Synchronous pulmonary and esophageal cancers: Is combined esophagectomy and anatomic lung resection appropriate?

Authors

null

Hedi Zhao

Division of Thoracic and Upper GI Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada

Hedi Zhao , Ana-Maria Misariu , Jose Ramirez-Garcia Luna , Wayne Lewis Hofstetter , Daniela Molena , Amit Katz , Tamar B. Nobel , Carmen L. Mueller , Jonathan Cools-Lartigue , Jonathan Spicer , David S. Mulder , Lorenzo Ferri

Organizations

Division of Thoracic and Upper GI Surgery, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY

Research Funding

No funding received
None

Background: Resection is the best treatment for both esophagus and lung cancer, however, concerns that a combined resection of synchronous lung/esophagus tumors might be associated with higher morbidity may preclude surgical therapy. We sought to review a multi-institutional experience on combined esophagus/lung cancer resections. Methods: Patients undergoing esophagectomy and those with concurrent anatomic resection for bronchogenic carcinoma between 1997-2018 at three high-volume North American centers were identified from prospectively collected databases. Combined resection cases (E+L) were matched in a 1:3 ratio to patients who underwent esophagectomy alone (E), based on age, sex, stage, neoadjuvant therapy, procedure (2/3hole), and approach (MIE/open). Patient demographics, tumour characteristics, and post-operative outcomes were compared. Statistical analysis was performed using unpaired t-test or Wilcoxon sum-rank test for continuous variables and Fisher’s exact test for categorical data. Statistical significance was defined as p < 0.05. Results: Of over 2500 patients undergoing esophagectomy, synchronous anatomic lung resection was performed in 20; 4 were excluded due to incomplete data (n = 16). Matching yielded 48 patients and 4 duplicates were removed (n = 44); there were no significant differences in patient demographics, neoadjuvant therapy, clinical stage, or procedure. Anatomic resection consisted of lobectomy (16/20), segmentectomy (3/20) and pneumonectomy (1/20), combined with 2-hole (14/20), 3-hole (4/20), or left thoraco-abdominal (2/20) esophagectomy. The proportion of patients with any complication in E+L was 50%, and 66% in E (p = 0.42). Pulmonary complications were 19% and 27% in the respective groups (p = 0.74). Mortality did not differ (E+L = 0/16:E = 1/44)NS. The median length of stay for both groups was similar (E+L = 10.5 days(IQR 5.7): E = 10.0 days (IQR 8.7))NS. Conclusions: Patients with synchronous localized lung and esophageal cancer, although rare, should not be biased towards non-surgery therapy, as the morbidity associated with combined esophagectomy and anatomic lung resection does not differ significantly from esophagectomy alone.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2020 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session A: Esophageal and Gastric Cancer and Other GI Cancers

Track

Esophageal and Gastric Cancer,Other GI Cancer

Sub Track

Quality of Care/Quality Improvement

Citation

J Clin Oncol 38, 2020 (suppl 4; abstr 341)

Abstract #

341

Poster Bd #

C16

Abstract Disclosures