Objective:To evaluate perioperative and oncologic outcomes in our RAMIE cohort and compare outcomes with contemporary OE controls.Summary of Background Data:RAMIE has emerged as an alternative to traditional open or laparoscopic approaches. Described in all esophagectomy techniques, rapid adoption has been attributed to both enhanced visualization and technical dexterity.Methods:We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent RAMIE for malignancy. Patient characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and survival were evaluated. For perioperative and oncologic outcome comparison, contemporary OE controls were propensity-score matched from NSQIP and NCDB databases.Results:We identified 350 patients who underwent RAMIE between 2010 and 2019. Median body mass index was 27.4, 32% demonstrated a Charlson Comorbidity Index >4. Nodal disease was identified in 50% of patients and 74% received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Mean operative time and blood loss were 425 minutes and 232 mL, respectively. Anastomotic leak occurred in 16% of patients, 2% required reoperation. Median LOS was 9 days, and 30-day mortality was 3%. A median of 21 nodes were dissected with 96% achieving an R0 resection. Median survival was 67.4 months. 222 RAMIE were matched 1:1 to the NSQIP OE control. RAMIE demonstrated decreased LOS (9 vs 10 days, P = 0.010) and reoperative rates (2.3 vs 12.2%, P = 0.001), longer operative time (427 vs 311 minutes, P = 0.001), and increased rate of pulmonary embolism (5.4% vs 0.9%, P = 0.007) in comparison to NSQIP cohort. There was no difference in leak rate or mortality. Three hundred forty-three RAMIE were matched to OE cohort from NCDB with no difference in median overall survival (63 vs 53 months; P = 0.130).Conclusion:In this largest reported institutional series, we demonstrate that RAMIE can be performed safely with excellent oncologic outcomes and decreased hospital stay when compared to the open approach.

No abstract

133 Background: Malnutrition, linked to decreased patient tolerance to chemotherapy and increased rates of therapy-related toxicity, negatively affects cancer prognosis. Esophageal carcinomas (EC) frequently present with dysphagia and significant weight loss which may be exacerbated by neoadjuvant chemoradiation, placing EC patients at an increased risk of malnutrition. We therefore aim to assess the prognostic value of pre-operative malnutrition for esophageal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). Methods: Query of our institution’s IRB approved database of 1113 EC patients (pts) identified 725 individuals who underwent NAT followed by resection from 1994-2018. Seventy-six pts were considered to be at higher nutritional risk during NAT, as indicated by significant weight loss and enteral feeding tube requirement (ETF+), while 644 did not receive pre-operative feeding tube placement (ETF–). Clinicopathologic characteristics, post-operative outcomes, and survival were compared between ETF+ and ETF– using various statistical methods. Results: Of the included pts, 83% were male with a median age of 64.5 (28-86) years. Between ETF+ (n = 76) and ETF– (n = 644), pt characteristics were balanced in terms of initial stage, age, histology and tumor location. A higher percentage of ETF+ pts had > 5% weight loss before NAT (32 vs. 6%; p < .01). ETF+ was associated with a significantly worse median survival (27 vs. 77 m; p < .01), but not with increased post-operative length of hospital stay (p = .69), complications (p = .20) or tumor recurrence (p = .89). Although completion of chemotherapy (p = .46) and radiation (p = .49) were comparable between ETF+ and ETF–, tumor response was worse in the ETF+ group (71 vs. 60% non-complete response; p = .02). Conclusions: Our results suggest that baseline malnutrition is a risk factor for poor survival and negatively impacts the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy in EC patients. Poor response to NAT in malnourished patients may stem from impaired immune function. Future prospective studies should evaluate other parameters for nutritional assessment to further assess the impact of malnutrition on tumor regression and survival after NAT.

No abstract

Background: The incidence of esophageal cancer (EC) is increasing in the USA. Neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced cancers followed by surgical resection is the standard of care. The most common postesophagectomy cardiac complication is atrial fibrillation (AF). New-onset postoperative AF can require a prolonged hospital stay and may confer an overall poorer prognosis. In this study, we seek to identify clinical factors associated with postoperative AF.Methods: Query of an IRB approved database of 1,039 esophagectomies at our institution revealed 677 patients with EC from 1999 to 2017 who underwent esophagectomy after neoadjuvant treatment. Age, treatment location (primary vs. other), gender, neoadjuvant radiation type [2D vs. 3D vs. intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)], radiation dose, surgery type (transthoracic vs. transhiatal vs. three field), smoking history, coronary artery disease (CAD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), operative time, blood transfusions, fluid management, and length of stay (LOS) were analyzed in relationship to the development of AF. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 24.Results: The mean age of the entire cohort was 64.3 (range, 28-86 years), with a Caucasian and male preponderance (White: 94.5%; male: 83.6%). Of the 677 patients, 14.9% (n=101) developed postoperative AF. Increasing age (P<0.001), increased radiation dose (P=0.034), operative time (P=0.001), and blood transfusions (P=0.027) were associated with AF. LOS was longer in patients with AF than those without AF (10.5 vs. 10.0 days, P=0.001). On multivariate analysis, increasing age (95% CI: 1.023-1.080, P<0.001) and radiation dose (95% CI: 1.000-1.001, P=0.034) remained significant. None of the other parameters assessed were associated with the development of AF.Conclusions: Increasing age and radiation dose were associated with the development of postoperative AF in this cohort. This study suggests that older patients or patients receiving higher radiation dose should be monitored more closely in the postoperative setting and potentially referred earlier preoperatively for cardiooncology assessment. Future study is required to determine if modification of current radiation techniques and cardiac dose constraints in this patient population may be warranted.