723 TWO- VS. THREE-FIELD LYMPHADENECTOMY FOR ESOPHAGEAL CANCER. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF SHORT- AND LONG-TERM OUTCOMES.

Abstract Nowadays, there is still no consensus about the benefits of adding neck lymphadenectomy to the traditional two-fields esophagectomy. An extended lymphadenectomy could potentially increase operation time and the risks for postoperative complications. However, extended lymphadenectomy allows resection of cervical nodes at risk for metastases, potentially increasing long-term survival rates. This study aims to estimate whether cervical prophylactic lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer influences short- and long-term outcomes through a systematic review of literature and meta-analysis. Methods A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Central, and Lilacs (BVS). The inclusion criteria were: (1) studies that compare two-field vs. three-field esophagectomy; (2) adults (>18 years); (3) articles that analyze short- or long-term outcomes; and (4) clinical trials or cohort studies. The results were summarized by forest plots, with effect size (ES) or risk difference (RD) and 95% CI. Results Twenty-five articles were selected, comprising 8,954 patients. Three-field lymphadenectomy was associated to higher operation time (ES: -1.51; 95%CI -1.84, −1.18) and higher blood loss (ES: -0.24; 95%CI: −0.37, −0.11). Also, neck lymphadenectomy inputs additional risk for pulmonary complications (RD: 0.03; 95%CI: 0.01, 0.05). No difference was noted for morbidity (RD: 0.01; 95%CI: −0.01, 0.03); leak (−0.02; 95%CI: −0.07, 0.03); postoperative mortality (RD: 0.00; 95%CI: −0.00, 0.01), and hospital stay (ES: -0.05; 95%CI -0.20, 0.10). Three-field lymphadenectomy allowed higher number of retrieved lymph nodes (MD: -1.51; 95%CI -1.84, −1.18), but did not increase the overall survival (HR: 1.11; 95%CI: 0.96, 1.26). Conclusion Prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer should be performed with caution once it is associated with poorer short-term outcomes compared to traditional two-field lymphadenectomy and does not improve long-term survival. Future esophageal cancer studies should determine the subgroup of patients who could benefit from prophylactic neck lymphadenectomy in long-term outcomes.

Download Full-text

Effect of vascular resection for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PeerJ ◽

10.7717/peerj.12184 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 9 ◽

pp. e12184

Author(s):

Yong Liu ◽

Guangbing Li ◽

Ziwen Lu ◽

Tao Wang ◽

Yang Yang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Mortality Rate ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Postoperative Mortality ◽

Morbidity Rate ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Long Term Outcomes ◽

Term Survival ◽

Long Term Survival ◽

Short And Long Term

Objective To evaluate the effect of vascular resection (VR), including portal vein resection (PVR) and hepatic artery resection (HAR), on short- and long-term outcomes in patients with perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC). Background Resection surgery and transplantation are the main treatment methods for PHC that provide a chance of long-term survival. However, the efficacy and safety of VR, including PVR and HAR, for treating PHC remain controversial. Methods This study was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42020223330). The EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases were used to search for eligible studies published through November 28, 2020. Studies comparing short- and long-term outcomes between patients who underwent hepatectomy with or without PVR and/or HAR were included. Random- and fixed-effects models were applied to assess the outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, and R0 resection rate, as well as the impact of PVR and HAR on long-term survival. Results Twenty-two studies including 4,091 patients were deemed eligible and included in this study. The meta-analysis showed that PVR did not increase the postoperative morbidity rate (odds ratio (OR): 1.03, 95% confidenceinterval (CI): [0.74–1.42], P = 0.88) and slightly increased the postoperative mortality rate (OR: 1.61, 95% CI [1.02–2.54], P = 0.04). HAR did not increase the postoperative morbidity rate (OR: 1.32, 95% CI [0.83–2.11], P = 0.24) and significantly increased the postoperative mortality rate (OR: 4.20, 95% CI [1.88–9.39], P = 0.0005). Neither PVR nor HAR improved the R0 resection rate (OR: 0.70, 95% CI [0.47–1.03], P = 0.07; OR: 0.77, 95% CI [0.37–1.61], P = 0.49, respectively) or long-term survival (OR: 0.52, 95% CI [0.35–0.76], P = 0.0008; OR: 0.43, 95% CI [0.32–0.57], P < 0.00001, respectively). Conclusions PVR is relatively safe and might benefit certain patients with advanced PHC in terms of long-term survival, but it is not routinely recommended. HAR results in a higher mortality rate and lower overall survival rate, with no proven benefit.

Download Full-text

Effect of perioperative blood transfusion on the long-term survival of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Diseases of the Esophagus ◽

10.1093/dote/dox134 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 31 (4) ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

P R Boshier ◽

C Ziff ◽

M E Adam ◽

M Fehervari ◽

S R Markar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Esophageal Cancer ◽

Blood Transfusion ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Term Survival ◽

Long Term Survival ◽

Perioperative Blood Transfusion

Download Full-text

The Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Immunotherapy for Gastric Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis and Literature Review

Cancer Control ◽

10.1177/1073274821997430 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 28 ◽

pp. 107327482199743

Author(s):

Ke Chen ◽

Xiao Wang ◽

Liu Yang ◽

Zheling Chen

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Esophageal Cancer ◽

Survival Rate ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Response Rates ◽

Control Group ◽

Term Survival ◽

Long Term Survival ◽

And Control

Background: Treatment options for advanced gastric esophageal cancer are quite limited. Chemotherapy is unavoidable at certain stages, and research on targeted therapies has mostly failed. The advent of immunotherapy has brought hope for the treatment of advanced gastric esophageal cancer. The aim of the study was to analyze the safety of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy and the long-term survival of patients who were diagnosed as gastric esophageal cancer and received anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy. Method: Studies on anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy of advanced gastric esophageal cancer published before February 1, 2020 were searched online. The survival (e.g. 6-month overall survival, 12-month overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates (ORR)) and adverse effects of immunotherapy were compared to that of control therapy (physician’s choice of therapy). Results: After screening 185 studies, 4 comparative cohort studies which reported the long-term survival of patients receiving immunotherapy were included. Compared to control group, the 12-month survival (OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.31 to 2.12, P < 0.0001) and 18-month survival (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.39 to 2.81, P = 0.0001) were significantly longer in immunotherapy group. The 3-month survival rate (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.36 to 3.06, P = 0.92) and 18-month survival rate (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 0.98 to 2.12, P = 0.07) were not significantly different between immunotherapy group and control group. The ORR were not significantly different between immunotherapy group and control group (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 0.65 to 3.66, P = 0.01). Meta-analysis pointed out that in the PD-L1 CPS ≥10 sub group population, the immunotherapy could obviously benefit the patients in tumor response rates (OR = 3.80, 95% CI: 1.89 to 7.61, P = 0.0002). Conclusion: For the treatment of advanced gastric esophageal cancer, the therapeutic efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy was superior to that of chemotherapy or palliative care.

Download Full-text

Total Artificial Heart versus Bi-Ventricular Assist Device: Meta-Analysis of Long-Term Survival and Systematic Review

The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation ◽

10.1016/j.healun.2021.01.1191 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 40 (4) ◽

pp. S426

Author(s):

M. Carrier ◽

W. Ben Ali ◽

A. Ducharme ◽

Y. Lamarche

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ventricular Assist Device ◽

Artificial Heart ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Total Artificial Heart ◽

Assist Device ◽

Term Survival ◽

Ventricular Assist ◽

Long Term Survival

Download Full-text

665 PROPHYLACTIC THORACIC DUCT OBSTRUCTION DURING ESOPHAGECTOMY: THE IMPACT ON PERIOPERATIVE RISKS AND LONG-TERM SURVIVAL. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Diseases of the Esophagus ◽

10.1093/dote/doab052.665 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

Clara Santos ◽

Laura Santos ◽

Leticia Datrino ◽

Guilherme Tavares ◽

Luca Tristão ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Overall Survival ◽

Postoperative Complications ◽

Thoracic Duct ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Term Survival ◽

Long Term Survival ◽

Thoracic Duct Ligation ◽

Duct Ligation

Abstract During esophagectomy for cancer, there is no consensus if prophylactic thoracic duct ligation (TDL), with or without thoracic duct resection (TDR), could influence the perioperative outcomes and long-term survival. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared patients who went through esophagectomy associated or not to ligation or resection of the thoracic duct. Methods A systematic review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library Central and Lilacs (BVS). The inclusion criteria were: (1) studies that compare thoracic duct ligation, with or without resection, and non-thoracic duct ligation; (2) involve adult patients with esophageal cancer; (3) articles that analyses the outcomes—perioperative complications, perioperative mortality, chylothorax development and overall survival; (4) only clinical trials and cohort were accepted. A 95% confidence interval (CI) was used, and random-effects model was performed. Results Fifteen articles were selected, comprising 6,249 patients. TDL did not reduce the risk for chylothorax (Risk difference [RD]: -0.01; 95%CI: −0.02, 0.00). Also, TDL did not influence the risk for complications (RD: -0.02; 95%CI: −0.11, 0.07); mortality (RD: 0.00; 95%CI: −0.00, 0.00); and reoperation rate (RD: -0.01; 95%CI: −0.02, 0.00). TDR was associated with higher risk for postoperative complications (RD: 0.1; 95%CI 0.00, 0.19); chylothorax (RD: 0.02; 95%CI 0.00, 0.03). Both TDL and TDR did not influence the overall survival rate (TDL: HR: 1.17; 95%CI: 0.86, 1.48; and TDR: HR: 1.16; 95%CI: 0.8, 1.51). Conclusion Thoracic duct obliteration with or without its resection during esophagectomy does not change long term survival. Nonetheless, TDR increased the risk for postoperative complications and chylothorax.

Download Full-text