Literature DB >> 26668512

Updated experiences with minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Ju-Wei Mu1, Shu-Geng Gao1, Qi Xue1, You-Sheng Mao1, Da-Li Wang1, Jun Zhao1, Yu-Shun Gao1, Jin-Feng Huang1, Jie He1.   

Abstract

AIM: To update our experiences with minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 445 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy between January 2009 and July 2015 at the Cancer Hospital of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and used 103 patients who underwent open McKeown esophagectomy in the same period as controls. Among 375 patients who underwent total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy, 180 in the early period were chosen for the study of learning curve of total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy. These 180 minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomies performed by five surgeons were divided into three groups according to time sequence as group 1 (n = 60), group 2 (n = 60) and group 3 (n = 60).
RESULTS: Patients who underwent total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy had significantly less intraoperative blood loss than patients who underwent hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy or open McKeown esophagectomy (100 mL vs 300 mL vs 200 mL, P = 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in operation time, number of harvested lymph nodes, or postoperative morbidity including incidence of pulmonary complication and anastomotic leak between total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy, hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy and open McKeown esophagectomy groups. There were no significant differences in 5-year survival between these three groups (60.5% vs 47.9% vs 35.6%, P = 0.735). Patients in group 1 had significantly longer duration of operation than those in groups 2 and 3. There were no significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, number of harvested lymph nodes, or postoperative morbidity including incidence of pulmonary complication and anastomotic leak between groups 1, 2 and 3.
CONCLUSION: Total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy was associated with reduced intraoperative blood loss and comparable short term and long term survival compared with hybrid minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy or open Mckeown esophagectomy. At least 12 cases are needed to master total minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a high volume center.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophagectomy; Learning curve; Minimally invasive; Outcome; Surgical procedures

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26668512      PMCID: PMC4671043          DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v21.i45.12873

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1007-9327            Impact factor:   5.742


  29 in total

1.  Minimally invasive oesophagectomy: a valuable alternative to open oesophagectomy for the treatment of early oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal junction carcinoma.

Authors:  Philippe Nafteux; Johnny Moons; Willy Coosemans; Herbert Decaluwé; Georges Decker; Paul De Leyn; Dirk Van Raemdonck; Toni Lerut
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2011-04-22       Impact factor: 4.191

2.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy provides significant survival advantage compared with open or hybrid esophagectomy for patients with cancers of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

Authors:  Francesco Palazzo; Ernest L Rosato; Asadulla Chaudhary; Nathaniel R Evans; Jocelyn A Sendecki; Scott Keith; Karen A Chojnacki; Charles J Yeo; Adam C Berger
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2014-12-27       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 3.  Preoperative chemo(radio)therapy versus primary surgery for gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma: systematic review with meta-analysis combining individual patient and aggregate data.

Authors:  Ulrich Ronellenfitsch; Matthias Schwarzbach; Ralf Hofheinz; Peter Kienle; Meinhard Kieser; Tracy E Slanger; Bryan Burmeister; David Kelsen; Donna Niedzwiecki; Christoph Schuhmacher; Susan Urba; Cornelis van de Velde; Thomas N Walsh; Marc Ychou; Katrin Jensen
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2013-06-22       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 4.  Systematic review of health-related quality of life after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Marco Scarpa; Stefano Valente; Rita Alfieri; Matteo Cagol; Giorgio Diamantis; Ermanno Ancona; Carlo Castoro
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-11-14       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Surya S A Y Biere; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Kirsten W Maas; Luigi Bonavina; Camiel Rosman; Josep Roig Garcia; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Jean H G Klinkenbijl; Markus W Hollmann; Elly S M de Lange; H Jaap Bonjer; Donald L van der Peet; Miguel A Cuesta
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 6.  Survival benefit and additional value of preoperative chemoradiotherapy in resectable gastric and gastro-oesophageal junction cancer: a direct and adjusted indirect comparison meta-analysis.

Authors:  K Kumagai; I Rouvelas; J A Tsai; D Mariosa; P A Lind; M Lindblad; W Ye; L Lundell; C Schuhmacher; M Mauer; B H Burmeister; J M Thomas; M Stahl; M Nilsson
Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-11-27       Impact factor: 4.424

7.  Report of incidence and mortality in China cancer registries, 2009.

Authors:  Wanqing Chen; Rongshou Zheng; Siwei Zhang; Ping Zhao; Guanglin Li; Lingyou Wu; Jie He
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 5.087

8.  Comparative study of minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in a single cancer center.

Authors:  Juwei Mu; Zuyang Yuan; Baihua Zhang; Ning Li; Fang Lyu; Yousheng Mao; Qi Xue; Shugeng Gao; Jun Zhao; Dali Wang; Zhishan Li; Yushun Gao; Liangze Zhang; Jinfeng Huang; Kang Shao; Feiyue Feng; Liang Zhao; Jian Li; Guiyu Cheng; Kelin Sun; Jie He
Journal:  Chin Med J (Engl)       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 2.628

9.  Comparison of perioperative outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Teng Mao; Wentao Fang; Zhitao Gu; Xufeng Guo; Chunyu Ji; Wenhu Chen
Journal:  Thorac Cancer       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 3.500

10.  Meta-analysis of postoperative efficacy in patients receiving chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery for resectable esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Jiaying Deng; Chunyu Wang; Mingqiong Xiang; Fatao Liu; Yun Liu; Kuaile Zhao
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 2.644

View more
  11 in total

1.  The impact of operative approaches on outcomes of middle and lower third esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Authors:  Ju-Wei Mu; Shu-Geng Gao; Qi Xue; You-Sheng Mao; Da-Li Wang; Jun Zhao; Yu-Shun Gao; Jin-Feng Huang; Jie He
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  The value of esophagectomy surgical apgar score (eSAS) in predicting the risk of major morbidity after open esophagectomy.

Authors:  Xue-Zhong Xing; Hai-Jun Wang; Shi-Ning Qu; Chu-Lin Huang; Hao Zhang; Hao Wang; Quan-Hui Yang; Yong Gao
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  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

4.  Morbidity analysis in minimally invasive esophagectomy for oesophageal cancer versus conventional over the last 10 years, a single institution experience.

Authors:  Misbah Khan; Muhammad Ijaz Ashraf; Aamir Ali Syed; Shahid Khattak; Namra Urooj; Anam Muzaffar
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2017 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.407

5.  Comparison of short-term outcomes and three yearsurvival between total minimally invasive McKeown and dual-incision esophagectomy.

Authors:  Ju-Wei Mu; Shu-Geng Gao; Qi Xue; You-Sheng Mao; Da-Li Wang; Jun Zhao; Yu-Shun Gao; Jin-Feng Huang; Jie He
Journal:  Thorac Cancer       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 3.500

Review 6.  Learning curves in minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  Frans van Workum; Laura Fransen; Misha Dp Luyer; Camiel Rosman
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Synchronous carcinoma of oesophageal and lung treated with laparoscopic-thoracoscopic cooperative surgery: A case report.

Authors:  Xin Li; Jiali Fu; Hua Zhang; Zhenguo Zhai; Wei Wang
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2019-04-24       Impact factor: 1.407

8.  Totally minimally invasive esophagectomy versus hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Frans van Workum; Bastiaan R Klarenbeek; Nikolaj Baranov; Maroeska M Rovers; Camiel Rosman
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 3.429

9.  Learning Curve for Lymph Node Dissection Around the Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve in McKeown Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Zi-Yi Zhu; Rao-Jun Luo; Zheng-Fu He; Yong Xu; Shao-Hua Xu; Qiang Zhang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 6.244

Review 10.  Minimally invasive techniques for transthoracic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  K Siaw-Acheampong; S K Kamarajah; R Gujjuri; J R Bundred; P Singh; E A Griffiths
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2020-09-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.