Ultrasound-guided quantitative fluorescence molecular endoscopy for monitoring response in patients with esophageal cancer following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

PURPOSE: The ability to identify residual tumor tissues in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer (EC) following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) is essential for monitoring the treatment response. Using the fluorescent tracer bevacizumab-800CW, we evaluated whether ultrasound-guided quantitative fluorescent molecular endoscopy (US-qFME), which combines quantitative fluorescence molecular endoscopy (qFME) with ultrasound-guided needle biopsy/single-fiber fluorescence (USNB/SFF), can be used to identify residual tumor tissues in patients following nCRT. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighteen patients received an additional endoscopy procedure the day before surgery. qFME was performed at the primary tumor site (PTS) and in healthy tissue to first establish the optimal tracer dose. USNB/SFF was then used to measure intrinsic fluorescence in the deeper PTS layers and in lymph nodes (LN) suspected for metastasis. Finally, the intrinsic fluorescence and the tissue optical properties, the absorption and the reduced scattering coefficient, were combined into a new parameter: omega. RESULTS: First, a dose of 25 mg bevacizumab-800CW allowed for clear differentiation between the PTS and healthy tissue, with a target-to-background ratio (TBR) of 2.98 (IQR: 1.86-3.03). Moreover, we found a clear difference between both the deeper esophageal PTS layers and suspected LN compared to healthy tissues, with TBR values of 2.18 and 2.17, respectively. Finally, our new parameter, omega, further improved the ability to differentiate between the PTS and healthy tissue. CONCLUSIONS: Combining bevacizumab-800CW with US-qFME may serve as a viable strategy for monitoring the response to nCRT in EC and may help stratify patients with respect to active surveillance versus surgery.

Nationwide Association of Surgical Performance of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy With Patient Outcomes.

Importance: Suboptimal surgical performance is hypothesized to be associated with less favorable patient outcomes in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Establishing this association may lead to programs that promote better surgical performance of MIE and improve patient outcomes. Objective: To investigate associations between surgical performance and postoperative outcomes after MIE. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this nationwide cohort study of 15 Dutch hospitals that perform more than 20 MIEs per year, 7 masked expert MIE surgeons assessed surgical performance using videos and a previously developed and validated competency assessment tool (CAT). Each hospital submitted 2 representative videos of MIEs performed between November 4, 2021, and September 13, 2022. Patients registered in the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021, were included to examine patient outcomes. Exposure: Hospitals were divided into quartiles based on their MIE-CAT performance score. Outcomes were compared between highest (top 25%) and lowest (bottom 25%) performing quartiles. Transthoracic MIE with gastric tube reconstruction. Main Outcome and Measure: The primary outcome was severe postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) within 30 days after surgery. Multilevel logistic regression, with clustering of patients within hospitals, was used to analyze associations between performance and outcomes. Results: In total, 30 videos and 970 patients (mean [SD] age, 66.6 [9.1] years; 719 men [74.1%]) were included. The mean (SD) MIE-CAT score was 113.6 (5.5) in the highest performance quartile vs 94.1 (5.9) in the lowest. Severe postoperative complications occurred in 18.7% (41 of 219) of patients in the highest performance quartile vs 39.2% (40 of 102) in the lowest (risk ratio [RR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.24-0.99). The highest vs the lowest performance quartile showed lower rates of conversions (1.8% vs 8.9%; RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.21-0.21), intraoperative complications (2.7% vs 7.8%; RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.04-0.94), and overall postoperative complications (46.1% vs 65.7%; RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.24-0.96). The R0 resection rate (96.8% vs 94.2%; RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.97-1.05) and lymph node yield (mean [SD], 38.9 [14.7] vs 26.2 [9.0]; RR, 3.20; 95% CI, 0.27-3.21) increased with oncologic-specific performance (eg, hiatus dissection, lymph node dissection). In addition, a high anastomotic phase score was associated with a lower anastomotic leakage rate (4.6% vs 17.7%; RR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.06-0.31). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that better surgical performance is associated with fewer perioperative complications for patients with esophageal cancer on a national level. If surgical performance of MIE can be improved with MIE-CAT implementation, substantially better patient outcomes may be achievable.

Prognostic value of Mandard score and nodal status for recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the association of pathological tumour response (tumour regression grade, TRG) and a novel scoring system, combining both TRG and nodal status (TRG-ypN score; TRG1-ypN0, TRG>1-ypN0, TRG1-ypN+ and TRG>1-ypN+), with recurrence patterns and survival after multimodal treatment of oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: This Dutch nationwide cohort study included patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by oesophagectomy for distal oesophageal or gastro-oesophageal junctional adenocarcinoma between 2007 and 2016. The primary endpoint was the association of Mandard score and TRG-ypN score with recurrence patterns (rate, location, and time to recurrence). The secondary endpoint was overall survival. RESULTS: Among 2746 inclusions, recurrence rates increased with higher Mandard scores (TRG1 30.6%, TRG2 44.9%, TRG3 52.9%, TRG4 61.4%, TRG5 58.2%; P < 0.001). Among patients with recurrent disease, the distribution (locoregional versus distant) was the same for the different TRG groups. Patients with TRG1 developed more brain recurrences (17.7 versus 9.8%; P = 0.001) and had a longer mean overall survival (44 versus 35 months; P < 0.001) than those with TRG>1. The TRG>1-ypN+ group had the highest recurrence rate (64.9%) and worst overall survival (mean 27 months). Compared with the TRG>1-ypN0 group, patients with TRG1-ypN+ had a higher risk of recurrence (51.9 versus 39.6%; P < 0.001) and worse mean overall survival (33 versus 41 months; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Improved tumour response to neoadjuvant therapy was associated with lower recurrence rates and higher overall survival rates. Among patients with recurrent disease, TRG1 was associated with a higher incidence of brain recurrence than TRG>1. Residual nodal disease influenced prognosis more negatively than residual disease at the primary tumour site.

Long-Term Outcome of Immediate Versus Postponed Intervention in Patients With Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis (POINTER): Multicenter Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term outcomes of immediate drainage versus the postponed-drainage approach in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis. BACKGROUND: In the randomized POINTER trial, patients assigned to the postponed-drainage approach using antibiotic treatment required fewer interventions, as compared with immediate drainage, and over a third were treated without any intervention. METHODS: Clinical data of those patients alive after the initial 6-month follow-up were re-evaluated. The primary outcome was a composite of death and major complications. RESULTS: Out of 104 patients, 88 were re-evaluated with a median follow-up of 51 months. After the initial 6-month follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 7 of 47 patients (15%) in the immediate-drainage group and 7 of 41 patients (17%) in the postponed-drainage group (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.33-2.28; P =0.78). Additional drainage procedures were performed in 7 patients (15%) versus 3 patients (7%) (RR 2.03; 95% CI 0.56-7.37; P =0.34). The median number of additional interventions was 0 (IQR 0-0) in both groups ( P =0.028). In the total follow-up, the median number of interventions was higher in the immediate-drainage group than in the postponed-drainage group (4 vs. 1, P =0.001). Eventually, 14 of 15 patients (93%) in the postponed-drainage group who were successfully treated in the initial 6-month follow-up with antibiotics and without any intervention remained without intervention. At the end of follow-up, pancreatic function and quality of life were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Also, during long-term follow-up, a postponed-drainage approach using antibiotics in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis results in fewer interventions as compared with immediate drainage and should therefore be the preferred approach. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN33682933.

Surgical Techniques and Related Perioperative Outcomes After Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Gastrectomy (RAMIG): Results From the Prospective Multicenter International Ugira Gastric Registry.

OBJECTIVE: To gain insight in global practice of RAMIG and evaluated perioperative outcomes using an international registry. BACKGROUND: The techniques and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive gastrectomy (RAMIG) for gastric cancer vary substantially in literature. METHODS: Prospectively registered RAMIG-cases for gastric cancer (≥10 per center) were extracted from 25 centers in Europe, Asia and South-America. Techniques for the resection, reconstruction, anastomosis and lymphadenectomy were analyzed, and related to perioperative surgical and oncological outcomes. Complications were uniformly defined by the Gastrectomy Complications Consensus Group. RESULTS: Between 2020-2023, 759 patients underwent total (n=272), distal (n=465) or proximal (n=22) gastrectomy (RAMIG). After total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y-reconstruction, anastomotic leakage rates were 8% with hand-sewn (n=9/111) and 6% with linear stapled anastomoses (n=6/100). After distal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y (67%) or Billroth-II-reconstruction (31%), anastomotic leakage rates were 3% with linear stapled (n=11/433) and 0% with hand-sewn anastomoses (n=0/26). Extent of lymphadenectomy consisted of D1+ (28%), D2 (59%) or D2+ (12%). Median nodal harvest yielded 31 nodes [IQR 21-47] after total and 34 nodes [IQR 24-47] after distal gastrectomy. R0-resection rates were 93% after total and 96% distal gastrectomy. Hospital stay was 9 days after total and distal gastrectomy, and was 3 days shorter without perianastomotic drains versus routine drain placement. Postoperative 30-day mortality was 1%. CONCLUSIONS: This large multicenter study provided a worldwide overview of current RAMIG-techniques with their respective perioperative outcomes. These outcomes demonstrated high surgical quality, set a quality standard for RAMIG and can be considered an international reference for surgical standardization.

Treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: large, collaborative, observational TENTACLE cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak is a severe complication after oesophagectomy. Anastomotic leak has diverse clinical manifestations and the optimal treatment strategy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of treatment strategies for different manifestations of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in 71 centres worldwide and included patients with anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy (2011-2019). Different primary treatment strategies were compared for three different anastomotic leak manifestations: interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (that is no intrathoracic collections; well perfused conduit); drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations; and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Of 1508 patients with anastomotic leak, 28.2 per cent (425 patients) had local manifestations, 36.3 per cent (548 patients) had intrathoracic manifestations, 9.6 per cent (145 patients) had conduit ischaemia/necrosis, 17.5 per cent (264 patients) were allocated after multiple imputation, and 8.4 per cent (126 patients) were excluded. After propensity score matching, no statistically significant differences in 90-day mortality were found regarding interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (risk difference 3.2 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.8 to 8.2 per cent), drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations (risk difference 5.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.2 to 12.8 per cent), and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis (risk difference 0.1 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -21.4 to 1.6 per cent). In general, less morbidity was found after less extensive primary treatment strategies. CONCLUSION: Less extensive primary treatment of anastomotic leak was associated with less morbidity. A less extensive primary treatment approach may potentially be considered for anastomotic leak. Future studies are needed to confirm current findings and guide optimal treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy.

Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: Unravelling differences in failure to rescue.

INTRODUCTION: Failure to rescue (FTR) is an important outcome measure after esophagectomy and reflects mortality after postoperative complications. Differences in FTR have been associated with hospital resection volume. However, insight into how centers manage complications and achieve their outcomes is lacking. Anastomotic leak (AL) is a main contributor to FTR. This study aimed to assess differences in FTR after AL between centers, and to identify factors that explain these differences. METHODS: TENTACLE - Esophagus is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. Differences in FTR were assessed between low-volume (<20 resections), middle-volume (20-60 resections) and high-volume centers (≥60 resections). Mediation analysis was performed using logistic regression, including possible mediators for FTR: case-mix, hospital resources, leak severity and treatment. RESULTS: FTR after AL was 11.7%. After adjustment for confounders, FTR was lower in high-volume vs. low-volume (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.2-0.8), but not versus middle-volume centers (OR 0.67, 95%CI 0.5-1.0). After mediation analysis, differences in FTR were found to be explained by lower leak severity, lower secondary ICU readmission rate and higher availability of therapeutic modalities in high-volume centers. No statistically significant direct effect of hospital volume was found: high-volume vs. low-volume 0.86 (95%CI 0.4-1.7), high-volume vs. middle-volume OR 0.86 (95%CI 0.5-1.4). CONCLUSION: Lower FTR in high-volume compared with low-volume centers was explained by lower leak severity, less secondary ICU readmissions and higher availability of therapeutic modalities. To reduce FTR after AL, future studies should investigate effective strategies to reduce leak severity and prevent secondary ICU readmission.

Trends in Distal Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer Care: The Dutch Nationwide Ivory Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the nationwide trends in care and accompanied postoperative outcomes for patients with distal esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The introduction of transthoracic esophagectomy, minimally invasive surgery, and neo-adjuvant chemo(radio)therapy changed care for patients with esophageal cancer. METHODS: Patients after elective transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy for distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction carcinoma in the Netherlands between 2007-2016 were included. The primary aim was to evaluate trends in both care and postoperative outcomes for the included patients. Additionally, postoperative outcomes after transthoracic and tran-shiatal esophagectomy were compared, stratified by time periods. RESULTS: Among 4712 patients included, 74% had distal esophageal tumors and 87% had adenocarcinomas. Between 2007 and 2016, the proportion of transthoracic esophagectomy increased from 41% to 81%, and neo-adjuvant treatment and minimally invasive esophagectomy increased from 31% to 96%, and from 7% to 80%, respectively. Over this 10-year period, postoperative outcomes improved: postoperative morbidity decreased from 66.6% to 61.8% ( P = 0.001), R0 resection rate increased from 90.0% to 96.5% (P <0.001), median lymph node harvest increased from 15 to 19 ( P <0.001), and median survival increased from 35 to 41 months ( P = 0.027). CONCLUSION: In this nationwide cohort, a transition towards more neo-adju-vant treatment, transthoracic esophagectomy and minimally invasive surgery was observed over a 10-year period, accompanied by decreased postoperative morbidity, improved surgical radicality and lymph node harvest, and improved survival.

Luminal Preservation Protects the Small Intestine in a Brain-dead Rat Model.

Intestinal transplantation depends on donation after brain death (DBD). Luminal preservation (LP) has been beneficial against preservation injury in previous studies in animal models, but none include DBD. This study aims to investigate whether these benefits occur also with DBD. Methods: Wistar rats (male, N = 9) underwent brain death for 2 h. Thereafter, vascular perfusion was done with University of Wisconsin solution (UW). The small intestine was then explanted and randomized into 3 groups: control (empty segment), LP+PEG (with polyethylene glycol 3350 solution), or LP+UW (with UW), treated and tied shut. Ice-cold UW was used for cold storage. Samples were taken at procurement and after 4 (t = 4) and 8 h (t = 8) of preservation. Histopathological scorings were performed for intestinal preservation injury, subepithelial space, absence of epithelial lining, and hemeoxygenase-1 expression. Results: There was low-level mucosal injury (median intestinal preservation injury score 2) at procurement. At t = 4, bowels treated without LP had more damage than LP-treated samples (control score 4, LP+PEG 2 and LP+UW 2, P < 0.001 control versus LP+UW). At t = 8, no benefit of LP was observed (control 2, LP+PEG 3, LP+UW 2). Subepithelial space increased with time and the presence of LP; epithelial lining was better conserved in LP-treated samples. Hemeoxygenase-1 staining showed increased intensity with increased damage, irrespective of treatment. Conclusions: Luminal perfusion of the small intestine with UW or PEG protects the mucosa in brain-dead rats for up to 4 h. Fewer benefits of LP were found than previously described in non-DBD models. To mimic the clinical situation, DBD should be included in future animal studies on intestinal preservation.

Endoscopic Versus Surgical Step-Up Approach for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis (ExTENSION): Long-term Follow-up of a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Previous randomized trials, including the Transluminal Endoscopic Step-Up Approach Versus Minimally Invasive Surgical Step-Up Approach in Patients With Infected Pancreatic Necrosis (TENSION) trial, demonstrated that the endoscopic step-up approach might be preferred over the surgical step-up approach in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis based on favorable short-term outcomes. We compared long-term clinical outcomes of both step-up approaches after a period of at least 5 years. METHODS: In this long-term follow-up study, we reevaluated all clinical data on 83 patients (of the originally 98 included patients) from the TENSION trial who were still alive after the initial 6-month follow-up. The primary end point, similar to the TENSION trial, was a composite of death and major complications. Secondary end points included individual major complications, pancreaticocutaneous fistula, reinterventions, pancreatic insufficiency, and quality of life. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up period of 7 years, the primary end point occurred in 27 patients (53%) in the endoscopy group and in 27 patients (57%) in the surgery group (risk ratio [RR], 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65-1.32; P = .688). Fewer pancreaticocutaneous fistulas were identified in the endoscopy group (8% vs 34%; RR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.08-0.83). After the initial 6-month follow-up, the endoscopy group needed fewer reinterventions than the surgery group (7% vs 24%; RR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.09-0.99). Pancreatic insufficiency and quality of life did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: At long-term follow-up, the endoscopic step-up approach was not superior to the surgical step-up approach in reducing death or major complications in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis. However, patients assigned to the endoscopic approach developed overall fewer pancreaticocutaneous fistulas and needed fewer reinterventions after the initial 6-month follow-up. Netherlands Trial Register no: NL8571.

Comparing bowel lengthening procedures: which, when, and why?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Intestinal failure secondary to short bowel syndrome is still a very serious condition. Treatment consists of parenteral nutrition to provide nutrients and maintain body weight. During the last decades, intestinal lengthening procedures have become more available. The goal of this review is to discuss the results of the literature on the most commonly performed intestinal lengthening procedures. RECENT FINDINGS: Longitudinal Intestinal Lengthening, Serial Transverse Enteroplasty (STEP), and Spiral Intestinal Lengthening and Tailoring (SILT) are currently the most frequently reported intestinal lengthening procedures. The most recent literature of these procedures is described with respect to indication, technical details, complications, short and long-term outcome, and PN independence. SUMMARY: On the basis of indication, surgical complexity, complications, and clinical success, we conclude that the STEP procedure is probably the best choice for most centers.

Immediate versus Postponed Intervention for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Infected necrotizing pancreatitis is a potentially lethal disease that is treated with the use of a step-up approach, with catheter drainage often delayed until the infected necrosis is encapsulated. Whether outcomes could be improved by earlier catheter drainage is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized superiority trial involving patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis, in which we compared immediate drainage within 24 hours after randomization once infected necrosis was diagnosed with drainage that was postponed until the stage of walled-off necrosis was reached. The primary end point was the score on the Comprehensive Complication Index, which incorporates all complications over the course of 6 months of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients were randomly assigned to immediate drainage (55 patients) or postponed drainage (49 patients). The mean score on the Comprehensive Complication Index (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more severe complications) was 57 in the immediate-drainage group and 58 in the postponed-drainage group (mean difference, -1; 95% confidence interval [CI], -12 to 10; P = 0.90). Mortality was 13% in the immediate-drainage group and 10% in the postponed-drainage group (relative risk, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.42 to 3.68). The mean number of interventions (catheter drainage and necrosectomy) was 4.4 in the immediate-drainage group and 2.6 in the postponed-drainage group (mean difference, 1.8; 95% CI, 0.6 to 3.0). In the postponed-drainage group, 19 patients (39%) were treated conservatively with antibiotics and did not require drainage; 17 of these patients survived. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This trial did not show the superiority of immediate drainage over postponed drainage with regard to complications in patients with infected necrotizing pancreatitis. Patients randomly assigned to the postponed-drainage strategy received fewer invasive interventions. (Funded by Fonds NutsOhra and Amsterdam UMC; POINTER ISRCTN Registry number, ISRCTN33682933.).

Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis and Mid-Upper Arm Muscle Circumference Can Be Used to Detect Low Muscle Mass in Clinical Practice.

Identification of low muscle mass becomes increasingly relevant due to its prognostic value in cancer patients. In clinical practice, mid-upper arm muscle circumference (MAMC) and bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) are often used to assess muscle mass. For muscle-mass assessment, computed tomography (CT) is considered as reference standard. We investigated concordance between CT, BIA, and MAMC, diagnostic accuracy of MAMC, and BIA to detect low muscle mass and their relation with the clinical outcome malnutrition provided with the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form (PG-SGA SF). This cross-sectional study included adult patients with advanced esophageal and gastrointestinal cancer. BIA, MAMC, and PG-SGA-SF were performed. Routine CT-scans were used to quantify psoas muscle index (PMI) and skeletal muscle area. Good concordance was found between CTPMI and both BIAFFMI (fat free mass index) (ICC 0.73), and BIAASMI (appendicular skeletal muscle index) (ICC 0.69) but not with MAMC (ICC 0.37). BIAFFMI (94%), BIAASMI (86%), and MAMC (86%) showed high specificity but low sensitivity. PG-SGA-SF modestly correlated with all muscle-mass measures (ranging from -0.17 to -0.43). Of all patients with low muscle mass, 62% were also classified with a PG-SGA-SF score of ≥4 points. Although CT remains the first choice, since both BIA and MAMC are easy to perform by dieticians, they have the potential to be used to detect low muscle mass in clinical practice.

Intrathoracic vs Cervical Anastomosis After Totally or Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Transthoracic minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly performed as part of curative multimodality treatment. There appears to be no robust evidence on the preferred location of the anastomosis after transthoracic MIE. Objective: To compare an intrathoracic with a cervical anastomosis in a randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open, multicenter randomized clinical superiority trial was performed at 9 Dutch high-volume hospitals. Patients with midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer planned for curative resection were included. Data collection occurred from April 2016 through February 2020. Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to transthoracic MIE with intrathoracic or cervical anastomosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was anastomotic leakage requiring endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes were overall anastomotic leak rate, other postoperative complications, length of stay, mortality, and quality of life. Results: Two hundred sixty-two patients were randomized, and 245 were eligible for analysis. Anastomotic leakage necessitating reintervention occurred in 15 of 122 patients with intrathoracic anastomosis (12.3%) and in 39 of 123 patients with cervical anastomosis (31.7%; risk difference, -19.4% [95% CI, -29.5% to -9.3%]). Overall anastomotic leak rate was 12.3% in the intrathoracic anastomosis group and 34.1% in the cervical anastomosis group (risk difference, -21.9% [95% CI, -32.1% to -11.6%]). Intensive care unit length of stay, mortality rates, and overall quality of life were comparable between groups, but intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with fewer severe complications (risk difference, -11.3% [-20.4% to -2.2%]), lower incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (risk difference, -7.3% [95% CI, -12.1% to -2.5%]), and better quality of life in 3 subdomains (mean differences: dysphagia, -12.2 [95% CI, -19.6 to -4.7]; problems of choking when swallowing, -10.3 [95% CI, -16.4 to 4.2]; trouble with talking, -15.3 [95% CI, -22.9 to -7.7]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, intrathoracic anastomosis resulted in better outcome for patients treated with transthoracic MIE for midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Trial Registration: Trialregister.nl Identifier: NL4183 (NTR4333).

Early diagnosis is associated with improved clinical outcomes in benign esophageal perforation: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Time of diagnosis (TOD) of benign esophageal perforation is regarded as an important risk factor for clinical outcome, although convincing evidence is lacking. The aim of this study is to assess whether time between onset of perforation and diagnosis is associated with clinical outcome in patients with iatrogenic esophageal perforation (IEP) and Boerhaave's syndrome (BS). METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane library through June 2018 to identify studies. Authors were invited to share individual patient data and a meta-analysis was performed (PROSPERO: CRD42018093473). Patients were subdivided in early (≤ 24 h) and late (> 24 h) TOD and compared with mixed effects multivariable analysis while adjusting age, gender, location of perforation, initial treatment and center. Primary outcome was overall mortality. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, re-interventions and ICU admission. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis included IPD of 25 studies including 576 patients with IEP and 384 with BS. In IEP, early TOD was not associated with overall mortality (8% vs. 13%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 0.8-5.1), but was associated with a 23% decrease in ICU admissions (46% vs. 69%, OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.2-7.2), a 22% decrease in re-interventions (23% vs. 45%, OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2-6.7) and a 36% decrease in length of hospital stay (14 vs. 22 days, p < 0.001), compared with late TOD. In BS, no associations between TOD and outcomes were found. When combining IEP and BS, early TOD was associated with a 6% decrease in overall mortality (10% vs. 16%, OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-3.9), a 19% decrease in re-interventions (26% vs. 45%, OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2) and a 35% decrease in mean length of hospital stay (16 vs. 22 days, p = 0.001), compared with late TOD. CONCLUSIONS: This individual patient data meta-analysis confirms the general opinion that an early (≤ 24 h) compared to a late diagnosis (> 24 h) in benign esophageal perforations, particularly in IEP, is associated with improved clinical outcome.

Reducing the negative appendectomy rate with the laparoscopic appendicitis score; a multicenter prospective cohort and validation study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately nine percent of all acute appendectomies are unintentionally performed on a normal appendix. Failure of treatment (negative appendectomy or missed appendicitis) is associated with higher morbidity and mortality when compared to appendectomy for uncomplicated appendicitis. The Laparoscopic APPendicitis (LAPP) score was developed in order to systematically evaluate the appendix for the presence of inflammation. This study aims to determine whether the LAPP score reduces the negative appendectomy rate without missing appendicitis. METHODS: From September 2013 through May 2016, 322 adult patients presenting with a clinical suspicion of acute appendicitis and an indication for diagnostic laparoscopy were included and analyzed in this multicenter prospective validation study. Depending on the LAPP score, the appendix was either removed (n = 300) or left in situ (n = 22). These patients were compared to a historical control group of 584 patients treated at the same hospitals. The appendix was examined by a pathologist and the negative appendectomy rate was calculated. RESULTS: The negative appendectomy rate was significantly lower when the LAPP score was used (4,7% vs. 8,4%; P = 0,034). None of the patients with a negative LAPP score, in which the appendix remained in situ, developed acute appendicitis within three months. There were no significant differences in operation time, complications, or readmissions. Using the LAPP score was associated with significantly higher rates of preoperative radiological imaging (98% vs. 70%; P < 0,001). After adjusting for covariables, including radiological imaging, use of the LAPP score led to fewer treatment failures when compared to not using the LAPP score (OR: 0,48, 95% C.I. 0,251 to 0,914; P = 0,025). CONCLUSION: The LAPP score is a safe and simple tool to reduce the negative appendectomy rate during laparoscopic surgery without missing cases of acute appendicitis.

Safe and Successful Treatment of Acute Cellular Rejection of an Intestine and Abdominal Wall Transplant With Vedolizumab.

Graft survival rates after intestinal transplantation (ITx) are still the lowest in comparison to other solid organ transplants. One of the main reasons is the frequent occurrence of acute cellular rejection (ACR). Vedolizumab is an antibody against α4ß7+ integrin involved in gut-homing of T cells which has been approved for inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD). We report its off-label use to treat ACR after ITx. METHODS: Following abdominal wall transplantation (AWTx) and ITx, clinical course was followed biochemically. Sequential small intestinal biopsies were taken preceding, during, and after ACR treatment with vedolizumab, following the standard therapy regime for IBD. Rejection was diagnosed histologically, and proinflammatory (α4ß7+, interleukin-17+) and regulatory (FoxP3+) T cells were analyzed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: ACR in both the ITx and AWTx resolved upon vedolizumab treatment, which was safe, evidenced by clearing an astrovirus and primary cytomegalovirus infection. Only a slight reduction of α4ß7+ cells in the mucosa was observed, and α4ß7+ and regulatory T cells could still move into the lamina propria upon infection. CONCLUSIONS: Vedolizumab is a safe treatment option for ACR after ITx but its mechanism is probably not only based on inhibition of gut-selective T-cell homing.

Effect of Early Surgery vs Endoscopy-First Approach on Pain in Patients With Chronic Pancreatitis: The ESCAPE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: For patients with painful chronic pancreatitis, surgical treatment is postponed until medical and endoscopic treatment have failed. Observational studies have suggested that earlier surgery could mitigate disease progression, providing better pain control and preserving pancreatic function. Objective: To determine whether early surgery is more effective than the endoscopy-first approach in terms of clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: The ESCAPE trial was an unblinded, multicenter, randomized clinical superiority trial involving 30 Dutch hospitals participating in the Dutch Pancreatitis Study Group. From April 2011 until September 2016, a total of 88 patients with chronic pancreatitis, a dilated main pancreatic duct, and who only recently started using prescribed opioids for severe pain (strong opioids for ≤2 months or weak opioids for ≤6 months) were included. The 18-month follow-up period ended in March 2018. Interventions: There were 44 patients randomized to the early surgery group who underwent pancreatic drainage surgery within 6 weeks after randomization and 44 patients randomized to the endoscopy-first approach group who underwent medical treatment, endoscopy including lithotripsy if needed, and surgery if needed. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was pain, measured on the Izbicki pain score and integrated over 18 months (range, 0-100 [increasing score indicates more pain severity]). Secondary outcomes were pain relief at the end of follow-up; number of interventions, complications, hospital admissions; pancreatic function; quality of life (measured on the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36]); and mortality. Results: Among 88 patients who were randomized (mean age, 52 years; 21 (24%) women), 85 (97%) completed the trial. During 18 months of follow-up, patients in the early surgery group had a lower Izbicki pain score than patients in the group randomized to receive the endoscopy-first approach group (37 vs 49; between-group difference, -12 points [95% CI, -22 to -2]; P = .02). Complete or partial pain relief at end of follow-up was achieved in 23 of 40 patients (58%) in the early surgery vs 16 of 41 (39%)in the endoscopy-first approach group (P = .10). The total number of interventions was lower in the early surgery group (median, 1 vs 3; P < .001). Treatment complications (27% vs 25%), mortality (0% vs 0%), hospital admissions, pancreatic function, and quality of life were not significantly different between early surgery and the endoscopy-first approach. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with chronic pancreatitis, early surgery compared with an endoscopy-first approach resulted in lower pain scores when integrated over 18 months. However, further research is needed to assess persistence of differences over time and to replicate the study findings. Trial Registration: ISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN45877994.