Search

This article discusses the development and evaluation of an e-learning tool for clinicians to assist in counseling esophageal cancer patients. The tool aims to help clinicians take patient preferences into account when making treatment decisions. The e-learning tool consists of a theoretical part that provides information on esophageal cancer treatment options and shared decision-making, as well as a practical part that includes video scenarios for clinicians to practice their skills. The tool was evaluated by clinicians, with the majority finding it relevant and helpful. The authors suggest that integrating this tool can improve shared decision-making skills for clinicians. [Extracted from the article]

Background: This study explores patients' need for information and support in deciding on esophageal cancer treatment, when experimental active surveillance and standard surgery are both feasible. Methods: This psychological companion study was conducted alongside the Dutch SANO‐trial (Surgery As Needed for Oesophageal cancer). In‐depth interviews and questionnaires were used to collect data from patients who declined participation in the trial because they had a strong preference for either active surveillance (n = 20) or standard surgery (n = 20). Data were analyzed using both qualitative and quantitative techniques. Results: Patients prefer to receive information directly from their doctors and predominantly rely on this information to make a treatment decision. Other information resources are largely used to confirm their treatment decision. Patients highly value support from their loved ones and appreciate emphatic doctors to actively involve them in the decision‐making process. Overall, patients' needs for information and support during decision‐making were met. Conclusions: The importance of shared decision‐making and the role doctors have in this process is underlined. The role of doctors is essential at the initial phase of decision‐making: Once patients seem to have formed their treatment preference for either active surveillance or surgery, the influence of external resources (including doctors) may be limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oesophageal adenocarcinomas may show different histopathological patterns, including excessive acellular mucin pools, signet‐ring cells (SRCs), and poorly cohesive cells (PCCs). These components have been suggested to correlate with poor outcomes after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), which might influence patient management. However, these factors have not been studied independently of each other with adjustment for tumour differentiation grade (i.e. the presence of well‐formed glands), which is a possible confounder. We studied the pre‐ and post‐treatment presence of extracellular mucin, SRCs, and/or PCCs in relation to pathological response and prognosis after nCRT in patients with oesophageal or oesophagogastric junction adenocarcinoma. A total of 325 patients were retrospectively identified from institutional databases of two university hospitals. All patients were scheduled for ChemoRadiotherapy for Oesophageal cancer followed by Surgery Study (CROSS) nCRT and oesophagectomy between 2001 and 2019. Percentages of well‐formed glands, extracellular mucin, SRCs, and PCCs were scored in pre‐treatment biopsies and post‐treatment resection specimens. The association between histopathological factors (≥1 and >10%) and tumour regression grade 3–4 (i.e. >10% residual tumour), overall survival, and disease‐free survival (DFS) was evaluated, adjusted for tumour differentiation grade amongst other clinicopathological variables. In pre‐treatment biopsies, ≥1% extracellular mucin was present in 66 of 325 patients (20%); ≥1% SRCs in 43 of 325 (13%), and ≥1% PCCs in 126 of 325 (39%). We show that pre‐treatment histopathological factors were unrelated to tumour regression grade. Pre‐treatment presence of >10% PCCs was associated with lower DFS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.73, 95% CI 1.19–2.53). Patients with post‐treatment presence of ≥1% SRCs had higher risk of death (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.10–2.99). In conclusion, pre‐treatment presence of extracellular mucin, SRCs, and/or PCCs is unrelated to pathological response. The presence of these factors should not be an argument to refrain from CROSS. At least 10% PCCs pre‐treatment and any SRCs post‐treatment, irrespective of the tumour differentiation grade, seem indicative of inferior prognosis, but require further validation in larger cohorts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Active surveillance may be a safe and effective treatment in oesophageal cancer patients with a clinically complete response after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). In the NOSANO‐study we gained insight in patients' motive to opt for either an experimental treatment called active surveillance or for standard immediate surgery. Both qualitative and quantitative analyses methods were used. Forty patients were interviewed about their treatment preference, 3 months after completion of nCRT (T1). Data were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed according to the principles of grounded theory. In addition, at T1 and T2 (12 months after completion of nCRT) questionnaires on health‐related quality of life, coping, anxiety and decisional regret (only T2) were administered. Interview data analyses resulted in a conceptual model with 'dealing with threat of cancer' as the central theme. Patients preferring active surveillance tend to cope with this threat by confiding in their bodies and good outcomes. Their mind‐set is one of 'enjoy life now'. Patients preferring surgery tend to cope by minimizing uncertainty and eliminating the source of cancer. Their mind‐set is one of 'don't give up, act now'. Furthermore, questionnaire results showed that patients with a preference for standard surgery had a lower quality of life. Patient preferences are individualized and thus difficult to predict. Our model can help healthcare professionals to determine patient preferences for treatment. Coping style and mind‐set seem to be determining factors here. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. We aimed to gain consensus on HCPs' perspectives on self-management support information needs of patients with esophageal cancer during the preoperative phase. Methods. Based on the literature, observations of clinical consultations, and hospital patient information leaflets, a survey was created. HCPs were surveyed twice about their opinion on importance of information, from "not essential" to "absolutely essential," using Delphi methods. Topics were included in the second round if predetermined criteria were met. To be included in the final list, topics had to meet criteria for consensus and stability. Results. 64 information items and 6 sources of support were identified. Survey response rates were 59% (68 out of 116, first round) and 75% thereafter. The final list included 33 topics, including logistical information, expectations for future health condition, complications, follow-up care, nutrition during treatment, and nutrition during recovery as topics with 100% agreement. Consensus on the source of support was reached for face-to-face contact, written information, information video, and a case manager. Conclusion. This study provides a list of important topics, from the perspectives of HCPs, to guide the systematic provision of education to support EC patients' self-management during the preoperative phase. Additionally, the most preferred sources of support were face-to-face contact and a case manager. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent according to the hospital of diagnosis varies for esophagogastric cancer in the Netherlands. Little is known about the factors contributing to this variation. This study aimed to improve the understanding of the differences between the multidisciplinary team meeting treatment proposal and the treatment that was actually carried out and to qualitatively investigate the differences in treatment decision‐making after the multidisciplinary team meeting treatment proposal between hospitals. Methods: To gain an in‐depth understanding of treatment decision‐making, quantitative data (i.e., multidisciplinary team meeting proposal and treatment that was carried out) were collected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Changes in the multidisciplinary team meeting proposal and applied treatment comprised changes in the type of treatment option (i.e., curative or palliative, or no change) and were calculated according to the multivariable multilevel probability of undergoing treatment with curative intent (low, middle, and high). Qualitative data were collected from eight hospitals, including observations of 26 outpatient clinic consultations, 30 in‐depth interviews with clinicians, seven focus groups with clinicians, and three focus groups with patients. Clinicians and patients' perspectives were assessed using thematic content analysis. Results: The multidisciplinary team meeting proposal and applied treatment were concordant in 97% of the cases. Clinicians' implementation of treatment decision‐making in clinical practice varied, which was mentioned by the clinicians to be due to the clinician's personality and values. Differences between clinicians consisted of discussing all treatment options versus only the best fitting treatment option and the extent of discussing the benefits and harms. Most patients aimed to undergo curative treatment regardless of the consequences, since they believed this could prolong their life. Conclusion: Since changes in the multidisciplinary team meeting‐proposed treatment and actual treatment were rarely observed, this study emphasizes the importance of an adequately formulated multidisciplinary team meeting proposal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: No consensus exists on the clinical value of tumour regression grading (TRG) systems for therapy effects of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Existing TRG systems lack standardization and reproducibility, and do not consider the morphological heterogeneity of tumour response. Therefore, we aim to identify morphological tumour regression patterns of oesophageal adenocarcinoma after nCRT and their association with survival. Methods and results: Patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma, who underwent nCRT followed by surgery and achieved a partial response to nCRT, were identified from two Dutch upper‐gastrointestinal (GI) centres (2005–18; test cohort). Resection specimens were scored for regression patterns by two independent observers according to a pre‐defined three‐step flowchart. The results were validated in an external cohort (2001–17). In total, 110 patients were included in the test cohort and 115 in the validation cohort. In the test cohort, two major regression patterns were identified: fragmentation (60%) and shrinkage (40%), with an excellent interobserver agreement (κ = 0.87). Here, patients with a fragmented pattern had a significantly higher pathological stage (stages III/IV: 52 versus 16%; P < 0.001), less downstaging (48 versus 91%; P < 0.001), a higher risk of recurrence [risk ratio (RR) = 2.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.5–5.6] and poorer 5‐year overall survival (30 versus 80% respectively, P = 0.001). Conclusions: The validation cohort confirmed these findings, although had more advanced cases (case‐stages = III/IV 91 versus 73%, P = 0.005) and a higher prevalence of fragmented‐pattern cases (80 versus 60%, P = 0.002). When combining the cohorts in multivariate analysis, the pattern of response was an independent prognostic factor [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.76, 95% CI = 1.0–3.0]. In conclusion, we established an externally validated, reproducible and clinically relevant classification of tumour response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Anastomotic leakage has a great impact on clinical outcomes after esophagectomy. It has never been studied whether anastomotic leakage is of equal severity between different types of esophagectomy (i.e., transhiatal, McKeown and Ivor Lewis) in terms of postoperative mortality and morbidity. Methods: All esophageal cancer patients with anastomotic leakage after transhiatal, McKeown or Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between 2011 and 2019 were selected from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit (DUCA) registry. The primary outcome was 30-day/in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, re-operation and ICU readmission rate. Results: Data from 1030 patients with anastomotic leakage after transhiatal (n=287), McKeown (n=397) and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (n=346) were evaluated. The 30-day/in-hospital mortality rate was 4.5% in patients with leakage after transhiatal esophagectomy, 8.1% after McKeown and 8.1% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P=0.139). After correction for confounders, leakage after transhiatal resection was associated with lower mortality (OR 0.152–0.699, P=0.004), but mortality after McKeown and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was similar. Re-operation rate was 24.0% after transhiatal, 40.6% after McKeown and 41.3% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P<0.001). ICU readmission rate was 24.0% after transhiatal, 37.8% after McKeown and 43.4% after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P<0.001). Conclusion: This study in patients with anastomotic leakage confirms a strong association between severity of clinical consequences and different types of esophagectomy. It supports the hypothesis that cervical leakage is generally less severe than intrathoracic leakage. The clinical impact of anastomotic leakage should be taken into account, in addition to its incidence, when different types of esophagectomy are compared by clinicians or researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Inadequate margins continue to occur frequently in patients who undergo surgical resection of a tumor, suggesting that current intraoperative methods are not sufficiently reliable in determining the margin status. This clinical demand has inspired the development of many novel imaging techniques that could help surgeons with intraoperative margin assessment. This systematic review provides an overview of novel imaging techniques for intraoperative margin assessment in surgical oncology, and reports on their technical properties, feasibility in clinical practice and diagnostic accuracy. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane library were systematically searched (2013‐2018) for studies reporting on imaging techniques for intraoperative margin assessment. Patient and study characteristics, technical properties, feasibility characteristics and diagnostic accuracy were extracted. This systematic review identified 134 studies that investigated and developed 16 groups of techniques for intraoperative margin assessment: fluorescence, advanced microscopy, ultrasound, specimen radiography, optical coherence tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, elastic scattering spectroscopy, bio‐impedance, X‐ray computed tomography, mass spectrometry, Raman spectroscopy, nuclear medicine imaging, terahertz imaging, photoacoustic imaging, hyperspectral imaging and pH measurement. Most studies were in early developmental stages (IDEAL 1 or 2a, n = 98); high‐quality stage 2b and 3 studies were rare. None of the techniques was found to be clearly superior in demonstrating high feasibility as well as high diagnostic accuracy. In conclusion, the field of imaging techniques for intraoperative margin assessment is highly evolving. This review provides a unique overview of the opportunities and limitations of the currently available imaging techniques. What's new? While surgical resection is critical in the treatment of primary solid tumors, resection at tumor margins remains problematic, with inadequately resected margins facilitating tumor recurrence. In this systematic review, the authors collected information on novel imaging techniques applied to the intraoperative assessment of tumor margins across cancer types. A total of 16 groups of techniques were identified, with many in early stages of clinical application. Following comparison, no single technique was clearly superior in clinical feasibility or diagnostic accuracy. The review highlights the evolving nature of imaging techniques for intraoperative margin assessment and identifies opportunities and limitations in the field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Anastomotic leakage is a severe complication after low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer and occurs in up to 20% of patients. Most research focuses on reducing its incidence and finding predictive factors for anastomotic leakage. There are no robust data on severity and treatment strategies with associated outcomes. The aims of this work were (1) to investigate the factors that contribute to severity of anastomotic leakage and to compose an anastomotic leakage severity score and (2) to evaluate the effects of different treatment approaches on prespecified outcome parameters, stratified for severity score and other leakage characteristics. Method: TENTACLE–Rectum is an international multicentre retrospective cohort study. Patients with anastomotic leakage after LAR for primary rectal cancer between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2018 will be included by each centre. We aim to include 1246 patients in this study. The primary outcome is 1‐year stoma‐free survival (i.e. patients alive at 1 year without a stoma). Secondary outcomes include number of reinterventions and unplanned readmissions within 1 year, total length of hospital stay, total time with a stoma, the type of stoma present at 1 year (defunctioning, permanent), complications related to secondary leakage and mortality. For aim (1) regression models will be used to create an anastomotic leakage severity score. For aim (2) the effectiveness of different treatment strategies for leakage will be tested after correction for severity score and leakage characteristics, in addition to other potential related confounders. Conclusion: TENTACLE–Rectum will be an important step towards drawing up evidence‐based recommendations and improving outcomes for patients who experience severe treatment‐related morbidity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The availability of validated laparoscopic simulators has not resulted in sustainable high-volume training. We investigated whether the validated laparoscopic serious game Underground would increase voluntary training by residents. We hypothesized that by removing intrinsic barriers and extrinsic barriers, residents would spend more time on voluntary training with Underground compared to voluntary training with traditional simulators. Methods: After 1 year, we compared amount of voluntary time spent on playing Underground to time spent on all other laparoscopic training modalities and to time spent on performing laparoscopic procedures in the OR for all surgical residents. These data were compared to resident' time spent on laparoscopic activities over the prior year before the introduction of Underground. Results: From March 2016 until March 2017, 63 residents spent on average 20 min on voluntary serious gaming, 17 min on voluntary simulator training, 2 h and 44 min on mandatory laparoscopic training courses, and 14 h and 49 min on laparoscopic procedures in the OR. Voluntary activities represented 3% of laparoscopic training activities which was similar in the prior year wherein fifty residents spent on average 33 min on voluntary simulator training, 3 h and 28 min on mandatory laparoscopic training courses, and 11 h and 19 min on laparoscopic procedures. Conclusion: Serious gaming has not increased total voluntary training volume. Underground did not mitigate intrinsic and extrinsic barriers to voluntary training. Mandatory, scheduled training courses remain needed. Serious gaming is flexible and affordable and could be an important part of such training courses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

However, if ultrasound-guided nerve blockades are interpreted as a composite skill that involves mental rotation, this would explain the successful transfer from unrelated exercises to clinical skills found by Dr. Hewson. Dear Editor On behalf of myself and my co-authors, I would like to thank Dr. David Hewson for his kind words and insightful remarks. [Extracted from the article]

The open preperitoneal approach in inguinal hernia repair might have the benefit of a mesh in the preferred space without the disadvantages of an endoscopic procedure. A total of 172 patients with primary inguinal hernia were randomized to undergo the open preperitoneal Kugel or the standard open anterior Lichtenstein procedure in a teaching hospital. The main outcome measures were operating variables, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, and consumed analgesics during the first 2 weeks postoperatively and at 3 months, neurological examination, and complications. In the Lichtenstein group the operation took longer (54 min versus 41 min; p < .001). There were no clinically important differences in VAS pain score or number of analgesics during the first 2 weeks postoperatively. In the Kugel group the mean VAS pain score at 3 months was less (0.3 versus 0.9; p = .002), as was the proportion of patients reporting pain (21 versus 40%; p = .007). Pain was merely described as neuropathic, especially in the Lichtenstein group. With the anterior repair significantly more nerves were encountered, numbness reported, and cutaneous sensory changes found with neurological examination (all p < .001). For those surgeons preferring an open approach, the Kugel procedure is a feasible alternative for the standard Lichtenstein procedure and is associated with less chronic pain at three months. Most likely the neuropathic pain and numbness with the Lichtenstein technique are results of more nerves at risk with the anterior approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]