Literature DB >> 31041586

Predictive factors of difficulty of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left decubitus position.

Yushi Fujiwara1, Shigeru Lee2, Ken Gyobu2, Daiki Inazu2, Ryoko Naka2, Masaki Nishiyama2, Masaichi Ohira2, Harushi Osugi3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We have sometimes experienced technical difficulty performing thoracoscopic esophagectomy because of the position of the descending aorta or width of the mediastinal space. In this study, we retrospectively investigated predictive preoperative factors that influence the procedure of thoracoscopic esophagectomy with a focus on the position of the descending aorta and width of the mediastinal space.
METHODS: Ninety-five patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer by two specialists were included in this study. Thirty patients in whom both the operation time and blood loss in the thoracic region exceeded the median were categorized to the difficult group. The remaining 65 patients were categorized into the common group. During the evaluation of the position of the descending aorta, we measured the aorta-vertebra angle at the level of the left inferior pulmonary vein. During the evaluation of the width of the mediastinal space, we measured the sternum-vertebra distance at the level of the tracheal bifurcation.
RESULTS: A forward stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed the following independent predictive factors of the technical difficulty of thoracoscopic esophagectomy: aorta-vertebra angle (≥ 30°), sternum-vertebra distance (< 100 mm), and clinical T stage (T3).
CONCLUSIONS: The position of the descending aorta, width of the mediastinal space, and clinical T stage are predictive factors of the technical difficulty of thoracoscopic esophagectomy. These factors might become supporting indices for the indication for thoracoscopic esophagectomy among trainees or the surgeons who introduce this procedure.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Esophageal cancer; Minimally invasive esophagectomy; Predictive factor

Year:  2019        PMID: 31041586     DOI: 10.1007/s10388-019-00663-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Esophagus        ISSN: 1612-9059            Impact factor:   4.230


  13 in total

Review 1.  Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for intrathoracic esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Harushi Osugi; Masashi Takemura; Sigeru Lee; Takayuki Nishikawa; Kennichirou Fukuhara; Hiroshi Iwasaki; Masayuki Higashino
Journal:  Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 1.520

Review 2.  Hospital esophagectomy volume and postoperative length of stay: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Femi Giwa; Aitua Salami; Ajibola I Abioye
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 2.565

3.  The effect of postoperative complications on survival of patients after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Kun-Kun Li; Yin-Jian Wang; Xue-Hai Liu; Qun-You Tan; Yao-Guang Jiang; Wei Guo
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Effect of Esophagus Position on Surgical Difficulty and Postoperative Morbidities After Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy.

Authors:  Naoya Yoshida; Yoshifumi Baba; Hironobu Shigaki; Shinya Shiraishi; Kazuto Harada; Masayuki Watanabe; Masaaki Iwatsuki; Junji Kurashige; Yasuo Sakamoto; Yuji Miyamoto; Takatsugu Ishimoto; Keisuke Kosumi; Ryuma Tokunaga; Yasuyuki Yamashita; Hideo Baba
Journal:  Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015-12-18

5.  Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Carcinoma of the Esophagus April 2012 edited by the Japan Esophageal Society.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Kuwano; Yasumasa Nishimura; Tsuneo Oyama; Hiroyuki Kato; Yuko Kitagawa; Motoyasu Kusano; Hideo Shimada; Hiroya Takiuchi; Yasushi Toh; Yuichiro Doki; Yoshio Naomoto; Hisahiro Matsubara; Tatsuya Miyazaki; Manabu Muto; Akio Yanagisawa
Journal:  Esophagus       Date:  2014-11-11       Impact factor: 4.230

Review 6.  Minimally invasive esophagectomy performed with the patient in a prone position: a systematic review.

Authors:  Kazuo Koyanagi; Soji Ozawa; Yuji Tachimori
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 2.549

7.  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 8.  Oesophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Arjun Pennathur; Michael K Gibson; Blair A Jobe; James D Luketich
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2013-02-02       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a Japanese nationwide web-based database.

Authors:  Hiroya Takeuchi; Hiroaki Miyata; Mitsukazu Gotoh; Yuko Kitagawa; Hideo Baba; Wataru Kimura; Naohiro Tomita; Tohru Nakagoe; Mitsuo Shimada; Kenichi Sugihara; Masaki Mori
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 12.969

10.  Extended Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: Japan Clinical Oncology Group postoperative complications criteria.

Authors:  Hiroshi Katayama; Yukinori Kurokawa; Kenichi Nakamura; Hiroyuki Ito; Yukihide Kanemitsu; Norikazu Masuda; Yasuhiro Tsubosa; Toyomi Satoh; Akira Yokomizo; Haruhiko Fukuda; Mitsuru Sasako
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 2.549

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.