Staging and outcome depending on surgical treatment in adenocarcinomas of the oesophagogastric junction

Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. .
British Journal of Surgery (Impact Factor: 5.54). 10/2012; 99(10):1406-14. DOI: 10.1002/bjs.8884
Source: PubMed


Owing to controversial staging and classification of adenocarcinoma of the oesophago-gastric junction (AOG) before surgery, the choice of appropriate surgical approach remains problematic. In a retrospective study, preoperative staging of AOG and the impact of preoperative misclassification on outcome were analysed.
Data from patients with AOG were analysed from a prospectively collected database with regard to surgical treatment, preoperative and postoperative staging, and outcome.
One-hundred and thirty patients with Siewert types I and II AOG who did not have neoadjuvant treatment were included in the study: 41 patients with an AOG type I who underwent oesophagectomy, 51 patients with an AOG staged before surgery as type I who underwent oesophagectomy but in whom the final histology showed a type II tumour, and 38 patients whose tumours were staged as AOG type II before and after operation who underwent gastrectomy. Among patients who had an oesophagectomy, lymph node metastases (P = 0·022), tumour relapse (P = 0·009) and recurrent distant metastases (P = 0·028) were significantly more frequent in patients with AOG type II; those with AOG type II had shorter overall survival than those with type I tumours (P = 0·024). Among those with AOG type II, recurrence-free survival was significantly shorter after oesophagectomy compared with extended gastrectomy (P = 0·019). Thoracoabdominal oesophagectomy had a favourable influence on outcome compared with the transhiatal approach.
Accurate preoperative staging of AOG and appropriate surgical therapy are crucial for outcome. AOG type II is a more aggressive tumour with higher recurrence rates than AOG type I. These patients therefore benefit from more radical surgical treatment. Copyright © 2012 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Download full-text


Available from: Andreas H Marx, Apr 21, 2015
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hintergrund Es besteht weltweite Einigkeit, dass zur optimalen kurativen Behandlung von fortgeschrittenen Adenokarzinomen des Magens und des gastroösophagealen Übergangs eine multimodale Therapie notwendig ist. Methode Literaturrecherche und Analyse klinischer Studien. Ergebnisse In den USA ist bei Magenkarzinomen eine adjuvante Radiochemotherapie Standard. Asiatische Studien zeigen einen Überlebensvorteil durch eine adjuvante Therapie. In Europa leitet sich die Standardempfehlung für Adenokarzinome des Magens aus der britischen MAGIC-Studie und der französischen FNCLCC-Studie ab. In diesen Studien wurden Patienten mit Adenokarzinomen des Magens und gastroösophagealen Übergangs mit einer perioperativen Platin/5-Fluorouracil-basierten Chemotherapie behandelt. Dadurch konnte das Überleben signifikant verbessert werden. Für die Behandlung von Adenokarzinomen des gastroösophagealen Übergangs stellt die präoperative Radiochemotherapie einen gleichwertigen Behandlungsstandard dar. Auch hier ließ sich eine signifikante Verbesserung des Überlebens zeigen. Schlussfolgerung Für Magenkarzinome empfehlen die deutschen S3-Leitlinien daher ab Stadium uT3 eine perioperative Chemotherapie und für Adenokarzinome des gastroösophagealen Übergangs eine perioperative Chemotherapie oder eine präoperative Radiochemotherapie.
    No preview · Article · May 2013 · Der Onkologe
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Surgery is the only option for curative treatment in patients with esophageal carcinoma. Despite the debates related to the peri-operative therapy regime, a generally accepted consensus on surgical approach is not reached yet. The debate focuses mainly on pros and cons between radical transthoracic resection and the (limited) transhiatal resection in the last decade. Methods: The PubMed database was searched for randomized trials, meta-analyses, and retrospective single-center studies. The search terms were "esophageal carcinoma," "esophageal junction carcinomas," "transhiatal," "transthoracic," "morbidity," "mortality," and "surgery." Results: The radical transthoracic approach should be the standard of care for esophageal carcinoma since it does not go along with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity or mortality but reveals an improved survival. Patient-related co-morbidities are the most influencing factors for the postoperative outcome. For type II esophageal junction carcinoma, treatment options from transhiatal extended gastrectomy to esophagectomy with hemigastrectomy or esophagogastrectomy with colonic interposition are existing. In type III esophagogastric junction carcinomas, the transhiatal extended gastrectomy is the standard of care, and the minimally invasive approach should be performed in specialized centers. Conclusion: Based on current available study results, this expert review provides a decision support for the best surgical strategy depending on tumor localization and patients' characteristics.
    No preview · Article · Jan 2013 · Langenbeck s Archives of Surgery
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Context The incidence of gastric cancer has been steadily declining during the last decade in the Western world. In contrast, the incidence of the adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) has been continually rising. Gastric cancer continues to be a leading cause of cancer death and has a poor prognosis despite subsequent 5-year survival improvement of 10 % during the last two decades. Methods Literature research and analysis of clinical trials. Results Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction have a different tumor biology and prognosis; hence, adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction represents a separate tumor entity. Topographic-anatomical classification differentiates three subtypes (AEG I–III). Radical resection is the only option to cure the disease. In gastric cancer, the histological subtype (intestinal vs. diffuse) defines the extent of the resection (subtotal vs. total), whereas in AEG, topographical classification determines the resection dimensions (extended gastrectomy vs. esophagectomy). In gastric cancer, a D2 lymphadenctomy (compartments I and II) is the gold standard. In AEG type I, a 2-field lymphadenctomy and in AEG types II and III a D2 lymphadenctomy including dissection of the lower mediastinal lymph nodes is performed. Conclusions Surgical standards are available and should be followed for gastric cancer and AEG I and III tumors. The optimal surgical approach for AEG type II tumors remains at current open. Multimodal therapy concepts can increase R0-resection rates and improve prognosis in locally advanced disease. In the palliative situation, surgery in the context of multimodal therapy can contribute to improvement of quality of life and increased survival.
    No preview · Article · Apr 2013 · Der Onkologe
Show more