The treatment of esophageal cancer is in constant evolution. Most of the esophageal cancer receive induction chemoradiation therapy. Surgical delay has been studied but the optimal timing has not been clarified. Through the years, surgical delay has been modified by surgeons in our institutions, going from an average of 6 weeks delay to an average of 10 weeks delay. It is time to ask if this change has a real positive impact on our patient. Methods In this retrospective multi-center study, we combined data from two center in Quebec city that performs oncologic esophagectomy. The surgical delay went from 6 to 10 weeks around 2014. All surgeons changed their practice at that moment. We retrospectively analysed 5 years before and after the change of practice and created two cohorts of patients. Our primary outcome compared complete pathologic response rate. Our secondary outcomes were surgical complications, anastomotic leak, disease free survival and overall survival. Results Thirty-eight patients had surgery under 8 weeks (mean: 6 weeks) after their induction chemoradiation compared to 64 patients that had surgery after 8 weeks (mean: 10 weeks). There was no statistical significant difference between groups for the complete pathologic response (32% vs 25%, p = 0,16). Important complications were similar, with a rate of 24% vs 28% (p = 0,69). Anastomotic leaks were less frequent in the less than 8 weeks group, but no statistical significance was obtained (13% vs 27%, p = 0,14).No difference in the disease-free survival rate and overall survival rate was noted (DFS 40% vs 55% (p = 0,32), OS 38% vs 38% (p = 0,29)). Conclusion The treatment of esophageal cancer is in constant evolution, induction therapy and surgical technics involve over time. Surgical delay has no impact on complete pathologic response, complication and overall survival. There is no advantage to wait longer before surgery.

The treatment of esophageal cancer is in constant evolution. Most of the esophageal cancer receive induction chemoradiation therapy. Surgical delay has been studied but the optimal timing has not been clarified. Through the years, surgical delay has been modified by surgeons in our institutions, going from an average of 6 weeks delay to an average of 10 weeks delay. It is time to ask if this change has a real positive impact on our patient. Methods In this retrospective multi-center study, we combined data from two center in Quebec city that performs oncologic esophagectomy. The surgical delay went from 6 to 10 weeks around 2014. All surgeons changed their practice at that moment. We retrospectively analysed 5 years before and after the change of practice and created two cohorts of patients. Our primary outcome compared complete pathologic response rate. Our secondary outcomes were surgical complications, anastomotic leak, disease free survival and overall survival. Results Thirty-eight patients had surgery under 8 weeks (mean: 6 weeks) after their induction chemoradiation compared to 64 patients that had surgery after 8 weeks (mean: 10 weeks). There was no statistical significant difference between groups for the complete pathologic response (32% vs 25%, p = 0,16). Important complications were similar, with a rate of 24% vs 28% (p = 0,69). Anastomotic leaks were less frequent in the less than 8 weeks group, but no statistical significance was obtained (13% vs 27%, p = 0,14). No difference in disease-free survival rate and overall survival rate was noted (DFS 40% vs 55% (p = 0,32), OS 38% vs 38% (p = 0,29)). Conclusion The treatment of esophageal cancer is in constant evolution, induction therapy and surgical technics involve over time. Surgical delay has no impact on complete pathologic response, complication and overall survival. There is no advantage to wait longer before surgery.

We present the case of a previously healthy 54-year-old man who was hospitalized for an Aspergillus fumigatus infection of an open window thoracotomy. Patient was successfully treated for 8 consecutives weeks with daily topical pleural liposomal amphotericine B administered by soaked gauzes combined with systemic therapy.