open esophagectomy (OE) for esophageal cancer. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare short- and long-term health-related quality of life (HRQOL) following HMIE and OE within a randomized controlled trial. Methods: We performed a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial at 13 study centers between 2009 and 2012. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with resectable cancers of the middle or lower third of the esophagus were randomized to undergo either transthoracic OE or HMIE. Patients were followed-up every 6 months for 3 years postoperatively and global health assessed with EORTC-QLQC30 and esophageal symptoms assessed with EORTC-OES18. Results: The short-term reduction in global HRQOL at 30 days specifically role functioning [−33.33 (HMIE) vs −46.3 (OE); P = 0.0407] and social functioning [−16.88 (HMIE) vs −35.74 (OE); P = 0.0003] was less substantial in the HMIE group. At 2 years, social functioning had improved following HMIE to beyond baseline (+5.37) but remained reduced in the OE group (−8.33) (P = 0.0303). At 2 years, increases in pain were similarly reduced in the HMIE compared with the OE group [+6.94 (HMIE) vs +14.05 (OE); P = 0.018]. Postoperative complications in multivariate analysis were associated with role functioning, pain, and dysphagia. Conclusions: Esophagectomy has substantial effects upon short-term HRQOL. These effects for some specific parameters are, however, reduced with HMIE, with persistent differences up to 2 years, and maybe mediated by a reduction in postoperative complications.

A quarter of patients with clinical N1 (cN1) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) based on positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) imaging have occult mediastinal nodal involvement (N2 disease). In a prospective study, endosonography alone had an unsatisfactory sensitivity (38%) in detecting N2 disease. The current prospective multicentre trial investigated the sensitivity of preoperative mediastinal staging by video-assisted mediastinoscopy (VAM) or VAM-lymphadenectomy (VAMLA).Consecutive patients with operable and resectable (suspected) NSCLC and cN1 after PET-CT imaging underwent VAM(LA). The primary study outcome was sensitivity to detect N2 disease. Secondary endpoints were the prevalence of N2 disease, negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of VAM(LA).Out of 105 patients with cN1 on imaging, 26% eventually developed N2 disease. Invasive mediastinal staging with VAM(LA) had a sensitivity of 73% to detect N2 disease. The NPV was 92% and accuracy 93%. Median number of assessed lymph node stations during VAM(LA) was 4 (IQR 3-5), and in 96%, at least three stations were assessed.VAM(LA) has a satisfactory sensitivity of 73% to detect mediastinal nodal disease in cN1 lung cancer, and could be the technique of choice for pre-resection mediastinal lymph node assessment in this patient group with a one in four chance of occult-positive mediastinal nodes after negative PET-CT.

Chest trauma remains an issue for health services for both severe and apparently mild trauma management. Severe chest trauma is associated with high mortality and is considered liable for 25% of mortality in multiple traumas. Moreover, mild trauma is also associated with significant morbidity especially in patients with preexisting conditions. Thus, whatever the severity, a fast-acting strategy must be organized. At this time, there are no guidelines available from scientific societies. These expert recommendations aim to establish guidelines for chest trauma management in both prehospital an in hospital settings, for the first 48hours. The "Société française d'anesthésie réanimation" and the "Société française de médecine d'urgence" worked together on the 7 following questions: (1) criteria defining severity and for appropriate hospital referral; (2) diagnosis strategy in both pre- and in-hospital settings; (3) indications and guidelines for ventilatory support; (4) management of analgesia; (5) indications and guidelines for chest tube placement; (6) surgical and endovascular repair indications in blunt chest trauma; (7) definition, medical and surgical specificity of penetrating chest trauma. For each question, prespecified "crucial" (and sometimes also "important") outcomes were identified by the panel of experts because it mattered for patients. We rated evidence across studies for these specific clinical outcomes. After a systematic Grade approach, we defined 60 recommendations. Each recommendation has been evaluated by all the experts according to the DELPHI method.

No abstract