IntroductionEsophageal resection is the primary treatment for malignant esophageal disease and the last resort for benign end-stage esophageal disease. There is a paucity of research comparing the long-term quality of life (QoL) following surgery among these two populations. The aim of this study was to examine the patient reported QoL after esophageal resection using questionnaires focusing on general well-being and esophageal-specific symptoms.MethodsA prospectively maintained database of post-operatively administered European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) with supplemental esophageal cancer-specific questionnaires (OES-18) was queried after institutional review board approval through Creighton University School of Medicine. Inclusions were made if patients received an esophageal resection for benign or malignant esophageal disease. Emergency procedures, delayed reconstructions, and stage IV disease were excluded. Student’s t-test was used for domains of function, symptoms, QoL, and esophageal-specific complaints to compare the groups with each other and with the general population.ResultsA total of 39 out of 248 patients with malignant disease and 24 out of 46 with benign disease completed the questionnaire. A mean post-operative follow-up of 53 months with a response rate of 40% was obtained. There was no difference in physical (p=0.81), role (p =0.37), conditional (p=0.73), emotional (p=0.06), or social functions (p=0.42) between the general population and the esophageal resection groups. There was also no significant difference in generalized pain (p=0.86), nausea/vomiting (p=0.27), fatigue (p=0.86), swallowing (p=0.35), or esophageal pain (p=0.12). The malignant cohort had better outcomes than the benign cohort with respect to eating (p=0.04), indigestion (p=0.04), and QoL (p=<0.01).DiscussionThe underlying disease between these cohorts is drastically different, but postoperative functional status, generalized symptoms, swallowing ability, and esophageal pain were similar. There was no difference in functional status between the general population and the esophageal resection cohorts. Patients with malignant disease reported less problems with eating and a better QoL than their benign counterparts.

Use of simple modifications to stapled EEA, as described here, has led to decrease in anastomotic leaks following Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

There has been an alarming rise in the incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma which continues to have poor survival rates primarily due to lack of effective chemotherapy and presentation at advanced stages. Over a dozen chemotherapeutic agents are FDA approved for esophageal cancer (EC), and a two or three-drug combination is typically prescribed as first-line therapy for the majority of EC patients, administered either pre or post-operatively with esophageal resection. We have noticed significant variability in adjuvant and neoadjuvant regimens used in the community setting. The aim of this study was to review the various drug regimens used in the neoadjuvant setting for EC patients with adenocarcinoma undergoing resection at a single tertiary referral center in the Midwest. A total of 123 patients (stage II–III) underwent esophageal resection after neoadjuvant treatment at the center. Overall, 18 distinct drug regimens were used in 123 patients including two patients who received targeted therapy. Median survival post-surgery for this group was 11.2 months with no single regimen offering a survival advantage. These results reveal an unclear algorithm of how accepted regimens are prescribed in the community setting as well as a dire need for agents that are more effective. Additionally, it was noted that although proteomic markers have been found to predict drug response to 92% of the FDA-approved drugs in EC (12 of 13), according to pathology reports, molecular diagnostic testing was not used to direct treatment in this cohort. We therefore propose potential strategies to improve clinical outcomes including the use of a robust molecular oncology diagnostic panel and discuss the potential role for targeted chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy in the management of EC patients.

No abstract