|
|
||||||||
Ann Thorac Surg 2001;71:1640-1644
© 2001 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
a Divisions of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Gastroenterology, and Medical Oncology, Washington DC Veterans Administration Medical Center, and George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, DC, USA
Address reprint requests to Dr Alexander, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, George Washington University, 50 Irving St, NW, Washington, DC 20422
e-mail: epalexander{at}med.va.gov
Presented at the Forty-sixth Annual Meeting of the Southern Thoracic Surgical Association, San Juan, Puerto Rico, Nov 46, 1999.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Methods. We retrospectively studied 74 consecutive male patients at a single institution presenting between 1/85 to 12/98 with bronchoscopic, endoscopic or radiographic confirmation of airway involvement with esophageal cancer, including 35 patients with ERF. Comparison was made between the first 35 patients (group I) and the last 39 patients (group II) with regard to antineoplastic therapy, stent placement, and survival.
Results. Treatment in group I included supportive care in 17 of 35 patients, plastic stent in 7 of 35 patients, and radiation or chemotherapy in 9 of 35 patients. In group II, radiation or chemotherapy was offered to 33 patients, and self-expanding metal stents were placed in 10 of 39 patients. Surgical resection was possible after neoadjuvant therapy in 13 of 39 patients in group II, including 2 initially presenting with ERF. Median survival in group I was 16 weeks and in group II was 37 weeks. Comparison of Kaplan-Meier survival estimates using log rank testing demonstrated improved survival in group II (p = 0.0026). Long-term survival in 4 group II patients initially presenting with ERF and receiving multimodality treatment was observed. Development of ERF during treatment occurred in 3 group II patients. Treatment failure was predominantly local in group I and local and distant in group II.
Conclusions. More aggressive treatment may favorably influence outcome in esophageal cancer with airway invasion. Long-term survival and the development of ERF during therapy occurred at similar rates.
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Although increasingly accepted in less advanced cases of esophageal carcinoma, multimodality therapy has not been widely used in the setting of airway invasion. Several reports of long-term survival exist [812], although pessimism over the potential impact of therapy is generally coupled with anxiety over the development or extension of ERF with chemoradiotherapy, and the potential for irreparable airway injury with attempted resection [24, 1119].
We have employed an increasingly aggressive approach to esophageal cancer with airway invasion, in addition to using newer stents and other supportive therapies. This study is a retrospective analysis of esophageal cancer with airway invasion from 1985 to 1998. To delineate changes in outcome and management, comparison is made between patients presenting before and after 1992.
| Patients and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A retrospective review of all patients with radiographic, endoscopic, bronchoscopic or postmortem evidence of airway involvement was performed. Sources included medical records, imaging studies, tumor registry, and pathologic data. Recorded data included details of presentation, treatment, clinical course, and eventual survival.
Airway involvement was defined as invasion, infiltration, or the presence of an ERF. Juxtaposition, abutment, or the presence of a bulge or deviation alone were not considered adequate evidence of airway involvement. Using these criteria, of 372 patients seen over the 14-year study period, 74 (20%) were identified with airway invasion. Thirty-five (47%) of these patients had an ERF for a total ERF incidence of 35 of 372 patients (9.4%). In the absence of ERF, airway involvement was proven with biopsy in 29 of 39 patients (74%). In the remaining 10 patients incontrovertible endoscopic, bronchoscopic radiographic, or postmortem evidence was required to document airway involvement. In 6 of these 10 patients bronchoscopic biopsy of obvious treacheal "cobble stoning" was not done to avoid the potential for creating an ERF. To delineate potential changes in presentation, management, and outcome, the study group was divided into two chronological halves: group I, 1985 to 1991 and group II, 1992 to 1998. The increasingly aggressive approach to advanced esophageal cancer adopted in 1992 was concurrent with the initiation of a previously reported study of multimodality therapy for stage III esophageal carcinoma, including the stage groupings of T4N0M0 and T4N1M0 [10].
Statistical methods
2 and Fishers exact test were used to test whether relationships existed between nominal variables. Survival was measured from the date of diagnosis to the date of death or October 1, 1999. Actuarial survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons made using the log rank test. Significant predictors from a univariable analysis of independent variables were subjected to multivariable analysis.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Management
Table 2 summarizes management strategies used in the group as a whole, group I, and group II. Supportive care measures, including intravenous hydration, feeding tubes, antibiotics, analgesics, and comfort measures, were employed much more commonly in group I.
|
Gastrostomy technique changed significantly over the study period (Table 2). Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy replaced open surgical gastrostomy in 1992, reflecting the initiation of a practice to place a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy in the majority of patients with esophageal cancer.
During the group II study period, laser treatment of esophageal cancer was used in multiple stages of disease for debulking and palliation of malignant dysphagia including patients with airway invasion. Four of 39 (10%) group II patients received laser treatment; however, more liberal use in "T4 airway" patients was curtailed after the development of an ERF in 1 patient shortly after a laser treatment.
Surgical bypass and diversion have been used extensively in patients with airway involvement [2, 3], but were performed in only 2 group I patients.
Antineoplastic therapy in general was used much more liberally in group II (Table 2). Chemotherapy use quadrupled and radiotherapy use tripled over the course of the study, with highly statistically significant differences between group I and group II. Radiation doses varied from 25 to 60 Gy and a wide range of chemotherapeutic agents were used. A number of group II patients received continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil with radiation as described in a previously reported protocol [10]. Surgical exploration was undertaken in 20 of 74 patients (27%) of the entire study group. Resections were performed in 15 of 74 (20%), with the majority of these in group II.
Resection was attempted predominately in patients who were thought to be complete responders to induction chemoradiotherapy. In these patients, resection was facilitated by the ability to develop a surgical plane in fibrous tissue between the airway and the esophagus. Surgical complications included death [1], airway injury [2], chylothorax [1], and anastomotic leak [1].
Impact of therapy on ERF
Sixteen of 35 patients (45.7%) with an ERF received chemotherapy or radiotherapy or a combination of both. Three patients had closure of their fistula during therapy. Two of 3 of these patients subsequently had successful resections.
Three patients without ERF at presentation developed ERF during chemoradiotherapy. As noted, development of a fistula was temporally related to laser therapy in 1 patient. None of the fistulas developing during treatment subsequently reclosed.
Survival
Kaplan-Meier actuarial survival for the entire group, group I, and group II are displayed in Figure 1. Median survival for the entire group was 22 weeks, 16 weeks for group I, and 37 weeks for group II. The difference in survival from group I to group II was highly significant (p = 0.0026).
|
|
The impact of N0M0 stage grouping on actuarial survival is depicted in Figure 3. There is a highly significant difference among patients in group II and the group as a whole when N0M0 patients are compared to all other groups.
|
|
|
| Comment |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The respiratory location of airway invasion in this series was consistent with previous reports [13]. In this series approximately 50% of esophageal cancers involving the thoracic airways involved the bronchi, with a slight predilection for the left bronchus. An ERF communicating peripherally into the lung parenchyma has been previously described [3], but was not noted in this series.
Stage grouping was relatively constant throughout the study period in spite of the application of newer staging modalities such as endoscopic ultrasound, thoracoscopy, and laparoscopy. There was a nonsignificant increase in the assignment of the N1 designator between group I and group II. Remarkably, disease was confined to the thorax in approximately 65% of patients in this series. This finding is concurrent with other reports [8, 11], and is consistent with the observation that left untreated, most patients will die from the local effects of the tumor rather than disseminated disease.
The appropriateness of cytotoxic treatment for airway invasion is controversial. Burt [2] and Fry [8] and their colleagues reported the resolution of an ERF after radiotherapy. Progression to ERF has also been reported with radiotherapy. Lewinsky and associates [18] noted the development of ERF in 9 of 85 patients. Eastridge and coworkers [19] also reported development of an ERF with radiotherapy. Three patients presenting with ERF in this series had documented closure with chemoradiotherapy and 2 patients were successfully resected. Three patients without ERF at presentation developed ERF during chemoradiotherapy, and none of these subsequently reclosed. It is likely that both closure and development or extension are possible with cytotoxic therapy. During radiotherapy, edema may transiently close or diminish the size of a fistula, with a consequent decrease in respiratory suppuration. Tumor necrosis and fibrous healing may be competing processes in the development, closure, or perpetuation of an ERF during cytotoxic therapy.
Stenting has been reported to be a helpful adjunct in patients with advanced locoregional esophageal cancer, for both the attenuation of respiratory soilage and the palliation of malignant dysphagia [46]. No survival advantage of metallic over plastic stents was demonstrated in this report, although long-term survival occurred in 2 patients with a metallic stent. A head-to-head comparison of stent types in this study is not possible because different patient selection criteria were used with poorer performance status patients receiving stents in the latter group.
Resection is feasible and associated with long-term survival in patients having a dramatic response to chemoradiotherapy. We do not believe primary resection in the absence of previous induction therapy should be undertaken, unless the airway involvement is very distal and esophagectomy can be accompanied by a pulmonary resection. Success with induction therapy followed by operation in this group of patients has been previously reported [8].
The prognosis of esophageal cancer with airway invasion remains poor, but long-term survival is possible, including patients with ERF. Aggressive treatment of local disease, applied liberally in group II, appears to favorably influence survival. Survival is highly dependent on Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, N0M0 stage grouping, and the presence of an ERF. Aggressive treatment significantly changed the pattern of failure from predominately local to mixed local and distant, as successful therapy of some primary tumors was achieved.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. Wlodarczyk, H. Olechnowicz, and P. Kocon Esophago-Pericardial Fistula During the Course of Primary Esophageal Carcinoma Ann. Thorac. Surg., December 1, 2008; 86(6): 1967 - 1969. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Margolis, P. Alexander, G. D. Trachiotis, F. Gharagozloo, and T. Lipman Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy before multimodality therapy in patients with esophageal cancer Ann. Thorac. Surg., November 1, 2003; 76(5): 1694 - 1698. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |