Jessica M. Leers

Comparison between endoscopic and surgical resection of mucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma in Barrett's esophagus at two high-volume centers.

Background and Objective:Esophagectomy has previously been the gold standard for patients with mucosal adenocarcinoma in Barretts esophagus (Barretts carcinoma, BC). Because of the minimal invasiveness and excellent results obtained with endoscopic resection (ER), the latter has become an accepted alternative. However, few data have so far been published comparing the 2 treatment methods. Methods:A total of 114 patients with mucosal BC who were treated surgically or endoscopically in 2 high-volume centers were included in this study. Between 1996 and 2009, 38 patients with mucosal BC received transthoracic esophageal resection with 2-field lymphadenectomy (median 29 lymph nodes removed; all pN0) in the Department of Surgery at the University of Cologne. Seventy-six patients with BC treated with ER followed by argon-plasma-coagulation of the remaining non-dysplastic Barretts esophagus in the Department of Gastroenterology in Wiesbaden were matched according to the following criteria: age, gender, infiltration depth (pT1m1–3), differentiation grade (G1/2 vs. 3) and follow-up period. Results:There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regard to epidemiologic and tumor criteria. Complete remission (CR) was achieved in all patients in the surgery group and all but 1 patient in the ER group (98.7%; the patient died of other causes before CR was achieved). Major complications after surgery occurred in 32% of the patients, significantly more often than in the ER group (0% major complications, P < 0.001). The 90-day mortality rates were 0% in the ER group and 2.6% in the surgical group (1 of 38; P = 0.333). The median follow-up periods were 4.1 years in the ER group and 3.7 years in the surgical group. During this period, 1 patient in the ER group had a local recurrence and 4 had metachronous neoplasia (overall recurrence rate 6.6%). However, repeat endoscopic treatment was possible in all of the patients, and the long-term CR rates in the surgical and ER groups were 100% and 98.7%, respectively. No tumor-related mortality was observed in either group. Conclusions:For patients with mucosal BC, both surgery and ER are effective treatment modalities. Surgery is associated with a higher morbidity rate and shows a risk for procedure-related mortality. However, the recurrence rate is higher in patients treated with ER, so that thorough follow-up procedures are mandatory.

Vagal-sparing esophagectomy: The ideal operation for intramucosal adenocarcinoma and Barrett with high-grade dysplasia

Objective:Our aim was to compare outcome of vagal-sparing esophagectomy with transhiatal and en bloc esophagectomy in patients with intramucosal adenocarcinoma or high-grade dysplasia. Summary Background Data:Intramucosal adenocarcinoma and high grade dysplasia have a low likelihood of lymphatic or systemic metastases and esophagectomy is curative in most patients. However, traditional esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity and altered gastrointestinal function. A vagal-sparing esophagectomy offers the advantages of complete disease removal with the potential for reduced morbidity and a better functional outcome. Method:Retrospective review of outcome in patients with intramucosal adenocarcinoma or high grade dysplasia that had a vagal-sparing (n = 49), transhiatal (n = 39) or en bloc (n = 21) esophagectomy. Results:The length of hospital stay and the incidence of major complications was significantly reduced with a vagal-sparing esophagectomy compared with a transhiatal or en bloc resection. Further, postvagotomy dumping and diarrhea symptoms were significantly less common, and weight was better maintained postoperatively with a vagal-sparing esophagectomy. Recurrent cancer has developed in only 1 patient. Conclusion:Survival with intramucosal adenocarcinoma or Barretts with high-grade dysplasia is independent of the type of resection. A vagal-sparing esophagectomy is associated with significantly less perioperative morbidity and a shorter hospital stay than a transhiatal or en bloc esophagectomy. Further, late morbidity including weight loss, dumping, and diarrhea are significantly less likely after a vagal-sparing approach. Consequently a vagal-sparing esophagectomy is the preferred procedure for patients with intramucosal adenocarcinoma or high grade dysplasia.

Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux: quantifying the association between body mass index, esophageal acid exposure, and lower esophageal sphincter status in a large series of patients with reflux symptoms.

IntroductionObesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) are increasingly important health problems. Previous studies of the relationship between obesity and GERD focus on indirect manifestations of GERD. Little is known about the association between obesity and objectively measured esophageal acid exposure. The aim of this study is to quantify the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and 24-h esophageal pH measurements and the status of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) in patients with reflux symptoms.MethodsData of 1,659 patients (50% male, mean age 51 ± 14) referred for assessment of GERD symptoms between 1998 and 2008 were analyzed. These subjects underwent 24-h pH monitoring off medication and esophageal manometry. The relationship of BMI to 24-h esophageal pH measurements and LES status was studied using linear regression and multiple regression analysis. The difference of each acid exposure component was also assessed among four BMI subgroups (underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese) using analysis of variance and covariance.ResultsIncreasing BMI was positively correlated with increasing esophageal acid exposure (adjusted R2 = 0.13 for the composite pH score). The prevalence of a defective LES was higher in patients with higher BMI (p < 0.0001). Compared to patients with normal weight, obese patients are more than twice as likely to have a mechanically defective LES [OR = 2.12(1.63–2.75)].ConclusionAn increase in body mass index is associated with an increase in esophageal acid exposure, whether BMI was examined as a continuous or as a categorical variable; 13% of the variation in esophageal acid exposure may be attributable to variation in BMI.

A New Technique for Measurement of Pharyngeal pH: Normal Values and Discriminating pH Threshold

IntroductionIdentifying gastroesophageal reflux disease as the cause of respiratory and laryngeal complaints is difficult and depends largely on the measurements of increased acid exposure in the upper esophagus or ideally the pharynx. The current method of measuring pharyngeal pH environment is inaccurate and problematic due to artifacts. A newly designed pharyngeal pH probe to avoid these artifacts has been introduced. The aim of this study was to use this probe to measure the pharyngeal pH environment in normal subjects and establish pH thresholds to identify abnormality.MethodsAsymptomatic volunteers were studied to define the normal pharyngeal pH environment. All subjects underwent esophagram, esophageal manometry, upper and lower esophageal pH monitoring with a dual-channel pH catheter and pharyngeal pH monitoring with the new probe. Analyses were performed at 0.5 pH intervals between pH 4 and 6.5 to identify the best discriminating pH threshold and calculate a composite pH score to identify an abnormal pH environment.ResultsThe study population consisted of 55 normal subjects. The pattern of pharyngeal pH environment was significantly different in the upright and supine periods and required different thresholds. The calculated discriminatory pH threshold was 5.5 for upright and 5.0 for supine periods. The 95th percentile values for the composite score were 9.4 for upright and 6.8 for supine.ConclusionA new pharyngeal pH probe which detects aerosolized and liquid acid overcomes the artifacts that occur in measuring pharyngeal pH with existing catheters. Discriminating pH thresholds were selected and normal values defined to identify patients with an abnormal pharyngeal pH environment.

Bravo Catheter-Free pH Monitoring: Normal Values, Concordance, Optimal Diagnostic Thresholds, and Accuracy

BACKGROUND & AIMS The Bravo pH capsule is a catheter-free intraesophageal pH monitoring system that avoids the discomfort of an indwelling catheter. The objectives of this study were as follows: (1) to obtain normal values for the first and second 24-hour recording periods using a Bravo capsule placed transnasally 5 cm above the upper border of the lower esophageal sphincter determined by manometry and to assess concordance between the 2 periods, (2) to determine the optimal discriminating threshold for identifying patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and (3) to validate this threshold and to identify the recording period with the greatest accuracy. METHODS Normal values for a manometrically positioned, transnasally inserted Bravo capsule were determined in 50 asymptomatic subjects. A test population of 50 subjects (25 asymptomatic, 25 with GERD) then was monitored to determine the best discriminating thresholds. The thresholds for the first, second, and combined (48-hour) recording periods then were validated in a separate group of 115 patients. RESULTS In asymptomatic subjects, the values measured using a manometrically positioned Bravo pH capsule were similar between the first and second 24-hour periods of recording. The highest level of accuracy with Bravo was observed when an abnormal composite pH score was obtained in the first or second 24-hour period of monitoring. CONCLUSIONS Normal values for esophageal acid exposure were defined for a manometrically positioned, transnasally inserted, Bravo pH capsule. An abnormal composite pH score, obtained in either the first or second 24-hour recording period, was the most accurate method of identifying patients with GERD.

Clinical characteristics, biologic behavior, and survival after esophagectomy are similar for adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and the distal esophagus

OBJECTIVE The Siewert classification system differentiates between adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and that of the distal esophagus. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether there were differences in the location and prevalence of lymph node metastases, type of recurrence, and survival with these tumors that warrant distinguishing between them in clinical practice. METHODS Records of all patients who underwent resection for adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction from 1987 to 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. Based on the endoscopic location of the epicenter of the tumor in relation to the gastroesophageal junction, tumors were categorized in 301 patients as being of the distal esophagus and in 208 as being of the gastroesophageal junction. RESULTS There were no significant differences in age, sex, or body mass index between patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction. Patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus were more likely to have reflux symptoms (75% vs 53%, P < .0001) and peritumoral intestinal metaplasia (73% vs 51%, P < .0001) and be in a surveillance program (54% vs 9%, P = .0005) compared with patients with adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction. However, the prevalence and location of nodal metastases was similar, and in node-positive patients mediastinal node involvement was present in more than 40% of the patients in each group (distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, 47%; gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 41%). Survival was similar (5 years: distal esophageal adenocarcinoma, 45%; gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, 38%; P = .14), as was the prevalence and type of recurrence. CONCLUSION The prevalence and distribution of lymph node metastases in patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and gastroesophageal junction were similar, and after esophagectomy, there was no difference in overall survival or recurrence. Efforts to differentiate between these tumors are unnecessary, and both are effectively treated with esophagectomy.

Genetic variations in angiogenesis pathway genes predict tumor recurrence in localized adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

Objective:The aim of this study was to determine whether the risk of systemic disease after esophagectomy could be predicted by angiogenesis-related gene polymorphisms. Summary Background Data:Systemic tumor recurrence after curative resection continues to impose a significant problem in the management of patients with localized esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA). The identification of molecular markers of prognosis will help to better define tumor stage, indicate disease progression, identify novel therapeutic targets, and monitor response to therapy. Proteinase-activated-receptor 1 (PAR-1) and epidermal growth factor (EGF) have been shown to mediate the regulation of local and early-onset angiogenesis, and in turn may impact the process of tumor growth and disease progression. Methods:We investigated tissue samples from 239 patients with localized EA treated with surgery alone. DNA was isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded normal esophageal tissue samples and polymorphisms were analyzed using polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism and 5′-end [&ggr;-33P] ATP-labeled polymerase chain reaction methods. Results:PAR-1 −506 ins/del (adjusted P value = 0.011) and EGF +61 A>G (adjusted P value = 0.035) showed to be adverse prognostic markers, in both univariate and multivariable analyses. In combined analysis, grouping alleles into favorable versus nonfavorable alleles, high expression variants of PAR-1 −506 ins/del (any insertion allele) and EGF +61 A>G (A/A) were associated with a higher likelihood of developing tumor recurrence (adjusted P value <0.001). Conclusion:This study supports the role of functional PAR-1 and EGF polymorphisms as independent prognostic markers in localized EA and may therefore help to identify patient subgroups at high risk for tumor recurrence.

Delayed Esophagogastrostomy: A Safe Strategy for Management of Patients with Ischemic Gastric Conduit at Time of Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND Ischemia of the gastric conduit remains an important complication of esophagectomy and is associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leak and sepsis. We report a group of patients with multiple comorbid conditions and an ischemic gastric conduit that was successfully managed by a delayed esophagogastrostomy. STUDY DESIGN Between 2000 and 2007, esophagectomy with gastric pullup was performed in 554 patients. In 37 patients (7%), the combination of an ischemic graft and substantial comorbid conditions prompted delayed reconstruction to avoid an immediate esophagogastrostomy. In these patients, the gastric conduit was brought up and secured in the neck, and a cervical esophagostomy was constructed. Subsequently, a delayed esophagogastrostomy was performed through neck incision. Outcomes were analyzed at a median of 22 months (interquartile range [IQR], 13 to 30 months). RESULTS There were 29 male and 8 female patients, with a median age of 65 years (IQR, 58 to 75 years). Thirty-one patients had malignant disease; 12 received neoadjuvant therapy. All 37 patients recovered from their esophagectomy without evidence of ischemic necrosis or fistula from their gastric conduit. In 35 patients, a delayed esophagogastrostomy was performed at a median of 98 days (IQR, 89 to 110 days). At the time of reconstruction, all had well-perfused gastric conduits, and the anastomoses healed without leak, wound infection, or sepsis. A stricture developed in three patients and was treated with dilation. Delayed esophagogastrostomy was never performed in two patients because of development of recurrent malignant disease. CONCLUSIONS Delayed esophagogastrostomy is a safe strategy for management of patients with comorbidities and an ischemic gastric conduit at the time of esophagectomy.

Survival in Lymph Node Negative Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus after R0 Resection With and Without Neoadjuvant Therapy: Evidence for Downstaging of N Status

BACKGROUND After esophagectomy, many patients who received neoadjuvant therapy have no evidence of lymph node involvement (N0 disease). Whether lymph nodes were initially involved and eradicated by the neoadjuvant therapy (down-staged) or if the nodes were never involved is a subject of debate. To address this issue, we compared clinical outcomes in N0 patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy with outcomes in patients treated with surgery alone. STUDY DESIGN We reviewed records of 100 consecutive patients who underwent R0 esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma with pathologic N0 status. Seventy-five patients were treated by operation alone and 25 received neoadjuvant therapy. Tumor characteristics including length, depth, lymphovascular invasion, and degree of differentiation were compared and longterm survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis at a median of 46 months (interquartile range 26 to 77 months). RESULTS Tumor characteristics were similar between groups. Recurrence was more common in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy compared with those treated with surgery alone (10 of 25 versus 10 of 75, p=0.0063). Patients with N0 disease after neoadjuvant therapy had a significantly worse survival than patients treated by surgery alone (49% versus 85%, p=0.005). CONCLUSIONS Although neoadjuvant therapy may eradicate lymph node metastases, it does not result in the same outcomes as those achieved in patients with N0 disease treated with surgery alone. The poor clinical outcomes observed in N0 patients after neoadjuvant therapy suggest that they initially had node involvement and were downstaged by eradication of lymph node disease.

Circular stapled pyloroplasty: a fast and effective technique for pyloric disruption during esophagectomy with gastric pull-up.

The necessity of pyloroplasty after esophagectomy and gastric pull-up is debated. Disadvantages of a standard pyloroplasty include the potential for leak, shortening of the length of the graft, and complexity when done during a minimally invasive procedure. The aim of this study is to report our experience with a novel internal pyloroplasty technique using a circular stapler (CS pyloroplasty), which is applicable for both laparoscopic and open esophagectomy. The records of all patients who underwent an esophagectomy with gastric pull-up and pyloroplasty between 2002 and 2007 were reviewed. The CS pyloroplasty was performed through a lesser curve gastrotomy with a 21-mm CS, while the standard pyloroplasty entailed a longitudinal full thickness incision through the pylorus with mucosal closure in the same direction and a Graham patch. A CS pyloroplasty was performed in 144 and a standard pyloroplasty in 133 patients. The median patient age was 66years, and the median follow-up was 17months, and was similar for both types of pyloroplasty. Routine postoperative videoesophagram was significantly more likely to show a delay in contrast transit through the pylorus after standard pyloroplasty (16% standard vs. 8% CS pyloroplasty, P= 0.03). Significantly more patients had postoperative endoscopy after standard pyloroplasty (40% standard vs. 24% CS pyloroplasty, P= 0.004), but the frequency of pyloric dilatation was similar. There were no leaks with either technique. A circular stapled pyloroplasty is as efficacious as a standard pyloroplasty after esophagectomy with gastric pull-up. Potential advantages include the ease and simplicity of the procedure along with virtually no risk of a leak and no graft shortening. The technique is amenable to both open and minimally invasive procedures.