Definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer: A Delphi consensus study in Europe.

Local treatment improves the outcomes for oligometastatic disease (OMD, i.e. an intermediate state between locoregional and widespread disseminated disease). However, consensus about the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer is lacking. The aim of this study was to develop a multidisciplinary European consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer. In total, 65 specialists in the multidisciplinary treatment for oesophagogastric cancer from 49 expert centres across 16 European countries were requested to participate in this Delphi study. The consensus finding process consisted of a starting meeting, 2 online Delphi questionnaire rounds and an online consensus meeting. Input for Delphi questionnaires consisted of (1) a systematic review on definitions of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer and (2) a discussion of real-life clinical cases by multidisciplinary teams. Experts were asked to score each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. The agreement was scored to be either absent/poor (<50%), fair (50%-75%) or consensus (≥75%). A total of 48 experts participated in the starting meeting, both Delphi rounds, and the consensus meeting (overall response rate: 71%). OMD was considered in patients with metastatic oesophagogastric cancer limited to 1 organ with ≤3 metastases or 1 extra-regional lymph node station (consensus). In addition, OMD was considered in patients without progression at restaging after systemic therapy (consensus). For patients with synchronous or metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval ≤2 years, systemic therapy followed by restaging to consider local treatment was considered as treatment (consensus). For metachronous OMD with a disease-free interval >2 years, either upfront local treatment or systemic treatment followed by restaging was considered as treatment (fair agreement). The OMEC project has resulted in a multidisciplinary European consensus statement for the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma and squamous cell cancer. This can be used to standardise inclusion criteria for future clinical trials

Magnetic sphincter augmentation and fundoplication for GERD in clinical practice: one-year results of a multicenter, prospective observational study

Background The techniques available for antireflux surgery have expanded with the introduction of the magnetic sphincter augmentation device (MSAD) for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Methods A prospective, multicenter registry evaluated MSAD and laparoscopic fundoplication (LF) in clinical practice (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01624506). Data collection included baseline characteristics, reflux symptoms, proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) use, side effects, and complications. Post-surgical evaluations were collected at one year. Results At report, 249 patients (202 MSAD patients and 47 LF patients) had completed one-year follow-up. The LF group was older and had a greater frequency of large hiatal hernias and Barrett's esophagus than the MSAD group (P < 0.001). The median GERD-health related quality of life score improved from 20.0 to 3.0 after MSAD and 23.0 to 3.5 after LF. Moderate or severe regurgitation improved from 58.2 to 3.1 % after MSAD and 60.0 to 13.0 % after LF (P = 0.014). Discontinuation of PPIs was achieved by 81.8 % of patients after MSAD and 63.0 % after LF (P = 0.009). Excessive gas and abdominal bloating were reported by 10.0 % of patients after MSAD and 31.9 % following LF (P 64 0.001). Following MSAD, 91.3 % of patients were able to vomit if needed, compared with 44.4 % of those undergoing LF (P < 0.001). Reoperation rate was 4.0 % following MSAD and 6.4 % following LF. Conclusion Antireflux surgery should be individualized to the characteristics of each patient, taking into consideration anatomy and propensity and tolerance of side effects. Both MSAD and LF showed significant improvements in reflux control, with similar safety and reoperation rates. In the treatment continuum of antireflux surgery, MSAD should be considered as a first-line surgical option in appropriately selected patients without Barrett's esophagus or a large hiatal hernia in order to avoid unnecessary dissection and preserve the patient's native gastric anatomy. MSAD is an important treatment option and will expand the surgeon's role in treating GERD

Definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer: A Delphi consensus study in Europe

BACKGROUND: Local treatment improves the outcomes for oligometastatic disease (OMD, i.e. an intermediate state between locoregional and widespread disseminated disease). However, consensus about the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer is lacking. The aim of this study was to develop a multidisciplinary European consensus statement on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: In total, 65 specialists in the multidisciplinary treatment for oesophagogastric cancer from 49 expert centres across 16 European countries were requested to participate in this Delphi study. The consensus finding process consisted of a starting meeting, 2 online Delphi questionnaire rounds and an online consensus meeting. Input for Delphi questionnaires consisted of (1) a systematic review on definitions of oligometastatic oesophagogastric cancer and (2) a discussion of real-life clinical cases by multidisciplinary teams. Experts were asked to score each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. The agreement was scored to be either absent/poor (2 years, either upfront local treatment or systemic treatment followed by restaging was considered as treatment (fair agreement). CONCLUSION: The OMEC project has resulted in a multidisciplinary European consensus statement for the definition, diagnosis and treatment of oligometastatic oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma and squamous cell cancer. This can be used to standardise inclusion criteria for future clinical trials