Literature DB >> 28149553

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

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

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the perioperative outcomes and 3-year overall survival (OS) of 2 approaches including Sweet and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in the surgical treatment of middle and lower third esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
METHODS: The medical records of 1,746 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy for middle and lower esophageal cancer between January 2009 and September 2015 at the First Department of Thoracic Oncologic Surgery of Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College were retrospectively reviewed. The clinical variables and 3-year survival were compared between Sweet (n=1,701) and open Ivor Lewis (n=45) approaches in unmatched and propensity score matching analysis.
RESULTS: Patients who received esophagectomy by Sweet approach had shorter duration of surgery (mean 212 vs. 390 min; P<0.001), more lymph nodes removed (mean 24 vs. 19; P=0.005), lower overall complications rate (24.4% vs. 11.7%; P=0.009), lower total hospital cost (¥77,200 vs. 106,000; P=0.045) compared with patients who received open Ivor Lewis approach. After propensity score matching analysis, Sweet approach was still associated with decreased duration of surgery (mean 210 vs. 390 min; P<0.001), more lymph nodes removed (mean 24 vs. 19; P=0.050), and lower total hospital cost (¥86,800 vs. 106,000; P=0.045) compared with Ivor Lewis approach. However, there were no significant differences in overall complication rates (24.4% vs. 24.4%; P=1.000) between two approaches. There was no significant difference in 3-year OS between Sweet and open Ivor Lewis approaches (59.9% vs. 61.4%; P=0.637) in unmatched analysis and in matched analysis (77.8% vs. 61.4%; P=0.264).
CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, for middle and lower third esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients, both Sweet and open Ivor Lewis approaches are feasible in terms of perioperative outcomes and 3-year OS.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Surgical approach; esophageal cancer; esophagectomy

Year:  2016        PMID: 28149553      PMCID: PMC5227276          DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2016.12.42

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


  22 in total

1.  [Comparison of surgical outcomes after different surgical approach for middle or lower thoracic esophageal squamous cancer].

Authors:  Shi-jie Fu; Wen-tao Fang; Teng Mao; Wen-hu Chen
Journal:  Zhonghua Wei Chang Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2012-04

Review 2.  Propensity-score matching in the cardiovascular surgery literature from 2004 to 2006: a systematic review and suggestions for improvement.

Authors:  Peter C Austin
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 5.209

3.  International Consensus on Standardization of Data Collection for Complications Associated With Esophagectomy: Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG).

Authors:  Donald E Low; Derek Alderson; Ivan Cecconello; Andrew C Chang; Gail E Darling; Xavier Benoit DʼJourno; S Michael Griffin; Arnulf H Hölscher; Wayne L Hofstetter; Blair A Jobe; Yuko Kitagawa; John C Kucharczuk; Simon Ying Kit Law; Toni E Lerut; Nick Maynard; Manuel Pera; Jeffrey H Peters; C S Pramesh; John V Reynolds; B Mark Smithers; J Jan B van Lanschot
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 12.969

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.  Annual report on status of cancer in China, 2011.

Authors:  Wanqing Chen; Rongshou Zheng; Hongmei Zeng; Siwei Zhang; Jie He
Journal:  Chin J Cancer Res       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 5.087

6.  Comparison of Ivor-Lewis vs Sweet esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Bin Li; Jiaqing Xiang; Yawei Zhang; Hecheng Li; Jie Zhang; Yihua Sun; Hong Hu; Longsheng Miao; Longfei Ma; Xiaoyang Luo; Sufeng Chen; Ting Ye; Yiliang Zhang; Yang Zhang; Haiquan Chen
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 14.766

7.  Effect of the number of lymph nodes sampled on postoperative survival of lymph node-negative esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Alexander J Greenstein; Virginia R Litle; Scott J Swanson; Celia M Divino; Stuart Packer; Juan P Wisnivesky
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-03-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  Updated experiences with minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

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:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  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

10.  Modified McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a 5-year retrospective study of 142 patients in a single institution.

Authors:  Baofu Chen; Bo Zhang; Chengchu Zhu; Zhongrui Ye; Chunguo Wang; Dehua Ma; Minhua Ye; Min Kong; Jiang Jin; Jiang Lin; Chunlei Wu; Zheng Wang; Jiahong Ye; Jian Zhang; Quanteng Hu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  5 in total

1.  Comparison of Ivor Lewis and Sweet esophagectomy for middle and lower esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A systematic review and pooled analysis.

Authors:  Yuhang Xue; Donglai Chen; Wei Wang; Wenjia Wang; Lei Chen; Yonghua Sang; Yongbing Chen; Weihua Xu
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2020-10-10

2.  Survival comparison between radical surgery and definitive chemoradiation in 267 esophageal squamous cell carcinomas in a single institution: A propensity-matched study.

Authors:  Hideomi Yamashita; Yasuyuki Seto; Ryousuke Takenaka; Kae Okuma; Tomoki Kiritooshi; Kazuhiko Mori; Kazuhiko Yamada; Takashi Fukuda; Michio Kaminishi; Osamu Abe; Keiichi Nakagawa
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Comparison of Ivor-Lewis versus Sweet procedure for middle and lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: A STROBE compliant study.

Authors:  Jun Wang; Ning Wei; Nanqing Jiang; Yiming Lu; Xiaoying Zhang
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2019-02       Impact factor: 1.817

4.  [ARTICLE WITHDRAWN] MicroRNA-539 Inhibits the Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition of Esophageal Cancer Cells by Twist-Related Protein 1-Mediated Modulation of Melanoma-Associated Antigen A4.

Authors:  Zhili Cao; Xiang Zheng; Lei Cao; Naixin Liang
Journal:  Oncol Res       Date:  2017-06-12       Impact factor: 5.574

5.  Right Compared With Left Thoracic Approach Esophagectomy for Patients With Middle Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

Authors:  Yan Zheng; Yin Li; Xianben Liu; Ruixiang Zhang; Haibo Sun; Wenqun Xing
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-10-26       Impact factor: 6.244

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.