Literature DB >> 24144805

Technical and early outcomes of Ivor Lewis minimally invasive oesophagectomy for gastric tube construction in the thoracic cavity.

Weibing Wu1, Quan Zhu, Liang Chen, Jinyuan Liu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Ivor Lewis minimally invasive oesophagectomy (ILMIE) is a complex surgery aiming to remove an oesophageal tumour and to create a new gastric tube in the abdomen. The objective was to assess the technical and early outcomes of ILMIE for gastric tube construction in the thoracic cavity.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted in 25 middle or lower oesophageal cancer patients treated with ILMIE between August and December 2012. A gastric tube was constructed in the thoracic cavity in all patients. The gastric tube and the oesophagus were anastomosed using a circular stapler. Clinical data (age, gender, pathological pattern and TNM stage), surgical data (operation time, intraoperative blood loss and intraoperative complications) and follow-up data (postoperative complications, length of stay, thoracic tube drainage time and time before eating) were assessed.
RESULTS: The mean age was 61 ± 8 years. Sixteen patients were male and 9 were female. Oesophageal cancer was located in the middle oesophagus in 5 cases and in the lower oesophagus in 20. No conversion to open surgery was performed. The mean operative time and intraoperative blood loss were 320 ± 63 min and 137 ± 95 ml, respectively. A mean of 2.4 ± 0.5 linear stapler cartridges was used per patient. A mean of 14.6 ± 5.4 lymph nodes was dissected per patient. Postoperative hospital stay was 13.2 ± 2.4 days. Intraoperative and postoperative complications occurred in 12% (3 of 25) and 20% (5 of 25) of patients, respectively, including 1 case of anastomotic fistula. The patients were followed up for a mean of 3.5 ± 1.2 months, and there was no relapse or death.
CONCLUSIONS: The construction of a gastric tube through the thoracic cavity using ILMIE is feasible and safe in patients with middle or lower oesophageal cancer. However, longer follow-up and larger sample sizes are needed to evaluate the oncological efficacy.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Complications; Gastric tube construction; Ivor Lewis minimally invasive oesophagectomy; Oesophageal cancer; Thoracic cavity

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24144805      PMCID: PMC3867051          DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivt448

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg        ISSN: 1569-9285


  23 in total

1.  Totally endoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Authors:  D I Watson; N Davies; G G Jamieson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Authors:  N T Nguyen; D M Follette; P H Lemoine; P F Roberts; J E Goodnight
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  The surgical treatment of carcinoma of the oesophagus; with special reference to a new operation for growths of the middle third.

Authors:  I LEWIS
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1946-07       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Gastric conduit staple line after esophagectomy: to oversew or not?

Authors:  Judith Boone; Inne H M Borel Rinkes; Richard van Hillegersberg
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 5.209

5.  Thoracoscopic construction of an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis using a circular stapler: transoral placement of the anvil.

Authors:  T Ninh Nguyen; Marcelo W Hinojosa; Brian R Smith; James Gray; Kevin M Reavis
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 4.330

6.  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

7.  Comparison of perioperative outcomes following open versus minimally invasive Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy at a single, high-volume centre.

Authors:  Smita Sihag; Cameron D Wright; John C Wain; Henning A Gaissert; Michael Lanuti; James S Allan; Douglas J Mathisen; Christopher R Morse
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2012-02-15       Impact factor: 4.191

Review 8.  Does minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) provide for comparable oncologic outcomes to open techniques? A systematic review.

Authors:  Marc M Dantoc; Michael R Cox; Guy D Eslick
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  A preliminary experience with minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Authors:  L F Tapias; C R Morse
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2011-10-03       Impact factor: 3.429

10.  Initial experience with minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Authors:  Costas Bizekis; Michael S Kent; James D Luketich; Percival O Buenaventura; Rodney J Landreneau; Matthew J Schuchert; Miguel Alvelo-Rivera
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 4.330

View more
  3 in total

1.  Minimally invasive esophageal resection and intrathoracic anastomosis for lower thoracic esophageal cancer with single position.

Authors:  Lufeng Zhao; Jianjun Ge; Wenshan Li; Yaping Luo; Ying Chai
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Laparoscopic gastric tube formation with pyloromyotomy for reconstruction in patients with esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Jin Won Lee; Sook Whan Sung; Jae Kil Park; Cho Hyun Park; Kyo Young Song
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2015-08-24       Impact factor: 1.859

3.  Modified reverse-puncture anastomotic technique vs. traditional technique for total minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.

Authors:  Xiaokang Shen; Tianming Chen; Xiaoming Shi; Ming Zheng; Zhang Yan Zhou; Hai Tao Qiu; Jiawei Zhao; Peng Lu; Po Yang; Shilin Chen
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-12-09       Impact factor: 2.754

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.