Intraoperative Music to Promote Patient Outcome (IMPROMPTU):A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction: Perioperative music can have beneficial effects on postoperative pain, anxiety, opioid requirement, and the physiological stress response to surgery. The aim was to assess the effects of intraoperative music during general anesthesia in patients undergoing surgery for esophagogastric cancer. Materials and methods: The IMPROMPTU study was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized multicenter trial. Adult patients undergoing surgery for stage II-III esophagogastric cancer were eligible. Exclusion criteria were a hearing impairment, insufficient Dutch language knowledge, corticosteroids use, or objection to hearing unknown music. Patients wore active noise-cancelling headphones intraoperatively with preselected instrumental classical music (intervention) or no music (control). Computerized randomization with centralized allocation, stratified according to surgical procedure using variable block sizes, was employed. Primary endpoint was postoperative pain on the first postoperative day. Secondary endpoints were postoperative pain during the first postoperative week, postoperative opioid requirement, intraoperative medication requirement, the stress response to surgery, postoperative complication rate, length of stay, and mortality, with follow-up lasting 30 d. Results: From November 2018 to September 2020, 145 patients were assessed and 83 randomized. Seventy patients (music n = 31, control n = 39) were analyzed. Median age was 70 [IQR 63–70], and 48 patients (69%) were male. Music did not reduce postoperative pain (numeric rating scale 1.8 (SD0.94) versus 2.0 (1.0), mean difference −0.28 [95% CI -0.76–0.19], P = 0.236). No statistically significant differences were seen in medication requirement, stress response, complication rate, or length of stay. Conclusions: Intraoperative, preselected, classical music during esophagogastric cancer surgery did not significantly improve postoperative outcome and recovery when compared to no music using noise-cancelling headphones.</p

Intraoperative Music to Promote Patient Outcome (IMPROMPTU):A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction: Perioperative music can have beneficial effects on postoperative pain, anxiety, opioid requirement, and the physiological stress response to surgery. The aim was to assess the effects of intraoperative music during general anesthesia in patients undergoing surgery for esophagogastric cancer. Materials and methods: The IMPROMPTU study was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized multicenter trial. Adult patients undergoing surgery for stage II-III esophagogastric cancer were eligible. Exclusion criteria were a hearing impairment, insufficient Dutch language knowledge, corticosteroids use, or objection to hearing unknown music. Patients wore active noise-cancelling headphones intraoperatively with preselected instrumental classical music (intervention) or no music (control). Computerized randomization with centralized allocation, stratified according to surgical procedure using variable block sizes, was employed. Primary endpoint was postoperative pain on the first postoperative day. Secondary endpoints were postoperative pain during the first postoperative week, postoperative opioid requirement, intraoperative medication requirement, the stress response to surgery, postoperative complication rate, length of stay, and mortality, with follow-up lasting 30 d. Results: From November 2018 to September 2020, 145 patients were assessed and 83 randomized. Seventy patients (music n = 31, control n = 39) were analyzed. Median age was 70 [IQR 63–70], and 48 patients (69%) were male. Music did not reduce postoperative pain (numeric rating scale 1.8 (SD0.94) versus 2.0 (1.0), mean difference −0.28 [95% CI -0.76–0.19], P = 0.236). No statistically significant differences were seen in medication requirement, stress response, complication rate, or length of stay. Conclusions: Intraoperative, preselected, classical music during esophagogastric cancer surgery did not significantly improve postoperative outcome and recovery when compared to no music using noise-cancelling headphones.</p

The association between hospital variation in curative treatment for esophagogastric cancer and health-related quality of life and survival

Background: As previous studies showed significant hospital variation in curative treatment of esophagogastric cancer, this study assesses the association between this variation and overall, cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival, and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL). Methods: Patients diagnosed with potentially curable esophageal or gastric cancer between 2015 and 2018 as registered in the Netherlands Cancer Registry were included. Data on overall survival was available for all patients, data on cancer-specific and recurrence-free survival and HRQoL was available for subgroups. Patients were classified according to diagnosis in hospitals with low, medium or high probability of treatment with curative intent (LP, MP or HP). Multivariable models were used to assess the association between LP, MP and HP hospitals and HRQoL and survival. Results: This study includes 7,199 patients with esophageal, and 2,407 with gastric cancer. Overall and cancer-specific survival was better for patients diagnosed in HP versus LP hospitals for both esophageal (HR = 0.82, 95%CI:0.77–0.88 and HR = 0.82, 95%CI:0.75–0.91, respectively), and gastric cancer (HR = 0.82, 95%CI:0.73–0.92 and HR = 0.74, 95%CI:0.64–0.87, respectively). These differences disappeared after adjustments for treatment. Recurrence-free survival was worse for gastric cancer patients diagnosed in HP hospitals (HR = 1.50, 95%CI:1.14–1.96), which disappeared after adjustment for radicality of surgery. Minor, but no clinically relevant, differences in HRQoL were observed.Conclusions: Patients diagnosed in hospitals with a high probability of treatment with curative intent have a better overall and cancer-specific but not recurrence-free survival, while minor differences in HRQoL were observed.</p

Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak in patients after oesophagectomy:the SEAL score

Background Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common but severe complication after oesophagectomy. It is unknown how to determine the severity of AL objectively at diagnosis. Determining leak severity may guide treatment decisions and improve future research. This study aimed to identify leak-related prognostic factors for mortality, and to develop a Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score. Methods This international, retrospective cohort study in 71 centres worldwide included patients with AL after oesophagectomy between 2011 and 2019. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Leak-related prognostic factors were identified after adjusting for confounders and were included in multivariable logistic regression to develop the SEAL score. Four classes of leak severity (mild, moderate, severe, and critical) were defined based on the risk of 90-day mortality, and the score was validated internally. Results Some 1509 patients with AL were included and the 90-day mortality rate was 11.7 per cent. Twelve leak-related prognostic factors were included in the SEAL score. The score showed good calibration and discrimination (c-index 0.77, 95 per cent c.i. 0.73 to 0.81). Higher classes of leak severity graded by the SEAL score were associated with a significant increase in duration of ICU stay, healing time, Comprehensive Complication Index score, and Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group classification. Conclusion The SEAL score grades leak severity into four classes by combining 12 leak-related predictors and can be used to the assess severity of AL after oesophagectomy.The Severity of oEsophageal Anastomotic Leak (SEAL) score was developed using data from the TENTACLE-Esophagus study, an international, multicentre retrospective cohort study including 1509 patients with anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy. The SEAL score was developed to determine anastomotic leak severity at diagnosis, and combines 12 leak-related parameters at diagnosis. The score may be useful in clinical practice and could improve future research.</p

Treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer:large, collaborative, observational TENTACLE cohort study

Background: Anastomotic leak is a severe complication after oesophagectomy. Anastomotic leak has diverse clinical manifestations and the optimal treatment strategy is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of treatment strategies for different manifestations of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed in 71 centres worldwide and included patients with anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy (2011-2019). Different primary treatment strategies were compared for three different anastomotic leak manifestations: interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (that is no intrathoracic collections; well perfused conduit); drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations; and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for confounders. Results: Of 1508 patients with anastomotic leak, 28.2 per cent (425 patients) had local manifestations, 36.3 per cent (548 patients) had intrathoracic manifestations, 9.6 per cent (145 patients) had conduit ischaemia/necrosis, 17.5 per cent (264 patients) were allocated after multiple imputation, and 8.4 per cent (126 patients) were excluded. After propensity score matching, no statistically significant differences in 90-day mortality were found regarding interventional versus supportive-only treatment for local manifestations (risk difference 3.2 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.8 to 8.2 per cent), drainage and defect closure versus drainage only for intrathoracic manifestations (risk difference 5.8 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -1.2 to 12.8 per cent), and oesophageal diversion versus continuity-preserving treatment for conduit ischaemia/necrosis (risk difference 0.1 per cent, 95 per cent c.i. -21.4 to 1.6 per cent). In general, less morbidity was found after less extensive primary treatment strategies. Conclusion: Less extensive primary treatment of anastomotic leak was associated with less morbidity. A less extensive primary treatment approach may potentially be considered for anastomotic leak. Future studies are needed to confirm current findings and guide optimal treatment of anastomotic leak after oesophagectomy.</p

Quality of Life During and After Completion of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal and Junctional Cancer

Background. The course of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) during and after completion of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) for esophageal or junctional carcinoma is unknown. Methods. This study was a multicenter prospective cohort investigation. Patients with esophageal or cancer to be treated with nCRT plus esophagectomy were eligible for inclusion in the study. The HRQOL of the patients was measured with European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30, QLQ-OG25, and QLQCIPN20 questionnaires before and during nCRT, then 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 weeks after nCRT and before surgery. Predefined end points were based on the hypothesized impact of nCRT. The primary end points were physical functioning, odynophagia, and sensory symptoms. The secondary end points were global quality of life, fatigue, weight loss, and motor symptoms. Mixed modeling analysis was used to evaluate changes over time. Results. Of 106 eligible patients, 96 (91%) were included in the study. The rate of questionnaires returned ranged from 94% to 99% until week 12, then dropped to 78% in week 16 after nCRT. A negative impact of nCRT on all HRQOL end points was observed during the last cycle of nCRT (all p\ 0.001) and 2 weeks after nCRT (all p\ 0.001). Physical functioning, odynophagia, and sensory symptoms were restored to pretreatment levels respectively 8, 4, and 6 weeks after nCRT. The secondary end points were restored to baseline levels 4–6 weeks after nCRT. Odynophagia, fatigue, and weight loss improved after nCRT compared with baseline levels at respectively 6 (p\0.001), 16 (p = 0.001), and 12 weeks (p \0.001). Conclusion. After completion of nCRT for esophageal cancer, HRQOL decreases significantly, but all HRQOL end points are restored to baseline levels within 8 weeks. Odynophagia, fatigue, and weight loss improved 6–16 weeks after nCRT compared with baseline levels

Intrathoracic vs Cervical Anastomosis After Totally or Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: Transthoracic minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly performed as part of curative multimodality treatment. There appears to be no robust evidence on the preferred location of the anastomosis after transthoracic MIE. Objective: To compare an intrathoracic with a cervical anastomosis in a randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open, multicenter randomized clinical superiority trial was performed at 9 Dutch high-volume hospitals. Patients with midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer planned for curative resection were included. Data collection occurred from April 2016 through February 2020. Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to transthoracic MIE with intrathoracic or cervical anastomosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was anastomotic leakage requiring endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes were overall anastomotic leak rate, other postoperative complications, length of stay, mortality, and quality of life. Results: Two hundred sixty-two patients were randomized, and 245 were eligible for analysis. Anastomotic leakage necessitating reintervention occurred in 15 of 122 patients with intrathoracic anastomosis (12.3%) and in 39 of 123 patients with cervical anastomosis (31.7%; risk difference, -19.4% [95% CI, -29.5% to -9.3%]). Overall anastomotic leak rate was 12.3% in the intrathoracic anastomosis group and 34.1% in the cervical anastomosis group (risk difference, -21.9% [95% CI, -32.1% to -11.6%]). Intensive care unit length of stay, mortality rates, and overall quality of life were comparable between groups, but intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with fewer severe complications (risk difference, -11.3% [-20.4% to -2.2%]), lower incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (risk difference, -7.3% [95% CI, -12.1% to -2.5%]), and better quality of life in 3 subdomains (mean differences: dysphagia, -12.2 [95% CI, -19.6 to -4.7]; problems of choking when swallowing, -10.3 [95% CI, -16.4 to 4.2]; trouble with talking, -15.3 [95% CI, -22.9 to -7.7]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, intrathoracic anastomosis resulted in better outcome for patients treated with transthoracic MIE for midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. Trial Registration: Trialregister.nl Identifier: NL4183 (NTR4333)

Population-Based Study on Risk Factors for Tumor-Positive Resection Margins in Patients with Gastric Cancer

Abstract Background Radical gastrectomy is the cornerstone of the treatment of locally advanced gastric cancer. This study was designed to evaluate factors associated with a tumor-positive resection margin after gastrectomy and to evaluate the influence of hospital volume. Methods In this Dutch cohort study, patients with junctional or gastric cancer who underwent curative gastrectomy between 2011 and 2017 were included. The primary outcome was incomplete tumor removal after the operation defined as the microscopic presence of tumor cells at the resection margin. The association of patient and disease characteristics with incomplete tumor removal was tested with multivariable regression analysis. The association of annual hospital volume with incomplete tumor removal was tested and adjusted for the patient- and disease characteristics. Results In total, 2799 patients were included. Incomplete tumor removal was seen in 265 (9.5%) patients. Factors associated with incomplete tumor removal were: tumor located in the entire stomach (odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.38 [1.91–5.96] reference: gastroesophageal junction), cT3, cT4, cTx (1.75 [1.20–2.56], 2.63 [1.47–4.70], 1.60 [1.03–2.48], reference: cT0-2), pN+ (2.73 [1.96–3.80], reference: pN−), and diffuse and unknown histological subtype (3.15 [2.14–4.46] and 2.05 [1.34–3.13], reference: intestinal). Unknown differentiation grade was associated with complete tumor removal (0.50 [0.30–0.83], reference: poor/undifferentiated). Compared with a hospital volume of  39 resections were associated with lower probability for incomplete tumor removal (OR 0.56 [0.42–0.76] and 0.34 [0.18–0.64]). Conclusions Tumor location, cT, pN, histological subtype, and tumor differentiation are associated with incomplete tumor removal. The association of incomplete tumor removal with an annual hospital volume of < 20 resections may underline the need for further centralization of gastric cancer care in the Netherlands

Prospective observational cohort study of oesophagogastric cancer patients (POCOP): A Dutch nationwide cohort

Experimentele farmacotherapi