Advertisement

Surgical concepts in esophageal cancer

  • Paolo Nicola Camillo GirottiEmail author
  • Ingmar Königsrainer
review
  • 4 Downloads

Summary

Despite neoadjuvant treatment being available for esophageal cancer, surgery remains the cornerstone of treatment. The aim of this article is to give a clear and simple overview of current issues in the available surgical strategies relating to locally limited and advanced disease, including the following: clinical staging, preoperative general condition and comorbidities, surgical strategy, surgical approaches, postoperative complications and the role of surgery in advanced disease. Based on a literature search and our personal professional experience to date, enhanced surgical treatment protocols for the treatment of the adenocarcinomas of esophagogastric junction (AEG) and the squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus are presented and discussed. Eligibility for a surgical resection strongly depends on the stage of the tumor and on the comorbidities. A minimally invasive laparoscopic approach should be preferred in the case of limited disease, regardless of its histology, or limited/advanced intrathoracic squamous cell carcinoma (hybrid technique: laparoscopic approach combined with thoracotomy). The surgical strategy in the case of adenocarcinoma to achieve radical resection depends on the tumor location. Finally, surgery should be performed by a multidisciplinary team that includes medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, gastroenterologists, dieticians and physiotherapists, so as to minimize the postoperative complications rates and improve early postoperative outcomes and overall patient survival. Therefore, we support the centralization of treatment of esophageal cancer to high volume centers.

Keywords

Surgery Esophageal cancer Multimodal treatment Adenocarcinoma Squamous cell carcinoma 

Notes

Conflict of interest

P.N.C. Girotti and I. Königsrainer declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. 1.
    Lagergren J, Smyth E, Cunningham D, Lagergren P. Oesophageal cancer. Lancet. 2017;390:2383–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Borggreve AS, Kingma BF, Domrachev SA, Koshkin MA, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R, Takeda FR, Goense L. Surgical treatment of esophageal cancer in the era of multimodality management. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018;  https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13677.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kassis ES, Kosinski AS, Ross P, et al. Predictors of anastomotic leak after esophagectomy: an analysis of the society of thoracic surgeons general thoracic database. Ann Thorac Surg. 2013;96:1919–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kechagias A, van Rossum PSN, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R. Ischemic conditioning of the stomach in the prevention of esophagogastric anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;101:1614–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goense L, van Rossum PSN, Kandioler D, et al. Stage-directed individualized therapy in esophageal cancer. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2016;1381:50–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Findlay JM, Bradley KM, Maile EJ, et al. Pragmatic staging of oesophageal cancer using decision theory involving selective endoscopic ultrasonography, PET and laparoscopy. Br J Surg. 2015;102:1488–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lordick F, Mariette C, Haustermans K, et al. Oesophageal cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2016;27(Suppl. 5):v50–v7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    van der Horst S, van Hillegersberg R. Esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer and cervical lymph node metastases (node). 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02426879. Accessed 5 Feb 2018.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Li S‑J, Wang Z‑Q, Li Y‑J, et al. Diabetes mellitus and risk of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30:1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nienhueser H, Kunzmann R, Sisic L, et al. Surgery of gastric cancer and esophageal cancer: does age matter? J Surg Oncol. 2015;112:387–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wei R, Dong W, Shen H, et al. Predictive effects of lung function test on postoperative pneumonia in squamous esophageal cancer. Sci Rep. 2016;6:23636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    van Adrichem EJ, Meulenbroek RL, Plukker JTM, et al. Comparison of two preoperative inspiratory muscle training programs to prevent pulmonary complications in patients undergoing esophagectomy: a randomized controlled pilot study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:2353–60.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shapiro J, van Lanschot JJ, Hulshof MC, et al. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16:1090–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Al-Batran SE, Pauligk C, Homann N, Schmalenberg H, Kopp HG, Haag GM, Luley KB, Schmiegel Wolff H, Folprecht G, Probst S, Prasnikar N, Thuss-Patience PC, Trojan J, Goetze TO, Meiler J, Schuler MH, Jäger E, Hofheinz RD. LBA-008Docetaxel, oxaliplatin, and fluorouracil/leucovorin (FLOT) versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine (ECF/ECX) as perioperative treatment of resectable gastric or gastro-esophageal junction adenocarcinoma: The multicenter, randomized phase 3 FLOT4 trial (German Gastric Group at AIO). Ann Oncol. 2017;  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx302.007.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Haverkamp L, Seesing MF, Ruurda JP, et al. Worldwide trends in surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30:1–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Glatz T, Marjanovic G, Kulemann B, et al. Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy vs. open esophagectomy: a matched case analysis in 120 patients. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2017;402:323–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rinieri P, Ouattara M, Brioude G, et al. Longterm outcome of open versus hybrid minimally invasive Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy: a propensity score matched studydagger. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;51:223–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Briez N, Piessen G, Bonnetain F, et al. Open versus laparoscopically-assisted oesophagectomy for cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled phase III trial—the MIRO trial. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    American Society of Clinical Oncology. ESMO 2017: MIRO trial: 3‑year outcomes favor laparoscopic surgery for esophageal cancer. 2017. http://www.ascopost.com/News/58020. Accessed 15 Dec 2017.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Markar S, Gronnier C, Duhamel A, et al. Salvage surgery after chemoradiotherapy in the management of esophageal cancer: is it a viable therapeutic option? J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:3866–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brusselaers N, Mattsson F, Lagergren J. Hospital and surgeon volume in relation to long-term survival after oesophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gut. 2014;63:1393–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.General and Thoracic Surgery DepartmentLandeskrankenhaus FeldkirchFeldkirchAustria

Personalised recommendations