Long-Term Survival Associated with Direct Oral Feeding Following Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy:Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial (NUTRIENT II)

Advancements in perioperative care have improved postoperative morbidity and recovery after esophagectomy. The direct start of oral intake can also enhance short-term outcomes following minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL). Subsequently, short-term outcomes may affect long-term survival. This planned sub-study of the NUTRIENT II trial, a multicenter randomized controlled trial, investigated the long-term survival of direct versus delayed oral feeding following MIE-IL. The outcomes included 3- and 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), and the influence of complications and caloric intake on OS. After excluding cases of 90-day mortality, 145 participants were analyzed. Of these, 63 patients (43.4%) received direct oral feeding. At 3 years, OS was significantly better in the direct oral feeding group (p = 0.027), but not at 5 years (p = 0.115). Moreover, 5-year DFS was significantly better in the direct oral feeding group (p = 0.047) and a trend towards improved DFS was shown at 3 years (p = 0.079). Postoperative complications and caloric intake on day 5 did not impact OS. The results of this study show a tendency of improved 3-year OS and 5-year DFS, suggesting a potential long-term survival benefit in patients receiving direct oral feeding after esophagectomy. However, the findings should be further explored in larger future trials.</p

Exploring the Modulatory Effect of High-Fat Nutrition on Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Acute Lung Injury in Vagotomized Rats and the Role of the Vagus Nerve

During esophagectomy, the vagus nerve is transected, which may add to the development of postoperative complications. The vagus nerve has been shown to attenuate inflammation and can be activated by a high-fat nutrition via the release of acetylcholine. This binds to α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (α7nAChR) and inhibits α7nAChR-expressing inflammatory cells. This study investigates the role of the vagus nerve and the effect of high-fat nutrition on lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced lung injury in rats. Firstly, 48 rats were randomized in 4 groups as follows: sham (sparing vagus nerve), abdominal (selective) vagotomy, cervical vagotomy and cervical vagotomy with an α7nAChR-agonist. Secondly, 24 rats were randomized in 3 groups as follows: sham, sham with an α7nAChR-antagonist and cervical vagotomy with an α7nAChR-antagonist. Finally, 24 rats were randomized in 3 groups as follows: fasting, high-fat nutrition before sham and high-fat nutrition before selective vagotomy. Abdominal (selective) vagotomy did not impact histopathological lung injury (LIS) compared with the control (sham) group (p > 0.999). There was a trend in aggravation of LIS after cervical vagotomy (p = 0.051), even after an α7nAChR-agonist (p = 0.090). Cervical vagotomy with an α7nAChR-antagonist aggravated lung injury (p = 0.004). Furthermore, cervical vagotomy increased macrophages in bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid and negatively impacted pulmonary function. Other inflammatory cells, TNF-α and IL-6, in the BALF and serum were unaffected. High-fat nutrition reduced LIS after sham (p = 0.012) and selective vagotomy (p = 0.002) compared to fasting. vagotomy. This study underlines the role of the vagus nerve in lung injury and shows that vagus nerve stimulation using high-fat nutrition is effective in reducing lung injury, even after selective vagotomy

The impact of hospital experience in bariatric surgery on short-term outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy:a nationwide analysis

Background: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a technically challenging procedure with a substantial learning curve. Composite volume of upper gastrointestinal (upper GI) procedures for cancer has been previously linked to postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to investigate an association between hospital experience in bariatric surgery and short-term outcomes in MIE. Method: Data on esophagectomy patients between 2016 and 2020 were collected from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit, a mandatory nationwide registry. Hospitals were categorized as bariatric or non-bariatric. Multivariable logistic regression investigated short-term postoperative outcomes, adjusting for case mix. Results: Of 3371 patients undergoing esophagectomy in sixteen hospitals, 2450 (72.7%) underwent MIE. Bariatric hospitals (N = 6) accounted for 1057 (43.1%) MIE. Annual volume of bariatric procedures was median 523 and esophagectomies 42. In non-bariatric hospitals, volume of esophagectomies was median 52 (P = 0.145). Overall postoperative complication rate was lower in bariatric hospitals (59.2% vs. 65.9%, P &lt; 0.001). Bariatric hospitals were associated with a reduced risk of overall complications (aOR 0.76 [95% CI 0.62–0.92]), length of hospital (aOR 0.79 [95% CI 0.65–0.95]), and ICU stay (aOR 0.81 [95% CI 0.67–0.98]) after MIE. Surgical radicality (R0) did not differ. Lymph node yield (≥ 15) was lower in bariatric hospitals (90.0% vs. 94.7%, P &lt; 0.001). Over the years, several short-term outcomes improved in bariatric hospitals compared to non-bariatric hospitals. Conclusion: In this nationwide analysis, there was an association between bariatric hospitals and improved short-term outcomes after MIE. Characteristics of bariatric hospitals that could explain this phenomenon and whether this translates to other upper GI procedures may be warranted to identify.</p

The impact of hospital experience in bariatric surgery on short-term outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy:a nationwide analysis

Background: Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a technically challenging procedure with a substantial learning curve. Composite volume of upper gastrointestinal (upper GI) procedures for cancer has been previously linked to postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to investigate an association between hospital experience in bariatric surgery and short-term outcomes in MIE. Method: Data on esophagectomy patients between 2016 and 2020 were collected from the Dutch Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Audit, a mandatory nationwide registry. Hospitals were categorized as bariatric or non-bariatric. Multivariable logistic regression investigated short-term postoperative outcomes, adjusting for case mix. Results: Of 3371 patients undergoing esophagectomy in sixteen hospitals, 2450 (72.7%) underwent MIE. Bariatric hospitals (N = 6) accounted for 1057 (43.1%) MIE. Annual volume of bariatric procedures was median 523 and esophagectomies 42. In non-bariatric hospitals, volume of esophagectomies was median 52 (P = 0.145). Overall postoperative complication rate was lower in bariatric hospitals (59.2% vs. 65.9%, P &lt; 0.001). Bariatric hospitals were associated with a reduced risk of overall complications (aOR 0.76 [95% CI 0.62–0.92]), length of hospital (aOR 0.79 [95% CI 0.65–0.95]), and ICU stay (aOR 0.81 [95% CI 0.67–0.98]) after MIE. Surgical radicality (R0) did not differ. Lymph node yield (≥ 15) was lower in bariatric hospitals (90.0% vs. 94.7%, P &lt; 0.001). Over the years, several short-term outcomes improved in bariatric hospitals compared to non-bariatric hospitals. Conclusion: In this nationwide analysis, there was an association between bariatric hospitals and improved short-term outcomes after MIE. Characteristics of bariatric hospitals that could explain this phenomenon and whether this translates to other upper GI procedures may be warranted to identify.</p

Erratum to “Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy:Unravelling differences in failure to rescue (vol 49, pg 974, 2023)

The publisher regrets that when the article was published the following collaboration authors from the “TENTACLE – Esophagus collaborative group” appeared incorrectly in the main author list due to a technical error: Writing Committee, Joos Heisterkamp, Fatih Polat, Jeroen Schouten, Pritam Singh, Study collaborators. This has now been corrected. The publisher would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused

Practice variation in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: Unravelling differences in failure to rescue

Introduction: Failure to rescue (FTR) is an important outcome measure after esophagectomy and reflects mortality after postoperative complications. Differences in FTR have been associated with hospital resection volume. However, insight into how centers manage complications and achieve their outcomes is lacking. Anastomotic leak (AL) is a main contributor to FTR. This study aimed to assess differences in FTR after AL between centers, and to identify factors that explain these differences. Methods: TENTACLE – Esophagus is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study, which included 1509 patients with AL after esophagectomy. Differences in FTR were assessed between low-volume (<20 resections), middle-volume (20–60 resections) and high-volume centers (≥60 resections). Mediation analysis was performed using logistic regression, including possible mediators for FTR: case-mix, hospital resources, leak severity and treatment. Results: FTR after AL was 11.7%. After adjustment for confounders, FTR was lower in high-volume vs. low-volume (OR 0.44, 95%CI 0.2–0.8), but not versus middle-volume centers (OR 0.67, 95%CI 0.5–1.0). After mediation analysis, differences in FTR were found to be explained by lower leak severity, lower secondary ICU readmission rate and higher availability of therapeutic modalities in high-volume centers. No statistically significant direct effect of hospital volume was found: high-volume vs. low-volume 0.86 (95%CI 0.4–1.7), high-volume vs. middle-volume OR 0.86 (95%CI 0.5–1.4). Conclusion: Lower FTR in high-volume compared with low-volume centers was explained by lower leak severity, less secondary ICU readmissions and higher availability of therapeutic modalities. To reduce FTR after AL, future studies should investigate effective strategies to reduce leak severity and prevent secondary ICU readmission