The management and long-term outcomes of endoscopic and surgical treatment of early esophageal adenocarcinoma.

Endoscopic resection (ER) for early (pT1) esophageal adenocarcinoma can be justified if the rate of coexisting lymph node (LN) metastasis is less than the mortality rate from esophagectomy. This study examines endoscopic and surgical outcomes, histological assessment of submucosal (sm) disease, factors influencing LN metastasis, and the safety of treating pT1b disease endoscopically. Histopathological reexamination recorded thickness, width and depth of sm invasion, grade, presence of lymphovascular invasion (LVI), resection margin status and tumor stage. Multivariate analysis was employed to evaluate the factors influencing survival and LN metastasis. Rate of LN metastasis for pT1 low-risk (LR: sm invasion < 500 µm, G1-2, no LVI) or high-risk (HR: sm invasion >500 µm, G3-4 or LVI) disease were analyzed. Ninety three patients underwent ER and 96 underwent esophagectomy. We demonstrate conflicting histological methods of sm disease reporting, which may explain the difference in LN metastasis rate between reported surgical & endoscopic series. Multivariate analysis confirmed age, T stage, and presence of LN metastases were the independent factors predicting poor prognosis. Tumor thickness as well as grade, T stage, LVI were predictors of LN metastasis. Rates of LN metastasis are <2% in LR sm1 disease, and >15% in HR sm1 disease. Pathological reporting of sm invasion should be updated for uniform analysis of endoscopic and surgical specimens. Following rigorous histopathological examination and within a close endoscopic follow-up regimen, pT1a and pT1b LRsm1 disease may be treated with curative intent endoscopically, whereas pT1b HRsm1-sm3 disease should be offered surgery.

Urethral Catheterization Is Not Necessary During Nononcological Laparoscopic Pelvic Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Expert opinion remains divided regarding whether routine urethral catheterization is required before nononcological laparoscopic pelvic surgery. Catheterization is thought to reduce the incidence of bladder injury when inserting a suprapubic laparoscopic port and prevent obstruction of the view of the pelvis because of bladder filling. However, catheterization comes with a risk of nosocomial infection and harbors financial cost. Moreover, indwelling catheters inhibit early mobilization and increase postoperative discomfort. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken using the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies guidelines to identify eligible publications. End points included bladder injury, positive postoperative urinary microbiology, and postoperative urinary symptoms. RESULTS: The reported incidence rates of laparoscopic bladder injury in included publications ranges from 0% to 1.3%. Importantly, bladder injury has occurred during both catheterized and noncatheterized operations. Our meta-analysis also shows that patients who are catheterized have a 2.33 times relative risk of developing postoperative positive microbiology in their urine (P = 0.01) and a 2.41 times relative risk of postoperative urinary symptoms (P = 0.005), when compared with noncatheterized patients. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis indicates that omitting a catheter in emergency and elective nononcological laparoscopic pelvic surgery may be a safe option. Catheterization does not remove the risk of bladder injury but results in more urinary tract infections and symptoms. It may be reasonable to ask a patient to void immediately before anesthesia, after which an on-table bladder scan should be performed. If there is minimal residual volume, a urinary catheter may not be necessary, unless operative time is estimated to be greater than 90 minutes.