Literature DB >> 21898014

Effectiveness of combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy: comparison of postoperative complications and midterm oncological outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer.

Yousuke Kinjo1, Noriaki Kurita, Fumiaki Nakamura, Hiroshi Okabe, Eiji Tanaka, Yoshiki Kataoka, Atsushi Itami, Yoshiharu Sakai, Shunichi Fukuhara.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During esophagectomy, laparoscopy can be used together with thoracoscopy, but it is not known whether a combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic procedure is associated with fewer postoperative complications than open esophagectomy, and without compromising oncological outcome.
METHODS: This was a longitudinal cohort study that included 185 esophageal cancer patients, including 72 who underwent combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy (TLE), 34 who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE), and 79 who underwent open esophagectomy (OE) between January 2002 and May 2010. The main outcome measures were postoperative respiratory and overall complications. The secondary outcome was 2-year relapse-free survival (RFS).
RESULTS: Respiratory complications occurred in 9 patients who underwent TLE, 13 who underwent TE, and 31 who underwent OE. TLE was associated with fewer respiratory complications (TLE vs. OE: odds ratio [OR], 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09-0.53 and TE vs. OE: OR, 0.71; 95% CI 0.29-1.76). Overall complications occurred in 34 patients who underwent TLE, 20 who underwent TE, and 54 who underwent OE. TLE was associated with fewer overall complications (TLE vs. OE: OR, 0.47; 95% CI 0.23-0.94 and TE vs. OE: OR, 0.51; 95% CI 0.21-1.25). The 2-year RFS rates were similar among the three groups: 71.6% for TLE, 57.7% for TE, and 58.3% for OE (TLE vs. OE: hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI 0.35-1.20 and TE vs. OE: hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI 0.45-1.82).
CONCLUSION: Unlike TE, TLE was associated with fewer postoperative complications than was OE, with no compromise of 2-year RFS. A randomized controlled trial with longer follow-up is needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21898014     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-011-1883-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  22 in total

1.  Review of open and minimal access approaches to oesophagectomy for cancer.

Authors:  P M Safranek; J Cubitt; M I Booth; T C B Dehn
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2010-10-04       Impact factor: 6.939

2.  Randomized study of the benefits of preoperative corticosteroid administration on the postoperative morbidity and cytokine response in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Nobuhiro Sato; Keisuke Koeda; Kenichiro Ikeda; Yusuke Kimura; Kiichi Aoki; Takeshi Iwaya; Yuji Akiyama; Kaoru Ishida; Kazuyoshi Saito; Shigeatsu Endo
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Perioperative outcomes after transition from conventional to minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in a specialized center.

Authors:  Ahmed H Hamouda; Matthew J Forshaw; Kostas Tsigritis; Greg E Jones; Aliya S Noorani; Ash Rohatgi; Abraham J Botha
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 4.  Hand-sewn versus stapled oesophago-gastric anastomosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sheraz R Markar; Alan Karthikesalingam; Soumil Vyas; Majid Hashemi; Mark Winslet
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-01-27       Impact factor: 3.452

5.  Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy: meta-analysis of outcomes.

Authors:  George Sgourakis; Ines Gockel; Arnold Radtke; Thomas J Musholt; Stephan Timm; Andreas Rink; Achilleas Tsiamis; Constantine Karaliotas; Hauke Lang
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 3.199

6.  A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report.

Authors:  Seigo Kitano; Norio Shiraishi; Kyuzo Fujii; Kazuhiro Yasuda; Masafumi Inomata; Yosuke Adachi
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.982

7.  Comparison of the outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  Bernard M Smithers; David C Gotley; Ian Martin; Janine M Thomas
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Lymphadenectomy along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve by a minimally invasive esophagectomy in the prone position for thoracic esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hirokazu Noshiro; Hironori Iwasaki; Kiitiro Kobayashi; Akihiko Uchiyama; Yoshihiro Miyasaka; Toshihiro Masatsugu; Kenta Koike; Kouji Miyazaki
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-05-22       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Prediction of pulmonary complications after transthoracic oesophagectomy.

Authors:  H Nagawa; O Kobori; T Muto
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 6.939

10.  Is minimally invasive surgery beneficial in the management of esophageal cancer? A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kamal Nagpal; Kamran Ahmed; Amit Vats; Danny Yakoub; David James; Hutan Ashrafian; Ara Darzi; Krishna Moorthy; Thanos Athanasiou
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-01-28       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  47 in total

1.  Muscle sparing thoracotomy for esophageal cancer: a comparison with posterolateral thoracotomy.

Authors:  Kazushi Miyata; Masahide Fukaya; Keita Itatsu; Tetsuya Abe; Masato Nagino
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 2.549

Review 2.  Combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of outcomes.

Authors:  Wei Guo; Xiao Ma; Su Yang; Xiaoli Zhu; Wei Qin; Jiaqing Xiang; Toni Lerut; Hecheng Li
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Advantages of the prone position for minimally invasive esophagectomy in comparison to the left decubitus position: better oxygenation after minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  Eiji Tanaka; Hiroshi Okabe; Yousuke Kinjo; Shigeru Tsunoda; Kazutaka Obama; Shigeo Hisamori; Yoshiharu Sakai
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 2.549

4.  Mesenteric excision of upper esophagus: a concept for rational anatomical lymphadenectomy of the recurrent laryngeal nodes in thoracoscopic esophagectomy.

Authors:  Shigeru Tsunoda; Hisashi Shinohara; Seiichiro Kanaya; Hiroshi Okabe; Eiji Tanaka; Kazutaka Obama; Hisahiro Hosogi; Shigeo Hisamori; Yoshiharu Sakai
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: an updated review.

Authors:  Masayuki Watanabe; Yoshifumi Baba; Yohei Nagai; Hideo Baba
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-08-28       Impact factor: 2.549

6.  Video-assisted thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy: the experience of Shanghai Chest Hospital.

Authors:  Teng Mao; Wentao Fang; Zhitao Gu; Xufeng Guo; Chunyu Ji; Wenhu Chen
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 7.  Laparoscopic approach to gastrointestinal malignancies: toward the future with caution.

Authors:  Lapo Bencini; Marco Bernini; Marco Farsi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-02-21       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Thoracoscopic vagal-sparing esophagectomy and colonic interposition for caustic stricture.

Authors:  Deniz Tihan; Tuğba Matlım; Taylan Çelik; Fatih Altıntoprak; Oktar Asoğlu
Journal:  Turk J Surg       Date:  2018-03-01

9.  Changes in oncological outcomes: comparison of the conventional and minimally invasive esophagectomy, a single institution experience.

Authors:  Misbah Khan; Anam Muzaffar; Aamir Ali Syed; Shahid Khatak; Ali Raza Khan; Muhammad Ijaz Ashraf
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2016-09-15

10.  Feasibility of a robot-assisted thoracoscopic lymphadenectomy along the recurrent laryngeal nerves in radical esophagectomy for esophageal squamous carcinoma.

Authors:  Dae Joon Kim; Seong Yong Park; Seokki Lee; Hyoung-Il Kim; Woo Jin Hyung
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.