Related Experiment Video For Computer tomography (CT)
Updated: Jul 7, 2025

Development of Compendium for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Published on: April 12, 2024
Diagnostic workup for esophageal cancer patients can be improved with checklists and clearer protocols; a comparative
J R van Doesburg1, J Luttikhold2, M Lindblad2
1Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit, de Boelelaan 1117, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Surgery, Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Cancer Center Amsterdam, Cancer Treatment and Quality of Life, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Amsterdam Gastroenterology Endocrinology Metabolism Research Institute, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Background:
Rapid and complete workup of newly diagnosed esophageal cancer is vital for a timely, individual and high-quality treatment strategy. The aim of this study was to uncover potential delay, inefficiencies and non-contributing investigations in the diagnostic process in two tertiary referral centers.
Methods:
This retrospective cohort study included all newly diagnosed esophageal cancer patients referred to or diagnosed in the Amsterdam UMC and Karolinska University Hospital between July 2020 and July 2021. Radiology, pathological assessment and multidisciplinary team meeting reports were reviewed. To assess time interval from diagnosis to treatment, dates of diagnosis, admittance to referral hospital, MDT meeting and start of treatment were collected.
Results:
In total, 252 esophageal cancer patients were included, 187 were treated with curative intent. Curatively treated patients had a mean age of 66 years, were predominantly male (74.9 %) with an adenocarcinoma (71.1 %). Curatively treated patients had a median time from diagnosis to referral of seven days (IQR:0-11) and of 35 days (IQR:28-45) between diagnosis and start of treatment. Main reasons for the significant (P < 0.001) differences in time between diagnosis and treatment between centers, Amsterdam UMC (39 days) vs Karolinska (27 days), were need for additional diagnostics (47.8 %) and differences in referral routine. Gastroscopy was repeated in 32.2 % of patients, mainly for further anatomical mapping.
Conclusion:
Significant time differences between centers in the path from diagnosis to start treatment can be explained by differences in workup approach, referral routines and MDT meeting regulations. Repeat of gastroscopy can be prevented with clearer endoscopy guidelines.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Endoscopic Procedures I: Esophagogastroduodenoscopy
During an EGD, the endoscope can be used to:
Barrett Esophagus-II: Clinical Manifestations and Management
To diagnose Barrett's esophagus, healthcare providers often recommend an endoscopy for those showing symptoms of acid reflux. The procedure...
Esophageal Strictures-II: Clinical Features and Management
Healthcare providers should gather a comprehensive medical history and conduct a physical examination for diagnosis. If esophageal stricture is...
Endoscopic Procedures V: ERCP
Patient...
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease II: Clinical Features and Management
Clinical Manifestations
GERD presents itself in a multitude of ways, with symptoms varying from person to person. The hallmark symptoms are...
Barrett Esophagus-I: Introduction
This constant acid exposure transforms the esophagus's pink mucosal lining (stratified squamous epithelium) into a type of lining more...

