Literature DB >> 22777054

Refinement of minimally invasive esophagectomy techniques after 15 years of experience.

Jie Zhang1, Rui Wang, Shilei Liu, James D Luketich, Sufeng Chen, Haiquan Chen, Matthew J Schuchert.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: [corrected] In an effort to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy, a minimally invasive approach to esophagectomy was introduced at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) in 1996. The objective of this article is to discuss the optimization and refinement of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) techniques over the 15-year experience at UPMC. We also reviewed the literature on technical improvements in MIE.
METHOD: Literature highlights for MIE and related meta-analyses comparing open esophagectomy and MIE were reviewed. The rationale and outcomes of techniques refinements were discussed in detail.
RESULTS: Most meta-analyses and systematic reviews confirm the feasibility and safety of MIE and suggest similar oncologic outcomes as compared with open esophagectomy. Since 1996, over 1,000 minimally invasive esophagectomies have been performed at UPMC. We have made several refinements to the MIE procedure that we believe significantly improved our surgical outcomes. It included adjustment of width of the gastric conduit, application of omental flap, and conversion from minimally invasive, three-hole esophagectomy to minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.
CONCLUSION: MIE became a mainstay in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer at UPMC. The technical improvements detailed above make the UPMC approach to MIE a feasible, safe, and efficient procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22777054     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-012-1950-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  34 in total

1.  Minimally invasive surgical treatment of esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Arjun Pennathur; James D Luketich
Journal:  Gastrointest Cancer Res       Date:  2008-11

Review 2.  Minimally invasive surgery compared to open procedures in esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  R J J Verhage; E J Hazebroek; J Boone; R Van Hillegersberg
Journal:  Minerva Chir       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  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

4.  Total en bloc spondylectomy and a greater omentum pedicle flap for a large bone and soft tissue defect: solitary lumbar metastasis from renal cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Norio Kawahara; Katsuro Tomita; Hideki Murakami; Satoru Demura; Kazuhiko Satomi; Yutaka Atomi
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2009-12-08       Impact factor: 1.601

5.  Protection of intrathoracic esophageal anastomoses by omentum.

Authors:  H S Goldsmith; A A Kiely; H T Randall
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1968-03       Impact factor: 3.982

6.  Wrapping of the omental pedicle flap around esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Ji Gang Dai; Zai Yong Zhang; Jia Xin Min; Xiao Bing Huang; Jing Si Wang
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2010-09-20       Impact factor: 3.982

7.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  J D Luketich; P R Schauer; N A Christie; T L Weigel; S Raja; H C Fernando; R J Keenan; N T Nguyen
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.330

8.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients.

Authors:  James D Luketich; Miguel Alvelo-Rivera; Percival O Buenaventura; Neil A Christie; James S McCaughan; Virginia R Litle; Philip R Schauer; John M Close; Hiran C Fernando
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  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

10.  Optimum lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Nabil P Rizk; Hemant Ishwaran; Thomas W Rice; Long-Qi Chen; Paul H Schipper; Kenneth A Kesler; Simon Law; Toni E M R Lerut; Carolyn E Reed; Jarmo A Salo; Walter J Scott; Wayne L Hofstetter; Thomas J Watson; Mark S Allen; Valerie W Rusch; Eugene H Blackstone
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  11 in total

1.  Laparoscopic surgery: A qualified systematic review.

Authors:  Alexander Buia; Florian Stockhausen; Ernst Hanisch
Journal:  World J Methodol       Date:  2015-12-26

2.  Comparison of single- and multi-incision minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for treating esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched study.

Authors:  Jang-Ming Lee; Shang-Chi Chen; Shun-Mao Yang; Ying-Fan Tseng; Pei-Wen Yang; Pei-Ming Huang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-11-08       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Implementation of minimally invasive esophagectomy in a tertiary referral center for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Magnus Nilsson; Satoshi Kamiya; Mats Lindblad; Ioannis Rouvelas
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hasan F Batirel
Journal:  J Vis Surg       Date:  2017-11-06

5.  Techniques of uniportal video-assisted thoracic surgery-esophageal and mediastinal indications.

Authors:  Hasan F Batirel
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  A standardized comparison of peri-operative complications after minimally invasive esophagectomy: Ivor Lewis versus McKeown.

Authors:  Andrew M Brown; Michael J Pucci; Adam C Berger; Talar Tatarian; Nathaniel R Evans; Ernest L Rosato; Francesco Palazzo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-06-22       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Mortality after esophagectomy is heavily impacted by center volume: retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample.

Authors:  Hans F Fuchs; Cristina R Harnsberger; Ryan C Broderick; David C Chang; Bryan J Sandler; Garth R Jacobsen; Michael Bouvet; Santiago Horgan
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Benchmark values for transthoracic esophagectomy are not set as the defined "best possible"-a validation study.

Authors:  Olli Helminen; Johanna Mrena; Eero Sihvo
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Robotic-assisted single-incision gastric mobilization for minimally invasive oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: preliminary results.

Authors:  Yu-Han Huang; Ke-Cheng Chen; Sian-Han Lin; Pei-Ming Huang; Pei-Wen Yang; Jang-Ming Lee
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-08-01       Impact factor: 4.191

10.  Minimally Invasive Versus open AbdominoThoracic Esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma (MIVATE) - study protocol for a randomized controlled trial DRKS00016773.

Authors:  Felix Nickel; Pascal Probst; Alexander Studier-Fischer; Henrik Nienhüser; Jana Pauly; Karl-Friedrich Kowalewski; Sebastian Weiterer; Philipp Knebel; Markus K Diener; Markus A Weigand; Markus W Büchler; Thomas Schmidt; Beat P Müller-Stich
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2021-01-11       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.