International survey on esophageal cancer: part I surgical techniques.

In patients with esophageal cancer, radical surgical resection of the esophagus and surrounding lymph nodes is the only curative treatment option. Nevertheless, no standard surgical procedure exists. The aims of the present study were to gain insight into the frequencies of the various surgical techniques in esophageal cancer surgery as applied by surgeons throughout the world and to identify intercontinental differences regarding surgical techniques. Surgeons with particular interest in esophageal surgery, including members of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, the European Society of Esophagology Group d'Etude Européen des Maladies de l'Oesophage and the OESO, were invited to participate in an online questionnaire. Questions were asked regarding approach to esophagectomy, extent of lymphadenectomy (LND), type of reconstruction, and anastomotic techniques. Subanalyses were performed for the surgeons' case volume per year, years of experience in esophageal cancer surgery, and continent. Of 567 invited surgeons, 269 participated, resulting in an overall response rate of 47%. The responders currently performing esophagectomies (n= 250; 44%), represented 41 countries across the six continents. Fifty-two percent of responders favor open transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) over transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) or minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). THE is preferred by 26%, whereas MIE is favored by 14%. Eight percent have no preference for one approach to esophagectomy over the other. The extent of LND is most frequently the 2-field, routinely performed by 73% of surgeons. The continuity of the digestive tract is most frequently restored with a gastric conduit (85%). In open TTE, the anastomosis is routinely created in the neck by 56% of responders and in the chest by 40%. Cervical anastomoses are routinely fashioned by means of a handsewn technique by 65% of responders, while 35% favor the stapled technique. The cervical incision is predominantly performed vertically on the left side of the neck (routinely by 66%). A horizontal neck incision is routinely carried out by 19% of responders and a vertical right-sided incision by 11%. Significant differences in surgical techniques could be detected between low- and high-volume surgeons, between surgeons with or=21 years of experience, and between surgeons from different continents. In conclusion, currently the most commonly applied surgical procedure is the open right-sided transthoracic approach with a two-field lymphadenectomy, using a gastric tube anastomosed at the left side of the neck by means of a handsewn, end-to-side technique. The results of this survey provide baseline data for future research and for the development of international guidelines.

Melanoma in the young: differences and similarities with adult melanoma: a case-matched controlled analysis.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma in the first 2 decades of life is rare and is less well characterized than melanoma in adults. Previously published comparisons of melanoma of the young (age 13 years. CONCLUSIONS: Melanoma of the young had some important differences and similarities relative to adult melanoma. Lymph node metastases were more prevalent in young patients with melanoma compared with adult (thickness-matched) control patients; however, the 5- and 10-year survival rates were similar.

Biology of desmoplastic melanoma: a case-control comparison with other melanomas.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have established that patients with desmoplastic melanoma (DM) have thicker primary tumors. Consequently, comparisons with other forms of melanoma have been strongly biased by differences in Breslow stage. This is the first case-matched control study comparing DM with other forms of melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From a database of 3,202 melanoma patients treated at one institution, 89 patients with DM and 178 case-matched control patients (2:1) were identified by matching for tumor thickness, age, sex, and year of diagnosis. Clinical, pathologic, and outcome information was obtained from chart review. RESULTS: Controls were matched successfully to patients for tumor thickness, age, sex, and year of diagnosis. Presentation with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III or IV disease is less common in patients with DM compared to case-matched control patients (5% v 21%; P < .001). Re-excisions to obtain clear surgical margins are required more often in patients with DM compared to case-matched control patients (21% v 6%; P < .001). Risk of positive sentinel nodes is lower in patients with DM compared to case-matched control patients (8% v 34%; P = .013). Despite these differences, survival rates of patients with DM are the same as case-matched control patients. CONCLUSION: Use of case-matched control patients matched for tumor thickness avoids biases introduced by the advanced Breslow stage of DMs. DMs are more locally aggressive than thickness-matched controls, and positive sentinel nodes are limited to patients with thick primary tumors. Importantly, patients with DM have survival rates similar to patients with other melanomas of similar thickness.