Literature DB >> 26096374

Minimally invasive esophagectomy: Lateral decubitus vs. prone positioning; systematic review and pooled analysis.

Sheraz R Markar1, Tom Wiggins1, Stefan Antonowicz1, Emmanouil Zacharakis1, George B Hanna2.   

Abstract

The uptake of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has increased vastly over the last decade, with proven short-term benefits over an open approach. The aim of this pooled analysis was to compare clinical outcomes of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) performed in the prone and lateral decubitus positions. A systematic literature search (2000-2015) was undertaken for publications that compared patients who underwent MIE in the lateral decubitus (LD) or prone (PR) positions. Weighted mean difference (WMD) was calculated for the effect size of LD positioning on continuous variables and Pooled odds ratios (POR) for discrete variables. Ten relevant publications comprising 723 patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy were included; 387 in the LD group and 336 in the PR group. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of in-hospital mortality, total morbidity, anastomotic leak, chylothorax, laryngeal nerve palsy, average operative time, and length hospital stay. LD MIE was associated with a non-significant increase in pulmonary complications (POR = 1.65; 95% C.I. 0.93 to 2.92; P = 0.09), and significant increases in estimated blood loss (WMD = 36.03; 95% 14.37 to 57.69; P = 0.001) and a reduced average mediastinal lymph node harvest (WMD = -2.17; 95% C.I. -3.82 to -0.52; P = 0.01) when compared to prone MIE. Pooled analysis suggests that prone MIE is superior to lateral decubitus MIE with reduced pulmonary complications, estimated blood loss and increased mediastinal lymph node harvest. Further studies are needed to explain performance-shaping factors and their influence on oncological clearance and short-term outcomes.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophagectomy; Laparoscopy; Positioning; Thoracoscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26096374     DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2015.06.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0960-7404            Impact factor:   3.279


  16 in total

Review 1.  [Specific complications of minimally invasive surgery].

Authors:  N Runkel; O Jurcovan
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  Comparison of perioperative and oncological outcome of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in left decubitus position and in prone position for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Shirou Kuwabara; Kazuaki Kobayashi; Akira Kubota; Ikuma Shioi; Kenji Yamaguchi; Norio Katayanagi
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2018-04-15       Impact factor: 3.445

3.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma-Shanghai Chest Hospital experience.

Authors:  Bin Li; Yu Yang; Yifeng Sun; Rong Hua; Xiaobin Zhang; Xufeng Guo; Haiyong Gu; Bo Ye; Zhigang Li; Teng Mao
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 4.  Total minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: approaches and outcomes.

Authors:  Danica N Giugliano; Adam C Berger; Ernest L Rosato; Francesco Palazzo
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-07-11       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 5.  Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and open chest surgery in esophageal cancer treatment: present and future.

Authors:  Lieven Depypere; Willy Coosemans; Philippe Nafteux; Hans Van Veer; Arne Neyrinck; Steve Coppens; Chantal Boelens; Kristel Laes; Toni Lerut
Journal:  J Vis Surg       Date:  2017-03-17

6.  Esophageal Position Affects Short-Term Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Tomoyuki Uchihara; Naoya Yoshida; Yoshifumi Baba; Yuichiro Nakashima; Yasue Kimura; Hiroshi Saeki; Shinsuke Takeno; Noriaki Sadanaga; Masahiko Ikebe; Masaru Morita; Yasushi Toh; Atsushi Nanashima; Yoshihiko Maehara; Hideo Baba
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 7.  Gastro-esophageal junction cancers: what is the best minimally invasive approach?

Authors:  Egle Jezerskyte; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Miguel A Cuesta; Suzanne S Gisbertz
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.895

8.  Predictive factors for post-operative respiratory infections after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: outcome of randomized trial.

Authors:  Surya Say Biere; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Luigi Bonavina; Camiel Rosman; Josep Roig Garcia; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Donald L van der Peet; Miguel A Cuesta
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Preoperative Smoking Cessation is Integral to the Prevention of Postoperative Morbidities in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Naoya Yoshida; Kenichi Nakamura; Daisuke Kuroda; Yoshifumi Baba; Yuji Miyamoto; Masaaki Iwatsuki; Yukiharu Hiyoshi; Takatsugu Ishimoto; Yu Imamura; Masayuki Watanabe; Hideo Baba
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Thoracoscopy in prone position with two-lung ventilation compared to conventional thoracotomy during Ivor Lewis procedure: a multicenter case-control study.

Authors:  R Souche; M Nayeri; R Chati; E Huet; I Donici; J J Tuech; F Borie; M Prudhomme; S Jaber; J M Fabre
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-03-13       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.