Literature DB >> 28251360

Role of 3D in minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Alexandros Charalabopoulos1,2, Bruno Lorenzi3,4, Ali Kordzadeh3,4, Cheuk-Bong Tang3,4, Sritharan Kadirkamanathan3,4, Naga Venkatesh Jayanthi3,4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Two-stage minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has gained popularity in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer. MIE's limitation is embedded in the construction of intrathoracic anastomosis. Various anastomotic techniques have been reported; however, the mechanical one remains the most commonly adopted. This pilot study aims to describe an efficient, safe, and reproducible way of performing a hand-sewn intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis in conjunction with short-term results using 2D and 3D thoracoscopic approaches.
METHODS: A total of n = 13 patients (mean age 67.4) underwent MIE for distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma between January and September 2016. Resection was performed in prone position, and the esophagogastric anastomosis was constructed in an end-to-side manner in two layers with barbed knotless suture. A 2D thoracoscopic approach was used in n = 10 patients (77%) and a 3D approach in n = 3 (23%).
RESULTS: n = 8 patients (61.5%) had neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and n = 5 (38.5%) had primary surgery. The mean operating time was 420 min, and the average length of stay was 10 days with no associated mortality. n = 1 (7.7%) developed a radiological leak that did not require an intervention. Thoracoscopic approach with the glasses-based 3D optical system using the angulating-tip 100° camera provided a far superior view for precise lymphadenectomy in combination to an efficient and safe construction of the anastomosis.
CONCLUSION: The barbed knotless suturing technique in MIE is an efficient and safe method of constructing the esophagogastric anastomosis with promising short-term outcomes. A 3D thoracoscopic approach appears to be superior in performing the anastomosis to that of a 2D technique.

Entities:  

Keywords:  2D esophagectomy; 3D esophagectomy; Barbed sutures; Esophageal cancer; Hand-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis; Minimally invasive esophagectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28251360     DOI: 10.1007/s00423-017-1570-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg        ISSN: 1435-2443            Impact factor:   3.445


  15 in total

1.  Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients.

Authors:  James D Luketich; Arjun Pennathur; Omar Awais; Ryan M Levy; Samuel Keeley; Manisha Shende; Neil A Christie; Benny Weksler; Rodney J Landreneau; Ghulam Abbas; Matthew J Schuchert; Katie S Nason
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 2.  Laparoscopic and thoracoscopic esophagectomy.

Authors:  Ryan M Levy; Joseph Wizorek; Manisha Shende; James D Luketich
Journal:  Adv Surg       Date:  2010

3.  Nationwide analysis of short-term surgical outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy for malignancy.

Authors:  Pragatheeshwar Thirunavukarasu; Emmanuel Gabriel; Kristopher Attwood; Moshim Kukar; Steven N Hochwald; Steven J Nurkin
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 6.071

Review 4.  Hand-sewn vs linearly stapled esophagogastric anastomosis for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xu-Feng Deng; Quan-Xing Liu; Dong Zhou; Jia-Xin Min; Ji-Gang Dai
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2015-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Esophagogastric Anastomosis Using the Transoral Orvil for the End-to-Side Ivor-Lewis Technique.

Authors:  Bernadette U Laxa; Kristi L Harold; Dawn E Jaroszewski
Journal:  Innovations (Phila)       Date:  2009-11

6.  Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis.

Authors:  Babatunde A Yerokun; Zhifei Sun; Chi-Fu Jeffrey Yang; Brian C Gulack; Paul J Speicher; Mohamed A Adam; Thomas A D'Amico; Mark W Onaitis; David H Harpole; Mark F Berry; Matthew G Hartwig
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 4.330

7.  Laparoscopic and thoracoscopic esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis for middle or lower esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Bo Ai; Zheng Zhang; Yongde Liao
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.895

8.  Thoracoscopic side-to-side esophagogastrostomy by use of linear stapler-a simplified technique facilitating a minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis operation.

Authors:  Tomoyuki Irino; Jon A Tsai; Jessica Ericson; Magnus Nilsson; Lars Lundell; Ioannis Rouvelas
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 3.445

9.  A safe and reproducible anastomotic technique for minimally invasive Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy: the circular-stapled anastomosis with the trans-oral anvil.

Authors:  Guilherme M Campos; David Jablons; Lisa M Brown; René M Ramirez; Charlotte Rabl; Pierre Theodore
Journal:  Eur J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2010-02-12       Impact factor: 4.191

10.  Worldwide trends in surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer.

Authors:  L Haverkamp; M F J Seesing; J P Ruurda; J Boone; R V Hillegersberg
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2017-01-01       Impact factor: 3.429

View more
  2 in total

1.  Purse-indigitation mechanical anastomosis vs. traditional mechanical anastomosis undergoing McKeown esophagectomy: a retrospective comparative cohort study.

Authors:  Peiyuan Wang; Derong Zhang; Xiaozhou Lin; Yujie Chen; Hao He; Peng Chen; Weijie Chen; Hang Zhou; Suyu Chen; Zhen Chen; Raja M Flores; Connor J Wakefield; Inderpal S Sarkaria; Shuoyan Liu; Feng Wang
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2022-08

2.  Clinical comparative study of glasses-free 3D and 2D thoracoscopic surgery in minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Authors:  Rongqiang Wei; Xinyu Ding; Zihao Chen; Ning Xin; Chengdong Liu; Yunhao Fang; Zhifei Xu; Kenan Huang; Hua Tang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 5.738

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.