Literature DB >> 10597061

Transhiatal versus transthoracic esophagectomy: complication and survival rates.

M J Boyle1, D Franceschi, A S Livingstone.   

Abstract

The classic approach for esophagectomy is via a combined thoracic and abdominal approach. Concerns persist regarding the adequacy of this approach as a cancer operation. A study was carried out to compare these approaches, with particular reference to complication rates and long-term survival. The charts of all adult patients undergoing esophagectomy for carcinoma at the University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital between July 1991 and June 1996 were reviewed. Patients who had transabdominal resections alone or colon interpositions were excluded. Of 65 esophageal resections, 38 (58%) were performed transhiatally (THE) and 27 (42%) were performed via the transthoracic (TTE) route. Treatment groups were matched for age and site, stage, and histology of tumor. Similarly, the treatment groups were homogeneous with respect to distribution of neoadjuvant chemotherapy/radiation. The number of patients experiencing any postoperative complication was similar in both treatment groups, occurring in 22 THE (58%) and 17 TTE (63%) patients (P>0.05). Anastomotic leak occurred in five THE patients (13%) and one TTE patient (4%) (P>0.05). The single TTE patient with a leak died within 3 months without leaving the hospital. All five THE patients who developed a leak left the hospital. Although there was a tendency toward a higher percentage of patients in the TTE group to suffer respiratory failure and sepsis and a higher percentage of THE patients to experience anastomotic leak, these did not reach statistical significance. Again, although perioperative mortality tended to be higher in the TTE group, this did not reach statistical significance. Four and 5-year survival rates were similar in both groups. Whereas a 4-year cumulative survival difference of 42% for THE patients and 31% in TTE patients extended at 58 months to 28% and 8%, respectively, these did not reach statistical significance. Similarly, analysis by stage and preoperative treatment type (+/- neoadjuvant chemotherapy/radiation) failed to demonstrate any survival difference between the two groups. These findings demonstrate that there is little difference in operative morbidity and mortality between THE and TTE routes. Anastomotic leaks that occur after cervical anastomosis tend to run a more benign course. Survival data do not support routine TTE as a superior oncological operation, despite the theoretical benefit of better lymphatic clearance. We continue to advocate THE because it allows a cervical anastomosis without thoracotomy and we feel it is better tolerated by patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10597061

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Surg        ISSN: 0003-1348            Impact factor:   0.688


  11 in total

Review 1.  A personal perspective on controversies in the surgical management of oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  J McK Manson; W D Beasley
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  The split-stomach fundoplication after esophagogastrectomy.

Authors:  Vic Velanovich; Nathan Mohlberg
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  The clinical significance of subcarinal lymph node dissection in the radical resection of oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Haibo Ma; Yin Li; Zhidan Ding; Xianben Liu; Jinliang Xu; Jianjun Qin
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2013-03-08

4.  Mediastinoscope-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  A Tangoku; S Yoshino; T Abe; H Hayashi; T Satou; T Ueno; M Oka
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-01-23       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Stent implantation as a treatment option in patients with thoracic anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy.

Authors:  Werner K H Kauer; Hubert J Stein; Hans-Joachim Dittler; J Rüdiger Siewert
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-08-18       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Use of decellularized human skin to repair esophageal anastomotic leak in humans.

Authors:  Michael I Bozuk; Nicole M Fearing; Philip L Leggett
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2006 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.172

7.  Zero leaks with minimally invasive esophagectomy: a team-based approach.

Authors:  Amit Khithani; John Jay; Christos Galanopoulos; David Curtis; Allison Vo; D Rohan Jeyarajah
Journal:  JSLS       Date:  2009 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.172

8.  Transhiatal and transthoracic resection in adenocarcinoma of the esophagus: does the operative approach have an influence on the long-term prognosis?

Authors:  Ines Gockel; Sina Heckhoff; Claudia M Messow; Werner Kneist; Theodor Junginger
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2005-06-24       Impact factor: 2.754

9.  Minimally invasive oesophagectomy in prone versus lateral decubitus position: A comparative study.

Authors:  Amit Javed; John Mathew Manipadam; Amit Jain; R Kalayarasan; Rajeev Uppal; Anil K Agarwal
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 1.407

10.  Intrathoracic versus cervical anastomosis after resection of esophageal cancer: a matched pair analysis of 72 patients in a single center study.

Authors:  Christian D Klink; Marcel Binnebösel; Jens Otto; Gabriele Boehm; Klaus T von Trotha; Ralf-Dieter Hilgers; Joachim Conze; Ulf P Neumann; Marc Jansen
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-08-06       Impact factor: 2.754

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.