Search

The aim of this study was to evaluate management strategies and related outcomes for cervical versus intrathoracic manifestation of cervical anastomotic leakage after transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer with gastric conduit reconstruction. Patients with esophageal cancer undergoing transthoracic esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis from October 2003 to December 2014 were identified from a prospectively acquired database. Management strategies and related outcomes among patients with anastomotic leakage confined to the neck were compared to patients with intrathoracic manifestation of anastomotic leakage. From a total of 286 patients, leakage of the cervical anastomosis occurred in 60 patients (21%) at a median time of 7 days after esophagectomy. Leakage was confined to the neck in 23 of 60 patients (38%), whereas 37 of 60 patients (62%) presented with intrathoracic spread. Leakages with intrathoracic manifestation were more frequently accompanied by a positive SIRS score compared to leakages confined to the neck (73% vs. 35%, respectively; P = 0.004). Drainage of the anastomotic leakage through the neck wound was effective in all of 23 patients (100%) with cervical manifestation. In patients with intrathoracic manifestation, mediastinal drainage through the neck was successful in 15 of 37 patients (41%), whereas 22 patients (59%) required an intervention through the thoracic cavity. Compared to patients with leakage confined to the neck, patients with intrathoracic manifestation showed prolonged intensive care unit (ICU) stay (median 6 vs. 2 days, respectively; P = 0.001), hospital stay (median 34 vs. 19 days, respectively; P

Background Esophagectomy functions as the cornerstone of the curative treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer. The addition of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) to surgery improves survival, but can be accompanied by substantial toxicity on the other hand. This cohort study describes the consequences of nCRT for esophageal cancer in terms of mortality (during or after the course of nCRT) in real-world clinical practice, as well as the proportion of patients that do not proceed to planned esophagectomy after finishing nCRT. Methods All patients that started nCRT (carboplatin/paclitaxel with 41.4 Gy) for primary, locally advanced, esophageal cancer in 2015 were included from the nationwide population-based cancer registry. Outcome measurements were mortality during or within 90 days after neoadjuvant therapy (and before planned esophagectomy), as well as refrainment from planned esophagectomy after starting nCRT and the reasons for cancelled esophagectomy. Results Some 740 patients that started nCRT for esophageal cancer were included (Table 1). A total of 13 (1.8%) patients died during or within 90 days after nCRT (before planned esophagectomy). A total of 79 (10.7%) patients that started nCRT did not proceed to esophagectomy. The most frequently reported reasons for not proceeding to esophagectomy were tumor progression (4.6%, n = 34), performance status (2.7%, n = 20), and patients’ request (1.8%, n = 13). Conclusion In this population-based study, 1 in 10 (10.7%) patients that started nCRT for locally advanced esophageal cancer did not undergo esophagectomy. Further research should aim to investigate whether this patient group can be selected prior to treatment, and if interventions and counseling will result in a larger proportion of patients who will undergo surgery. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.