Literature DB >> 30868323

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

R Souche1, M Nayeri2, R Chati3, E Huet3, I Donici2, J J Tuech3, F Borie2, M Prudhomme2, S Jaber4, J M Fabre5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative management based on thoracoscopy, prone position and two-lung ventilation could decrease the rate of postoperative pulmonary complications after esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to compare this multifaceted approach (MIE-PP) and conventional thoracotomy for Ivor Lewis procedure after a systematic laparoscopic dissection.
METHODS: Data from 137 consecutive patients undergoing Ivor Lewis procedures between 2010 and 2017 at two tertiary centers was analyzed retrospectively. The outcomes of patients who underwent MIE-PP (n = 58; surgeons group 1) were compared with those of patients undergoing conventional approach (n = 79; surgeons group 2). Our primary outcome was major postoperative pulmonary complications. Our main secondary outcomes were anastomotic leak, quality of resection and mortality.
RESULTS: Female patients were more prevalent in the MIE-PP group (p = 0.002). Other patient characteristics, cTNM staging and neoadjuvant treatment rate were not different between groups. Major postoperative pulmonary complications were significantly lower in the MIE-PP group compared to Conventional group (24 vs. 44%; p = 0.014). Anastomotic leak occurred in 31 versus 18% in MIE-PP group and Conventional groups, respectively (p = 0.103). Complete resection rate (98 vs. 95%; p = 0.303) and mean number of harvested lymph nodes (16 (4-40) vs. 18 (3-37); p = 0.072) were similar between the two groups. Postoperative mortality rates were 0 versus 2% at day 30 (p = 0.508) and 0 versus 7.6% at day 90 (p = 0.038).
CONCLUSION: Short-term outcomes of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis using thoracoscopy, prone position and two-lung ventilation are at least equivalent to the hybrid approach. Anastomotic leak after MIE-PP remains a major concern.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophageal cancer; Ivor Lewis; Minimally invasive; Prone position; Pulmonary complications

Year:  2019        PMID: 30868323     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-019-06742-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  34 in total

1.  Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery.

Authors:  Jonathan F Finks; Nicholas H Osborne; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-06-02       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  The surgical treatment of carcinoma of the oesophagus; with special reference to a new operation for growths of the middle third.

Authors:  I LEWIS
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1946-07       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 3.  Combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of outcomes.

Authors:  Wei Guo; Xiao Ma; Su Yang; Xiaoli Zhu; Wei Qin; Jiaqing Xiang; Toni Lerut; Hecheng Li
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  A trial of intraoperative low-tidal-volume ventilation in abdominal surgery.

Authors:  Emmanuel Futier; Jean-Michel Constantin; Catherine Paugam-Burtz; Julien Pascal; Mathilde Eurin; Arthur Neuschwander; Emmanuel Marret; Marc Beaussier; Christophe Gutton; Jean-Yves Lefrant; Bernard Allaouchiche; Daniel Verzilli; Marc Leone; Audrey De Jong; Jean-Etienne Bazin; Bruno Pereira; Samir Jaber
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-08-01       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Effectiveness of combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy: comparison of postoperative complications and midterm oncological outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Yousuke Kinjo; Noriaki Kurita; Fumiaki Nakamura; Hiroshi Okabe; Eiji Tanaka; Yoshiki Kataoka; Atsushi Itami; Yoshiharu Sakai; Shunichi Fukuhara
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-09-05       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Effects of hybrid minimally invasive oesophagectomy on major postoperative pulmonary complications.

Authors:  N Briez; G Piessen; F Torres; G Lebuffe; J-P Triboulet; C Mariette
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  The impact of combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic surgery on pulmonary complications after radical esophagectomy in patients with resectable esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Naoshi Kubo; Masaichi Ohira; Yoshito Yamashita; Katsunobu Sakurai; Takahiro Toyokawa; Hiroaki Tanaka; Kazuya Muguruma; Masatsune Shibutani; Sadaaki Yamazoe; Kenjiro Kimura; Hisashi Nagahara; Ryosuke Amano; Hiroshi Ohtani; Masakazu Yashiro; Kiyoshi Maeda; Kosei Hirakawa
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 2.480

Review 8.  Differences in the definitions used for esophageal and gastric diseases in different countries: endoscopic definition of the esophagogastric junction, the precursor of Barrett's adenocarcinoma, the definition of Barrett's esophagus, and histologic criteria for mucosal adenocarcinoma or high-grade dysplasia.

Authors:  Kaiyo Takubo; Michael Vieth; Junko Aida; Motoji Sawabe; Yoichi Kumagai; Yoshio Hoshihara; Tomio Arai
Journal:  Digestion       Date:  2009-10-15       Impact factor: 3.216

9.  Evolution of the surgical technique of minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: description according to the IDEAL framework.

Authors:  M H B C Stenstra; F van Workum; F J H van den Wildenberg; F Polat; C Rosman
Journal:  Dis Esophagus       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 3.429

10.  Techniques and short-term outcomes for total minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophageal resection in distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers: pooled data from six European centers.

Authors:  Jennifer Straatman; Nicole van der Wielen; Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen; Camiel Rosman; Josep Roig; Joris J G Scheepers; Miguel A Cuesta; Misha D P Luyer; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Frans van Workum; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Donald L van der Peet
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  5 in total

1.  Completely Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Versus Hybrid Esophagectomy for Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junctional Cancer: Clinical and Short-Term Oncological Outcomes.

Authors:  Krashna Patel; Omar Abbassi; Cheuk Bong Tang; Bruno Lorenzi; Alexandros Charalabopoulos; Sritharan Kadirkamanathan; Naga Venkatesh Jayanthi
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-07-09       Impact factor: 5.344

2.  Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Totally Versus Hybrid Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Oesophagectomy for Oesophageal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

Authors:  Yi-Min Gu; Han-Lu Zhang; Yu-Shang Yang; Yong Yuan; Yang Hu; Guo-Wei Che; Long-Qi Chen; Wen-Ping Wang
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-05-26       Impact factor: 5.738

3.  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

4.  Changes in respiratory mechanics of artificial pneumothorax two-lung ventilation in video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy in prone position.

Authors:  Yoshinori Tanigawa; Kimihide Nakamura; Tomoko Yamashita; Akira Nakagawachi; Yoshiro Sakaguchi
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 5.  Management of anastomotic leaks after esophagectomy and gastric pull-up.

Authors:  Amber Famiglietti; John F Lazar; Hayley Henderson; Margaret Hamm; Stefanie Malouf; Marc Margolis; Thomas J Watson; Puja Gaur Khaitan
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 3.005

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.