84 Chapter 6 Results Forty patients were included in this study, of which 20 received nCRT prior to surgery and 20 were treated with surgery only. An overview of patient characteristics, cardiac risk factors, clinical events at baseline and during follow up is presented in table 1. Table 1 Patient population including cardiac comorbidities at baseline and during/after treatment* Surgery(n=20) CRT + Surgery(n=20) p value age corrected p value Age (yrs) 74.0 [46-91] 67.8 [50-81] 0.04 Follow up after treatment (months) 126 88 0.01 WHO 0 vs higher (%) 60 55 ns BMI 25.4 25.0 ns Current smoker 3 1 ns Hypertension 6(5) 7(4) ns Diabetes Mellitus 3(3) 6(7) ns Hypercholesterolaemia 5(3) 7(7) ns Coronary artery disease 4(2) 2(1) ns Arrythmia** 2(0) 6(1) 0.11 0.07 Heart failure 2(2) 1(0) ns peripheral thrombosis 1(0) 2(0) ns Peripheral arterial disease 0(0) 1(0) ns Valvular replacement 1(1) 0(0) ns COPD 1(0) 2(2) ns *Between brackets numbers before esophagectomy **Arrythmias (AF) were most often diagnosed within the first half year after treatment ns=non-significant In the surgery only group, patients were older (74 vs 67.8 years, p=0.04), and the median follow up after treatment was significantly longer (126 vs 88 months, p=0.01). No statistically significant differences were found in clinical cardiac or pulmonary events except for cardiac arrhythmia. In the nCRT group, 6 patients were diagnosed with atrial fibrillation vs. 2 in the control group (p=0.11, age corrected p=0.07). At the time of analysis, patients in the nCRT group reported higher fatigue scores (EORTC QLQ-C30) 13.8 vs 9.1 (p=0.13) and lower role functioning scores 88.6 vs 95.0. (p=0.13). These differences could be explained by the differences in the questions ”Were you tired” (p=0.07), “Were you limited in doing your work” (p=0.03) and “were you limited in doing your hobbies” (p=0.01) and not by the effect on social or family life. When correcting for age, the difference in role functioning was statistically
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw