The Role of Prehabilitation in Modern Esophagogastric Cancer Surgery: A Comprehensive Review

Esophagogastric cancer is among the most common malignancies worldwide. Surgery with or without neoadjuvant therapy is the only potentially curative treatment option. Although esophagogastric resections remain associated with major surgical trauma and significant postoperative morbidity. Prehabilitation has emerged as a novel strategy to improve clinical outcomes by optimizing physical and psychological status before major surgery through exercise and nutritional and psychological interventions. Current prehabilitation programs may be unimodal, including only one intervention, or multimodal, combining the benefits of different types of interventions. However, it still is an investigational treatment option mostly limited to clinical trials. In this comprehensive review, we summarize the current evidence for the role of prehabilitation in modern esophagogastric cancer surgery. The available studies are very heterogeneous in design, type of interventions, and measured outcomes. Yet, all of them confirm at least some positive effects of prehabilitation in terms of improved physical performance, nutritional status, quality of life, or even reduced postoperative morbidity. However, the optimal interventions for prehabilitation remain unclear; thus, they cannot be standardized and widely adopted. Future studies on multimodal prehabilitation are necessary to develop optimal programs for patients with esophagogastric cancer

Achieving Textbook Outcomes in Colorectal Cancer Surgery Is Associated with Improved Long-Term Survival: Results of the Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

Background: The outcomes of patients with colorectal cancer greatly depend on the quality of their surgical care. However, relying solely on a single quality indicator does not adequately capture the multifaceted nature of modern perioperative care. A new tool—“Textbook Outcome” (TO)—has been suggested to provide a comprehensive evaluation of surgical quality. This study aims to examine how TO affects the long-term outcomes of colorectal cancer patients who are scheduled for surgery. Methods: The data of all patients undergoing elective colorectal cancer resection with primary anastomosis at two major cancer treatment centers in Lithuania—Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos and National Cancer Institute—between 2014 and 2018 were entered into the prospectively maintained database. The study defined TO as a composite quality indicator that incorporated seven parameters: R0 resection, retrieval of ≥12 lymph nodes, absence of postoperative complications during the intrahospital period, hospital stay duration of fewer than 14 days, no readmission within 90 days after surgery, no reinterventions within 30 days after surgery, and no 30-day mortality. Long-term outcomes between patients who achieved TO and those who did not were compared. Factors associated with failure to achieve TO were identified. Results: Of the 1524 patients included in the study, TO was achieved by 795 (52.2%). Patients with a higher ASA score (III-IV) were identified to have higher odds of failure to achieve TO (OR 1.497, 95% CI 1.203–1.863), while those who underwent minimally invasive surgery had lower odds for similar failure (OR 0.570, 95% CI 0.460–0.706). TO resulted in improved 5-year overall—(80.2% vs. 65.5%, p = 0.001) and disease-free survival (76.6% vs. 62.6%; p = 0.001) rates. Conclusions: Elective colorectal resections result in successful TO for 52.5% of patients. The likelihood of failure to achieve TO is increased in patients with a high ASA score, while minimally invasive surgery is associated with higher TO rates. Patients who fail to achieve successful surgical outcomes experience reduced long-term outcomes

Quality of Life and Bowel Function Following Early Closure of a Temporary Ileostomy in Patients with Rectal Cancer: A Report from a Single-Center Randomized Controlled Trial

The aim of this study was to assess quality of life and bowel function in patients undergoing early vs. standard ileostomy closure. We retrospectively assessed patients from our previous randomized controlled trial. Patients with a temporary ileostomy who underwent rectal cancer surgery and did not have anastomotic leakage or other. Early closure (EC; 30 days after creation) and standard closure (SC; 90 days after creation) of ileostomy were compared. Thirty-six months (17–97) after stoma closure, we contacted patients by phone and filled in two questionnaires—The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) and low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. This index trial was not powered to assess the difference in bowel function between the two groups. All the patients in the SC group had anastomosis <6 cm from the anal verge compared to 42 of 43 (97.7%) in the EC group. There were no statistically significant differences between EC (26 patients) and SC (25 patients) groups in the EORTC QLQ-C30 and LARS questionnaires. Global quality of life was 37.2 (0–91.7; ±24.9) in the EC group vs. 34.3 (0–100; ±16.2) in the SC (p = 0.630). Low anterior resection syndrome was present in 46% of patients in the EC and 56% in the SC group (p = 0.858). Major LARS was found more often in younger patients. However, no statistical significance was found (p = 0.364). The same was found with quality of life (p = 0.219). Age, gender, ileostomy closure timing, neoadjuvant treatment, complications had no effect of worse bowel function or quality of life. There was no difference in quality of life or bowel function in the late postoperative period after the early vs. late closure of ileostomy based on two questionnaires and small sample size. None of our assessed risk factors had a negative effect on bowel function o quality of life

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) with cisplatin and doxorubicin in combination with FOLFOX chemotherapy as a first-line treatment for gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastases: single-arm phase II study

Abstract Background Gastric cancer (GC) remains among the most common and most lethal cancers worldwide. Peritoneum is the most common site for distant dissemination. Standard treatment for GC peritoneal metastases (PM) is a systemic therapy, but treatment outcomes remain very poor, with median overall survival ranging between 3-9 months. Thus, novel treatment methods are necessary. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) is the most novel technique for intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Some preliminary data suggest PIPAC can achieve improved long-term outcomes in patients with GC PM, especially when used in combination with systemic chemotherapy. However, there is a lack of data from well-design prospective studies that would confirm the efficacy of PIPAC and systemic therapy combination for first-line treatment. Methods This study is an investigator-initiated single-arm, phase II trial to investigate the efficacy of PIPAC combined with systemic FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, leucovorin) as a first-line treatment for GC PM. The study is conducted in 2 specialized GC treatment centers in Lithuania. It enrolls GC patients with histologically confirmed PM without prior treatment. The treatment protocol consists of PIPAC with cisplatin (10.5 mg/m2 body surface in 150 mL NaCl 0.9%) and doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m2 in 50 mL NaCl 0.9%) followed by 2 cycles of FOLFOX every 6–7 weeks. In total 3 PIPACs and 6 cycles of FOLFOX will be utilized. The primary outcome of the study is the objective response rate (ORR) according to RECIST v. 1.1 criteria (Eisenhauer et al., Eur J Cancer 45:228–47) in a CT scan performed 7 days after the 4th cycle of FOLFOX. Secondary outcomes include ORR after all experimental treatment, PIPAC characteristics, postoperative morbidity, histological and biochemical response, ascites volume, quality of life, overall survival, and toxicity. Discussion This study aims to assess PIPAC and FOLFOX combination efficacy for previously untreated GC patients with PM. Trial registration NCT05644249. Registered on December 9, 2022