Perioperative complications influence long- and short-term outcomes after esophagectomy. The absence of a standardized system for defining and recording complications and quality measures after esophageal resection has meant that there is wide variation in evaluating their impact on these outcomes. The Esophageal Complications Consensus Group comprised 21 high-volume esophageal surgeons from 14 countries, supported by all the major thoracic and upper gastrointestinal professional societies. Delphi surveys and group meetings were used to achieve a consensus on standardized methods for defining complications and quality measures that could be collected in institutional databases and national audits. A standardized list of complications was created to provide a template for recording individual complications associated with esophagectomy. Where possible, these were linked to preexisting international definitions. A Delphi survey facilitated production of specific definitions for anastomotic leak, conduit necrosis, chyle leak, and recurrent nerve palsy. An additional Delphi survey documented consensus regarding critical quality parameters recommended for routine inclusion in databases. These quality parameters were documentation on mortality, comorbidities, completeness of data collection, blood transfusion, grading of complication severity, changes in level of care, discharge location, and readmission rates. The proposed system for defining and recording perioperative complications associated with esophagectomy provides an infrastructure to standardize international data collection and facilitate future comparative studies and quality improvement projects.

Video-assisted thoracoscopic anatomical resections are increasingly used in Europe to manage primary lung cancer. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome following thoracoscopic versus open lobectomy in case-matched groups of patients from the European Society of Thoracic Surgeon (ESTS) database. All patients having lobectomy as the primary procedure via thoracoscopy [video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS)-L)] or thoracotomy (TH-L) were identified in the ESTS database (January 2007 to December 2013). A propensity score was constructed using several patients' baseline characteristics. The matching using the propensity score was responsible for the minimization of selection bias. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to compare the incidence of postoperative major complications (according to the ESTS database definitions) and mortality at hospital discharge between the matched groups. After exclusions, 28 771 patients were identified: 26 050 having thoracotomy and 2721 having thoracoscopy. Propensity score yielded two well-matched groups of 2721 patients. Numeric variables were compared by Student's t -tests and categorical variables were compared by McNemar's tests. Compared with TH-L, VATS-L was associated with a lower incidence of total complications [ n = 792 (29.1%) vs 863 (31.7%), P = 0.0357], major cardiopulmonary complications [ n = 316 (15.9%) vs 435 (19.6%), P = 0.0094], atelectasis requiring bronchoscopy [ n = 65 (2.4%) vs 150 (5.5%), P < 0.0001], initial ventilation >48 h [ n = 18 (0.7%) vs 38 (1.4%), P = 0.0075] and wound infection [ n = 6 (0.2%) vs 17 (0.6%), P = 0.0218]. There was no difference in the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation between the two groups ( P = 0.14). Postoperative hospital stay was 2 days shorter in the VATS-L patients (mean: 7.8 vs 9.8 days; P = 0.0003). In terms of outcome at hospital discharge, there were 27 deaths in the VATS-L group (1%) versus 50 in the TH-L group (1.9%, P = 0.0201). Data from the ESTS database confirmed that lobectomy performed through VATS is associated with a lower incidence of complications compared with thoracotomy.

Background: Esophagectomy induces a systemic inflammatory response whose extent has been recognized as a predictive factor of postoperative respiratory morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of a protective ventilatory strategy to reduce systemic inflammation in patients undergoing esophagectomy. Methods: The authors prospectively investigated 52 patients undergoing planned esophagectomy for cancer. Patients were randomly assigned to a conventional ventilation strategy (n = 26; tidal volume of 9 ml/kg during two-lung and one-lung ventilation; no positive end-expiratory pressure) or a protective ventilation strategy (n = 26; tidal volume of 9 ml/kg during two-lung ventilation, reduced to 5 ml/kg during one-lung ventilation; positive end-expiratory pressure 5 cm H2O throughout the operative time). Results: Plasmatic levels of interleukin (IL)-1beta, IL-6, IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor alpha were measured perioperatively and postoperatively. Pulmonary function and postoperative evolution were also evaluated. Patients who received protective strategy had lower blood levels of IL-1beta, IL-6, and IL-8 at the end of one-lung ventilation (0.24 [0.15-0.40] vs. 0.56 [0.38-0.89] pg/ml, P < 0.001; 91 [61-117] vs. 189 [127-294] pg/ml, P < 0.001; and 30 [22-45] vs. 49 [29-69] pg/ml, P < 0.05, respectively) and 18 h postoperatively (0.18 [0.13-0.30] vs. 0.43 [0.34-0.54] pg/ml, P < 0.001; 54 [36-89] vs. 116 [78-208] pg/ml, P < 0.001; 16 [11-24] vs. 35 [28-53] pg/ml, P < 0.001, respectively). Protective strategy resulted in higher oxygen partial pressure to inspired oxygen fraction ratio during one-lung ventilation and 1 h postoperatively and in a reduction of postoperative mechanical ventilation duration (115 +/- 38 vs. 171 +/- 57 min, P < 0.001). Conclusion: A protective ventilatory strategy decreases the proinflammatory systemic response after esophagectomy, improves lung function, and results in earlier extubation.

Esophageal cancer resections, notwithstanding significant improvements in surgical technique and perioperative care in the modern era, still carry a risk of death greater than most common oncologic resections, with 5% or less a modern benchmark. These cancers also carry a high risk of major morbidity that ranges from 35% to 60%, depending on definitions used and irrespective of whether the operation is performed by open, minimally invasive, hybrid, or robotic-assisted technique.^1-8