Literature DB >> 25276363

Comparison of outcomes of open and minimally invasive esophagectomy in 183 patients with cancer.

Fanyu Meng1, Yin Li1, Haibo Ma1, Ming Yan1, Ruixiang Zhang1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Only few randomized trials or comparative studies with large number of patients have been reported on the outcomes of thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy (TLE) with cervical anastomosis and open 3-field esophagectomy (OE) for patients with esophageal cancer. The objective of this study is to compare the safety, feasibility, and short-term outcomes between TLE and OE (via right throax, abdomen, and left neck) for esophageal cancer.
METHODS: Clinical and surgical data of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent either TLE or OE between February 2011 and December 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic characteristics, pathological data, operative procedures, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes and survival in patients were compared between both groups.
RESULTS: Of the 183 patients included in this retrospective analysis, 94 underwent TLE and 89 underwent OE. Demographics, pathologic data, inpatient mortality, and overall surgical morbidity in both cohorts were almost identical. A significant difference was observed in blood loss (182.6±78.3 vs. 261.4±87.2 mL, P<0.001), hospital stay (13.9±7.5 vs. 17.1±10.2 days, P=0.017), overall surgical morbidity (25.5% vs. 46.1%, P=0.004), and rate of pulmonary and cardiac complication (9.6% vs. 27.0%, P=0.002; 4.1% vs. 12.4%, P=0.046) between TLE and OE groups; however, no difference in survival period was observed between the groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The procedure of TLE for esophageal cancer possesses advantages in intraoperative and postoperative outcomes compared with OE. The TLE procedure results in similar or potentially better outcomes.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Thoracoscopic; esophageal cancer; esophagectomy; laparoscopic; pulmonary complication

Year:  2014        PMID: 25276363      PMCID: PMC4178093          DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2014.07.20

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Dis        ISSN: 2072-1439            Impact factor:   2.895


  23 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

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.  Total three-stage oesophagectomy for cancer of the oesophagus.

Authors:  K C McKeown
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1976-04       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  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

5.  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

6.  Comparative experience of open and minimally invasive esophagogastric resection.

Authors:  Rajeev Parameswaran; Darmarajah Veeramootoo; Rakesh Krishnadas; Martin Cooper; Richard Berrisford; Shahjehan Wajed
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer: laparoscopic transhiatal procedure or thoracoscopy in prone position followed by laparoscopy?

Authors:  G Dapri; J Himpens; G B Cadière
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-12-11       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Clinical application of layered anastomosis during esophagogastrostomy.

Authors:  Zi-Jiang Zhu; Yong-Fan Zhao; Long-Qi Chen; Yang Hu; Lun-Xu Liu; Yun Wang; Ying-Li Kou
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.352

9.  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

10.  Treatment of esophagogastric anastomotic leak with perianastomotic drain.

Authors:  Jianjun Qin; Yin Li; Ruixiang Zhang; Ming Yan; Guolei Wang; Baoxing Liu
Journal:  J Thorac Oncol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 15.609

View more
  16 in total

1.  Clinical analysis of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a single center by a single medical group.

Authors:  Zi-Yi Zhu; Xu Yong; Rao-Jun Luo; Yun-Zhen Wang
Journal:  J Zhejiang Univ Sci B       Date:  2018 Sept.       Impact factor: 3.066

Review 2.  Optimal surgery for esophagogastric junctional cancer.

Authors:  Tsutomu Hayashi; Takaki Yoshikawa
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  A comparison of short-term outcomes between Ivor-Lewis and McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  Chunbo Zhai; Yongjing Liu; Wei Li; Tongzhen Xu; Guotao Yang; Hengxiao Lu; Dehong Hu
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  The survival impact of postoperative complications after curative resection in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: propensity score-matching analysis.

Authors:  Manabu Yamamoto; Mototsugu Shimokawa; Daisuke Yoshida; Shohei Yamaguchi; Mitsuhiko Ohta; Akinori Egashira; Masahiko Ikebe; Masaru Morita; Yasushi Toh
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 4.553

5.  Outcomes of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in prone position with laparoscopic gastric mobilization for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Kitagawa; Tsutomu Namikawa; Masaya Munekage; Kazune Fujisawa; Eri Munekgae; Michiya Kobayashi; Kazuhiro Hanazaki
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 6.  Does minimally invasive oesophagectomy provide a benefit in hospital length of stay when compared with open oesophagectomy?

Authors:  Paul Rodham; Jonathan A Batty; Philip J McElnay; Arul Immanuel
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2015-12-15

7.  Superiority of Minimally Invasive Oesophagectomy in Reducing In-Hospital Mortality of Patients with Resectable Oesophageal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Can Zhou; Li Zhang; Hua Wang; Xiaoxia Ma; Bohui Shi; Wuke Chen; Jianjun He; Ke Wang; Peijun Liu; Yu Ren
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 8.  Minimally invasive oesophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Waresijiang Yibulayin; Sikandaer Abulizi; Hongbo Lv; Wei Sun
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-12-08       Impact factor: 2.754

9.  Hybrid esophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: long-term results. A single-centre experience.

Authors:  Lucie Hlaváčová; Radek Vrba; Čestmír Neoral; René Aujeský; Martin Stašek; Josef Chudáček; Katherine Vomáčková; David Vrána; Martin Sněhota
Journal:  Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne       Date:  2020-11-16       Impact factor: 1.195

Review 10.  Is minimally invasive esophagectomy effective for preventing anastomotic leakages after esophagectomy for cancer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Can Zhou; Gang Ma; Xiao Li; Juan Li; Yu Yan; Peijun Liu; Jianjun He; Yu Ren
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 2.754

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.