International Survey on the Management of Anastomotic Leakage After Esophageal Resection.

Background Many studies have explored factors relating to post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF); however, the original definition (All-POPF) was revised to include only 'clinically relevant' (CR) POPF. This study identified variables associated with the two International Study Group on Pancreatic Surgery definitions to identify which variables are more strongly associated with CR-POPF. Methods A systematic review identified all studies reporting risk factors for POPF (using both International Study Group on Pancreatic Fistula definitions) following pancreatoduodenectomy. The primary outcome was factors associated with CR-POPF. Meta-analyses (random effects models) of pre-, intra- and post-operative factors associated with POPF in more than two studies were included. Results Among 52 774 patients All-POPF (n = 69 studies) and CR-POPF (n = 53 studies) affected 27% (95% confidence interval (CI95% ) 23-30) and 19% (CI95% 17-22), respectively. Of the 176 factors, 24 and 17 were associated with All- and CR-POPF, respectively. Absence of pre-operative pancreatitis, presence of renal disease, no pre-operative neoadjuvant therapy, use of post-operative somatostatin analogues, absence of associated venous or arterial resection were associated with CR-POPF but not All-POPF. Conclusion In conclusion this study demonstrates wide variation in reported rates of POPF and that several risk factors associated with CR-POPF are not used within risk prediction models. Data from this study can be used to shape future studies, research and audit across ethnic and geographic boundaries in POPF following pancreatoduodenectomy.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of factors associated with post-operative pancreatic fistula following pancreatoduodenectomy.

Background No evidence currently exists characterising global outcomes following major cancer surgery, including esophageal cancer. Therefore, this study aimed to characterise impact of high income countries (HIC) versus low and middle income countries (LMIC) on the outcomes following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Method This international multi-center prospective study across 137 hospitals in 41 countries included patients who underwent an esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, with 90-day follow-up. The main explanatory variable was country income, defined according to the World Bank Data classification. The primary outcome was 90-day postoperative mortality, and secondary outcomes were composite leaks (anastomotic leak or conduit necrosis) and major complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade III - V). Multivariable generalized estimating equation models were used to produce adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI95%). Results Between April 2018 to December 2018, 2247 patients were included. Patients from HIC were more significantly older, with higher ASA grade, and more advanced tumors. Patients from LMIC had almost three-fold increase in 90-day mortality, compared to HIC (9.4% vs 3.7%, p  Conclusion Resections in LMIC were independently associated with higher 90-day postoperative mortality, likely reflecting a failure to rescue of these patients following esophagectomy, despite similar composite anastomotic leaks and major complication rates to HIC. These findings warrant further research, to identify potential issues and solutions to improve global outcomes following esophagectomy for cancer.

Mortality from esophagectomy for esophageal cancer across low, middle, and high-income countries: An international cohort study

The esophagogastric anastomosis is most commonly performed to restore digestive tract continuity after esophagectomy for cancer. Despite a long history of clinical research and development of high-tech staplers, this procedure is still feared by most surgeons and associated with a 10% leakage rate. Among specific factors that may contribute to failure of the esophageal anastomosis are the absence of serosa layer, longitudinal orientation of muscle fibers, and ischemia of the gastric conduit. It has recently been suggested that the gut microbiome may influence the healing process of the anastomosis through the presence of collagenolytic bacterial strains, indicating that suture breakdown is not only a matter of collagen biosynthesis. The esophagogastric anastomosis can be performed either in the chest or neck, and can be completely hand-sewn, completely stapled (circular or linear stapler), or semi-mechanical (linear stapler posterior wall and hand-sewn anterior wall). Because of the lack of randomized clinical trials, no conclusive evidence is available, and the debate between the hand-sewn and the stapling technique is still ongoing even in the present era of robotic surgery. Centralization of care has improved the overall postoperative outcomes of esophagectomy, but the esophagogastric anastomosis remains the Achille's heel of the procedure. More research and network collaboration of experts is needed to improve safety and clinical outcomes.

https://atm.amegroups.com/article/download/38797/pdf

Progress in the esophagogastric anastomosis and the challenges of minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgery

This study aimed to compare the postoperative and pathological outcomes between CROSS and FLOT in esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) patients from an international, multicenter cohort.Ongoing debate exists around optimum approach to locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC), with proponents for perioperative chemotherapy, such as FLOT, or multimodal therapy, in particular the CROSS regimen.Patients undergoing CROSS (n = 350) and FLOT (n = 368), followed by curative esophagectomy for EAC were identified from the Oesophagogastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA).The 90-day mortality was higher after CROSS than FLOT (5% vs 1%, p = 0.005), even on adjusted analyses (odds ratio (OR): 3.97, CI95%: 1.34 - 13.67). Postoperative mortality in CROSS were related to higher pulmonary (74% vs 60%) and cardiac complications (42% vs 20%) compared to FLOT. CROSS was associated with higher pCR rates (18% vs 10%, p = 0.004) and margin-negative resections (93% vs 76%, p < 0.001) compared with FLOT. On adjusted analyses, CROSS was associated with higher pCR rates (OR: 2.05, CI95%: 1.26 - 3.34) and margin-negative resections (OR: 4.55, CI95%: 2.70 - 7.69) compared to FLOT.This study provides real-world data CROSS was associated with higher 90-day mortality than FLOT, related to cardio-pulmonary complications with CROSS. These warrant a further review into causes and mechanisms in selected patients, and at minimum suggest the need for strict radiation therapy quality assurance. Research into impact of higher pCR rates and R0 resections with CROSS compared to FLOT on long-term survival is needed. 

Postoperative and Pathological Outcomes of CROSS and FLOT as Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophageal and Junctional Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leaks are associated with significant risk of morbidity, mortality and treatment costs after oesophagectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate international variation in unit-level clinical practice and resource availability for the prevention and management of anastomotic leak following oesophagectomy. METHOD: The Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA) is an international research collaboration focussed on improving the care and outcomes of patients undergoing oesophagectomy. Any unit performing oesophagectomy worldwide can register to participate in OGAA studies. An online unit survey was developed and disseminated to lead surgeons at each unit registered to participate in OGAA. High-income country (HIC) and low/middle-income country (LMIC) were defined according to the World Bank whilst unit volume were defined as < 20 versus 20-59 versus ≥60 cases/year in the unit. RESULTS: Responses were received from 141 units, a 77% (141/182) response rate. Median annual oesophagectomy caseload was reported to be 26 (inter-quartile range 12-50). Only 48% (68/141) and 22% (31/141) of units had an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program and ERAS nurse, respectively. HIC units had significantly higher rates of stapled anastomosis compared to LMIC units (66 vs 31%, p = 0.005). Routine post-operative contrast-swallow anastomotic assessment was performed in 52% (73/141) units. Stent placement and interventional radiology drainage for anastomotic leak management were more commonly available in HICs than LMICs (99 vs 59%, p < 0.001 and 99 vs 83%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This international survey highlighted variation in surgical technique and management of anastomotic leak based on case volume and country income level. Further research is needed to understand the impact of this variation on patient outcomes.

International variation in surgical practices in units performing oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: A unit survey from the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA)

Ali Akbar

Papers

International variation in surgical practices in units performing oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: A unit survey from the Oesophago-Gastric Anastomosis Audit (OGAA)