ESTS guidelines for intraoperative lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer

The European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) organized a workshop dealing with lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer. The objective of this workshop was to develop guidelines for definitions and the surgical procedures of intraoperative lymph node staging, and the pathologic evaluation of resected lymph nodes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Relevant peer-reviewed publications on the subjects, the experience of the participants, and the opinion of the ESTS members contributing on line, were used to reach a consensus. Systematic nodal dissection is recommended in all cases to ensure complete resection. Lobe-specific systematic nodal dissection is acceptable for peripheral squamous T1 tumors, if hilar and interlobar nodes are negative on frozen section studies; it implies removal of, at least, three hilar and interlobar nodes and three mediastinal nodes from three stations in which the subcarinal is always included. Selected lymph node biopsies and sampling are justified to prove nodal involvement when resection is not possible. Pathologic evaluation includes all lymph nodes resected separately and those remaining in the lung specimen. Sections are done at the site of gross abnormalities. If macroscopic inspection does not detect any abnormal site, 2-mm slices of the nodes in the longitudinal plane are recommended. Routine search for micrometastases or isolated tumor cells in hematoxylin-eosin negative nodes would be desirable. Randomized controlled trials to evaluate adjuvant therapies for patients with these conditions are recommended. The adherence to these guidelines will standardize the intraoperative lymph node staging and pathologic evaluation, and improve pathologic staging, which will help decide on the best adjuvant therap

European guidelines on structure and qualification of general thoracic surgery

OBJECTIVE To update the recommendations for the structural characteristics of general thoracic surgery (GTS) in Europe in order to provide a document that can be used as a guide for harmonizing the general thoracic surgical practice in Europe. METHODS A task force was created to set the structural, procedural and qualification characteristics of a European GTS unit. These criteria were endorsed by the Executive Committee of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons and by the Thoracic Domain of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and were validated by the European Board of Thoracic Surgery at European Union of Medical Specialists. RESULTS Criteria regarding definition and scope of GTS, structure and qualification of GTS unit, training and education and recommendations for subjects of particular interest (lung transplant, oesophageal surgery, minimally invasive thoracic surgery, quality surveillance) were developed. CONCLUSIONS This document will hopefully represent the first step of a process of revision of the modern thoracic surgeons' curricula, which need to be qualitatively rethought in the setting of the qualification process. The structural criteria highlighted in the present document are meant to help and tackle the challenge of cultural and language barriers as well as of widely varying national training programme

How to select patients for anti-reflux surgery? The ICARUS guidelines (International Consensus regarding preoperative examinations and clinical characteristics assessment to select adult patients for AntiReflUx Surgery)

Objective: Anti-reflux surgery can be proposed in patients with gastro-esophageal reflux disease, especially when proton pump inhibitor use leads to incomplete symptom improvement. However, to date, international consensus guidelines on the clinical criteria and additional technical examinations used in patient selection for anti-reflux surgery are lacking. We aimed at generating key recommendations in the selection of patients for anti-reflux surgery. Design: We included 35 international experts (gastroenterologists, surgeons and physiologists) in a Delphi process and developed 37 statements that were revised by the Consensus Group, to start the Delphi process. Three voting rounds followed where each statement was presented with the evidence summary. The panel indicated the degree of agreement for the statement. When 80% of the Consensus Group agreed (A+/A) with a statement, this was defined as consensus. All votes were mutually anonymous.Results: Patients with heartburn with a satisfactory response to PPIs, patients with a hiatal hernia (HH), patients with esophagitis LA grade B or higher and patients with Barrett’s esophagus are good candidates for anti-reflux surgery. An endoscopy prior to anti-reflux surgery is mandatory and a barium swallow should be performed in patients with suspicion of a HH or short esophagus. Esophageal manometry is mandatory to rule out major motility disorders. Finally, esophageal pH (+/- impedance) monitoring off PPI is mandatory to select patients for anti-reflux surgery, if endoscopy is negative for unequivocal reflux esophagitis. Conclusion: With the ICARUS guidelines, we generated key recommendations for selection of patients for anti-reflux surgery

Status Update and Interim Results from the Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial-2 (ACST-2)

Objectives: ACST-2 is currently the largest trial ever conducted to compare carotid artery stenting (CAS) with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis requiring revascularization. Methods: Patients are entered into ACST-2 when revascularization is felt to be clearly indicated, when CEA and CAS are both possible, but where there is substantial uncertainty as to which is most appropriate. Trial surgeons and interventionalists are expected to use their usual techniques and CE-approved devices. We report baseline characteristics and blinded combined interim results for 30-day mortality and major morbidity for 986 patients in the ongoing trial up to September 2012. Results: A total of 986 patients (687 men, 299 women), mean age 68.7 years (SD ± 8.1) were randomized equally to CEA or CAS. Most (96%) had ipsilateral stenosis of 70-99% (median 80%) with contralateral stenoses of 50-99% in 30% and contralateral occlusion in 8%. Patients were on appropriate medical treatment. For 691 patients undergoing intervention with at least 1-month follow-up and Rankin scoring at 6 months for any stroke, the overall serious cardiovascular event rate of periprocedural (within 30 days) disabling stroke, fatal myocardial infarction, and death at 30 days was 1.0%. Conclusions: Early ACST-2 results suggest contemporary carotid intervention for asymptomatic stenosis has a low risk of serious morbidity and mortality, on par with other recent trials. The trial continues to recruit, to monitor periprocedural events and all types of stroke, aiming to randomize up to 5,000 patients to determine any differential outcomes between interventions. Clinical trial: ISRCTN21144362. © 2013 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2): a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

Background: Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence. Methods: ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362. Findings: Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86–1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91–1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation: Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable. Funding: UK Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment Programme

Commentary: Eliminating cervical anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: To supercharge or not to supercharge, that's the question.

status: Published onlin

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery versus surgery alone for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus: the (NEOCRTEC5010) trial-a timely and welcome clinical trial from the Far East

status: publishe

Thoracic surgical training in Europe: what has changed recently?

Training in thoracic surgery (TS) traditionally varies amongst countries in Europe. The theoretical content of the training, the length of training, the amount of self-performed procedures to be done and the definition of training units all differ in European countries. However, in the past two decades, several initiatives were taken to harmonize TS training in Europe. The purpose of this paper is to highlight these initiatives and their impact on today's TS training in Europe.status: publishe