BACKGROUND: Combined chemoradiotherapy is increasingly being used as definitive treatment for locoregional esophageal malignancy. Patients with residual or recurrent localized cancer are often selectively considered for salvage esophagectomy (SALV). The aim of this pooled analysis was to compare short-term clinical outcomes from SALV following definitive chemoradiotherapy with those from planned esophagectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRS). METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, trial registries, conference proceedings and reference lists were searched for relevant comparative studies. Primary outcome measures were in-hospital mortality, anastomotic leak and pulmonary complications. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, negative (R0) resection margin, and estimated blood loss. RESULTS: Eight studies comprising 954 patients; 242 (SALV) and 712 (NCRS) were included. SALV was associated with a significantly increased incidence of post-operative mortality (9.50 vs. 4.07 %; pooled odds ratio [POR] = 3.02; p < 0.001), anastomotic leak (23.97 vs. 14.47 %; POR = 1.99; p = 0.005), pulmonary complications (29.75 vs. 16.99 %; POR = 2.12; p < 0.001), and an increased length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference = 8.29 days; 95 % CI 7.08-9.5; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of negative resection margins or estimated blood loss. CONCLUSIONS: SALV has poorer short-term outcomes when compared with planned esophagectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Patients and multidisciplinary tumor boards should be made aware of these differences in outcomes and SALV should be reserved for practice in high-volume institutions.
BACKGROUND: Combined chemoradiotherapy is increasingly being used as definitive treatment for locoregional esophageal malignancy. Patients with residual or recurrent localized cancer are often selectively considered for salvage esophagectomy (SALV). The aim of this pooled analysis was to compare short-term clinical outcomes from SALV following definitive chemoradiotherapy with those from planned esophagectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCRS). METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, trial registries, conference proceedings and reference lists were searched for relevant comparative studies. Primary outcome measures were in-hospital mortality, anastomotic leak and pulmonary complications. Secondary outcomes were length of hospital stay, negative (R0) resection margin, and estimated blood loss. RESULTS: Eight studies comprising 954 patients; 242 (SALV) and 712 (NCRS) were included. SALV was associated with a significantly increased incidence of post-operative mortality (9.50 vs. 4.07 %; pooled odds ratio [POR] = 3.02; p < 0.001), anastomotic leak (23.97 vs. 14.47 %; POR = 1.99; p = 0.005), pulmonary complications (29.75 vs. 16.99 %; POR = 2.12; p < 0.001), and an increased length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference = 8.29 days; 95 % CI 7.08-9.5; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups in the incidence of negative resection margins or estimated blood loss. CONCLUSIONS: SALV has poorer short-term outcomes when compared with planned esophagectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Patients and multidisciplinary tumor boards should be made aware of these differences in outcomes and SALV should be reserved for practice in high-volume institutions.
Authors: M Schweigert; N Solymosi; A Dubecz; M Posada Gonzalez; R J Stadlhuber; D Ofner; H J Stein Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 1.891
Authors: Ryan C Broderick; Arielle M Lee; Rachel R Blitzer; Beiqun Zhao; Jenny Lam; Joslin N Cheverie; Bryan J Sandler; Garth R Jacobsen; Mark W Onaitis; Kaitlyn J Kelly; Michael Bouvet; Santiago Horgan Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 4.584