John D. Urschel

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery to surgery alone for resectable esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND Esophagectomy is a standard treatment for resectable esophageal cancer but relatively few patients are cured. Combining neoadjuvant chemoradiation with surgery may improve survival but treatment morbidity is a concern. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery with the use of surgery alone for esophageal cancer. METHODS Medline and manual searches were done to identify all published RCTs that compared neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery with surgery alone for esophageal cancer. A random-effects model was used and the odds ratio (OR) was the principal measure of effect. Systematic quantitative review was done for outcomes unique to the neoadjuvant chemoradiation treatment group, such as pathological complete response. RESULTS Nine RCTs that included 1,116 patients were selected with quality scores ranging from 1 to 3 (5-point Jadad scale). Odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]; P value), expressed as chemoradiation and surgery versus surgery alone (treatment versus control; values <1 favor chemoradiation-surgery arm), was 0.79 (0.59, 1.06; P = 0.12) for 1-year survival, 0.77 (0.56, 1.05; P = 0.10) for 2-year survival, 0.66 (0.47, 0.92; P = 0.016) for 3-year survival, 2.50 (1.05, 5.96; P = 0.038) for rate of resection, 0.53 (0.33, 0.84; P = 0.007) for rate of complete resection, 1.72 (0.96, 3.07; P = 0.07) for operative mortality, 1.63 (0.99, 2.68; P = 0.053) for all treatment mortality, 0.38 (0.23, 0.63; P = 0.0002) for local-regional cancer recurrence, 0.88 (0.55, 1.41; P = 0.60) for distant cancer recurrence, and 0.47 (0.16, 1.45; P = 0.19) for all cancer recurrence. A complete pathological response to chemoradiation occurred in 21% of patients. The 3-year survival benefit was most pronounced when chemotherapy and radiotherapy were given concurrently (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.79, P = 0.005) instead of sequentially (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.25, P = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS Compared with surgery alone, neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery improved 3-year survival and reduced local-regional cancer recurrence. It was associated with a lower rate of esophageal resection, but a higher rate of complete (R0) resection. There was a nonsignificant trend toward increased treatment mortality with neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Concurrent administration of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy was superior to sequential chemoradiation treatment scheduling.

Pyloric Drainage (Pyloroplasty) or No Drainage in Gastric Reconstruction after Esophagectomy: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background/Aim: A gastric conduit is usually used to reconstruct the foregut after esophagectomy for cancer. The gastric emptying may be impaired after this operation, so some esophageal surgeons routinely add a pyloric drainage procedure (pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy). We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the effect of pyloric drainage on patient outcomes. Methods: Medline and manual searches were done (completed independently and in duplicate) to identify all published RCTs that addressed the issue of pyloric drainage procedures during gastric conduit reconstruction of the esophagus. The selection process was inclusive; no trials were excluded. Trial validity assessment was done, and a trial quality score was assigned. Early outcomes assessed by meta-analysis included operative mortality, esophagogastric anastomotic leaks, pulmonary morbidity, pyloric drainage complications, fatal pulmonary aspiration, and gastric outlet obstruction. A random-effects model was used, and the relative risk was the principal measure of effect. Systematic semiquantitative review was used for late outcomes such as gastric emptying, bile reflux, nutritional status, and obstructive foregut symptoms. Results: Nine RCTs, that included a total of 553 patients, were selected, with quality scores ranging from 1 to 4 (5-point Jadad scale). Selection and validity agreement was strong. The relative risk (95% CI; p value), expressed as pyloric drainage versus no drainage (treatment vs. control), was 0.92 (0.34, 2.44; p = 0.86) for operative mortality, 0.90 (0.47, 1.76; p = 0.77) for esophagogastric anastomotic leaks, 0.69 (0.42, 1.14; p = 0.15) for pulmonary morbidity, 2.55 (0.34, 18.98; p = 0.36) for pyloric drainage complications, 0.25 (0.04, 1.60; p = 0.14) for fatal pulmonary aspiration, and 0.18 (0.03, 0.97; p = 0.046) for gastric outlet obstruction. Systematic semiquantitative review showed a nonsignificant trend favoring pyloric drainage for the late outcomes of gastric emptying, nutritional status, and obstructive foregut symptoms. For the late outcome of bile reflux, there was a nonsignificant trend favoring the no-drainage group. The scintographic gastric emptying time, expressed as a ratio (pyloric drainage/no drainage), was 0.53. Conclusions: Data synthesized from existing RCTs show that pyloric drainage procedures reduce the occurrence of early postoperative gastric outlet obstruction after esophagectomy with gastric reconstruction, but they have little effect on other early and late patient outcomes.

Effect of surgical experience on results of esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma

Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is associated with substantial operative morbidity and mortality. The effect of surgical experience on results of esophagectomy has received little attention in the medical literature.

Complications of antireflux surgery

In order to determine the in-hospital morbidity and mortality rates of antireflux surgery in a community hospital setting, a retrospective 10-year review of 355 antireflux procedures was conducted. A modified Nissen fundoplication, with an incomplete fundal wrap, was the most common operation performed. Concomitant procedures, usually biliary or gastric, were undertaken in 93 patients. Thirty-nine patients had previously undergone an operation involving hiatal dissection. Overall morbidity was 17%, and mortality was 1% (three deaths). Patients with previous hiatal surgery had higher morbidity (44%, p < 0.0001) and mortality rates (3%, p < 0.21). Wound infection occurred in 5% of patients and wound dehiscence in 1%. Splenic repair or splenectomy for iatrogenic injury was required in 2%. Postoperative gastroesophageal leaks occurred in six patients (2%). Patients with previous hiatal surgery had a higher incidence of gastroesophageal leaks (8%, p < 0.002). Three of six patients had contained leaks that resolved with antibiotics, cessation of oral intake, and nutritional support. Two of three patients with noncontained leaks died despite surgical intervention.

A randomized, controlled trial comparing thoracoscopy and limited thoracotomy for lung biopsy in interstitial lung disease

BACKGROUND Lung biopsies are frequently needed to diagnose diffuse interstitial lung diseases. A prospective randomized, controlled trial comparing limited thoracotomy (open lung biopsy) and thoracoscopy for lung biopsy was done. METHODS Ambulatory patients with a clinical diagnosis of diffuse interstitial lung disease were randomized to thoracoscopy or limited thoracotomy. Data on postoperative pain, narcotic requirements, operating room time, adequacy of biopsy, duration of chest tube drainage, length of hospital stay, spirometry, and complications were collected. RESULTS A total of 42 randomized patients underwent lung biopsy (thoracoscopy 20, thoracotomy 22). The two study groups were comparable with respect to age, gender, corticosteroid use, and preoperative spirometry. Visual analog scale pain scores were nearly identical in the two groups (p = 0.397). Total morphine dose was 50.8 +/- 27.3 mg in the thoracoscopy group and 52.5 +/- 25.6 mg in the thoracotomy group (p = 0.86). Spirometry (FEV1) values in the two groups were not significantly different on postoperative days 1, 2, 14, and 28 (p = 0.665). Duration of operation was similar in both groups (thoracoscopy 40 +/- 30 minutes, thoracotomy 37 +/- 15 minutes; p = 0.67). The thoracoscopy and thoracotomy groups had equivalent duration of chest tube drainage (thoracoscopy 38 +/- 28 hours, thoracotomy 31 +/- 26 hours; p = 0.47) and length of hospital stay (thoracoscopy 77 +/- 82 hours, thoracotomy 69 +/- 55 hours; p = 0.72). Definitive pathologic diagnoses were made in all patients. CONCLUSIONS There is no clinical or statistical difference in outcomes for thoracoscopic and thoracotomy approaches. Both thoracoscopy and thoracotomy are acceptable procedures for diagnostic lung biopsy in diffuse interstitial lung disease.

Necrotizing soft tissue infections

Necrotizing soft tissue infections are a group of highly lethal infections that typically occur after trauma or surgery. Many individual infectious entities have been described, but they all have similar pathophysiologies, clinical features, and treatment approaches. The essentials of successful treatment include early diagnosis, aggressive surgical debridement, antibiotics, and supportive intensive treatment unit care. The two commonest pitfalls in management are failure of early diagnosis and inadequate surgical debridement. These life-threatening infections are often mistaken for cellulitis or innocent wound infections, and this is responsible for diagnostic delay. Tissue gas is not a universal finding in necrotizing soft tissue infections. This misconception also contributes to diagnostic errors. Incision and drainage is an inappropriate surgical strategy for necrotizing soft tissue infections; excisional debridement is needed. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy may be useful, but it is not as important as aggressive surgical therapy. Despite advances in antibiotic therapy and intensive treatment unit medicine, the mortality of necrotizing soft tissue infections is still high. This article emphasizes common treatment principles for all of these infections, and reviews some of the more important individual necrotizing soft tissue infectious entities.

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of route of reconstruction after esophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND A gastric conduit is usually used to reconstruct the foregut after esophagectomy for cancer. It can be transposed through a posterior or anterior mediastinal route. The choice of route is often debated but there is little evidence to support the use of one route over the other. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the effect of route of reconstruction on patient outcomes. METHODS Medline and manual searches were done (completed independently and in duplicate) to identify all published RCTs that addressed the issue of route of gastric conduit reconstruction after esophagectomy for cancer. The selection process was inclusive; no trials were excluded. Trial validity assessment was done and a trial quality score was assigned. Major outcomes for quantitative data synthesis included operative mortality, anastomotic leaks, cardiac morbidity, and pulmonary morbidity. A random-effects model was used and relative risk was the principal measure of effect. Systematic qualitative review was used for other outcomes such as duration of ventilation, length of hospital stay, operative blood loss, duration of surgery, anastomotic strictures, dysphagia, gastric emptying, and quality of life. Data on cancer survival were not available in the RCTs. RESULTS Six RCTs were selected with quality scores ranging from 1 to 4 (5-point Jadad scale). Selection and validity agreement was strong. Relative risk (95% confidence interval; P value), expressed as posterior versus anterior mediastinal route (treatment versus control), was 0.56 (0.17, 1.82; P = 0.34) for mortality, 1.01 (0.35, 2.94; P = 0.98) for leaks, 0.43 (0.17, 1.12; P = 0.08) for cardiac complications, and 0.67 (0.34, 1.33; P = 0.26) for pulmonary complications. Systematic qualitative review did not suggest any difference in other perioperative outcomes or conduit function for the two routes of reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS Data synthesized from existing RCTs show that posterior and anterior mediastinal routes of reconstruction are associated with similar outcomes after esophagectomy for cancer. However, a difference in outcomes for the two reconstructive routes remains possible. Further trials with larger numbers of patients are needed.

Open lung biopsy as an outpatient procedure

BACKGROUND Lung biopsies are frequently needed to diagnose diffuse interstitial lung diseases. Both limited thoracotomy (open lung biopsy) and thoracoscopy can be used for lung biopsies, but both procedures have traditionally required hospital admission. We report a series of patients that underwent outpatient open lung biopsy to show the safety and effectiveness of this practice. METHODS We reviewed records of ambulatory, nonoxygen dependent patients with a clinical diagnosis of diffuse interstitial lung disease that underwent outpatient open lung biopsy between January 1997 and December 1999. All procedures were done by a senior surgeon using single lumen endotracheal anesthesia, a small anterolateral thoracotomy without rib spreading, stapled wedge resection, and no chest tube. Patients were discharged the same day. RESULTS Thirty-two patients with a clinical diagnosis of diffuse interstitial lung disease underwent outpatient open lung biopsy. Mean age was 58 years (range, 21 to 74 years). Preoperative forced expiratory volume in 1 second was 74.3%+/-7.0% of predicted. A pathologic diagnosis was established in all patients: usual interstitial pneumonia, 26 patients; sarcoidosis, 2; metastatic carcinoma, 2; desquamative interstitial pneumonia, 1; and mixed dust pneumoconiosis, 1 patient. No patient required a chest tube, overnight observation, or hospital admission. No complications occurred. CONCLUSIONS Selected patients with a clinical diagnosis of diffuse interstitial lung disease can safely and effectively undergo diagnostic outpatient open lung biopsy. However, careful patient selection and attention to operative detail are essential.

Cerebrovascular accident complicating extended cervical mediastinoscopy

The safety and efficacy of staging cervical mediastinoscopy is well established. Extended cervical mediastinoscopy has been proposed as a safe and effective method of staging left upper lobe lung cancers. We report a case of cerebrovascular accident complicating extended cervical mediastinoscopy.

Outcome of major cardiac injuries at a Canadian trauma center

BackgroundCanadian trauma units have relatively little experience with major cardiac trauma (disruption of a cardiac chamber) so injury outcome may not be comparable to that reported from other countries. We compared our outcomes to those of other centers.MethodsRecords of patients suffering major cardiac trauma over a nine-year period were reviewed. Factors predictive of outcome were analyzed.ResultsTwenty-seven patients (11 blunt and 16 penetrating) with major cardiac trauma were evaluated. Injury severity scores (ISS) were similar for blunt (49.6 ± 16.6) and penetrating (39.5 ± 21.6, p = 0.20) injuries. Five of 11 blunt trauma patients, and 9 of 16 penetrating trauma patients, had detectable vital signs on hospital arrival (p = 0.43). Ten patients underwent emergency department thoracotomy and 11 patients had cardiac repair in the operating theatre. Eleven patients survived and 16 died. Survivors had a lower ISS (33.7 ± 15.4) than non-survivors (50.4 ± 20.4; p = 0.03). Two of 11 blunt trauma patients and 9 of 16 penetrating trauma patients survived (p = 0.06). Eleven of 14 patients with detectable vital signs survived; all 13 without detectable vital signs died (p = 0.00003). Ten of eleven patients treated in the operating theatre survived, while only one of the other 16 patients survived (p = 0.00002).ConclusionsPatients with major cardiac injuries and detectable vital signs on hospital arrival can be salvaged by prompt surgical intervention in the operating theatre. Major cardiac injuries are infrequently encountered at our center but patient survival is comparable to that reported from trauma units in other countries.