Over the last decades, the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer has evolved into a multidisciplinary process in which all players are essential for treatment to be successful. Medical oncologists and radiation oncologists have been increasingly involved since the implementation of neoadjuvant therapy, which has been shown to improve survival. Although esophagectomy is still considered the cornerstone of curative treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer, it remains associated with considerable postoperative morbidity, despite promising results of minimally invasive techniques. In this light, both physical status and response to neoadjuvant therapy may be important factors for selecting patients who will benefit from surgery. Furthermore, it is important to optimize the entire perioperative trajectory: from the initial outpatient clinic visit to postoperative discharge. Enhanced recovery after surgery is increasingly recognized for esophagectomy and emphasizes perioperative aspects, such as nutrition, physiotherapy, and pain management. To date, several facets of esophageal cancer treatment remain topics of debate, such as the preferred neoadjuvant treatment, anastomotic technique, extent of lymphadenectomy, organization of postoperative care, and the role of surgery beyond locally advanced disease. Here, we describe the current and future perspectives in the surgical treatment of patients with esophageal cancer in the context of the available literature.

Gastric cancer is the fifth most common malignancy in the world, with nearly one million new cases of gastric cancer diagnosed every year. 1 Curative treatment of gastric adenocarcinoma consists of partial or total resection of the stomach combined with lymphadenectomy. 2 Over the last years, multimodality treatment strategies such as neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy, perioperative chemotherapy and adjuvant chemotherapy have gained importance in the treatment of gastric cancer by improving the likelihood of a radical tumor resection, disease free survival and overall survival. 3-8 Unfortunately, the overall 5 year survival rate still remains poor (35-45%). 4,9 Accurate staging of gastric cancer allows for selection of the most appropriate therapy, minimizes unnecessary surgery and maximizes the likelihood of benefit from the selected treatment. After initial diagnosis by gastroscopy with tumor biopsy, diagnostic work-up can consist of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT) and 18 F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18 F-FDG PET). However, these techniques all have their limitations. EUS is an invasive, highly operator-dependent technique and does not detect distant metastases. 10,11 CT exposes patients to ionizing radiation and has poor soft-tissue contrast. 18 F-FDG PET is impaired by the fact that not all gastric carcinomas are 18 F-FDG-avid (avidity ranging from 42-96%) and has a low spatial resolution. 12 Historically, the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in gastric cancer has been limited, since relatively long acquisition times and technical challenges of peristaltic motion and respiration artifacts resulted in poor imaging quality. 13,14 With the continuous technical improvements in MRI scanning, including fast imaging techniques, (respiratory) motion compensation techniques, use of anti peristaltic agents and the introduction of functional MRI

No abstract