| Literature DB >> 31860783 |
Shuangping Zhang1,2, Peng Zhang1, Shiping Guo2, Jianhong Lian2, Yun Chen3, Ailan Chen3, Yong Ma2, Feng Li2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare three kinds of lymphadenectomy methods along the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) and assess the safety and effectiveness of the new method.Entities:
Keywords: Esophageal cancer; lymphadenectomy; minimally invasive esophagectomy; recurrent laryngeal nerve
Year: 2019 PMID: 31860783 PMCID: PMC6997020 DOI: 10.1111/1759-7714.13210
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Thorac Cancer ISSN: 1759-7706 Impact factor: 3.500
Figure 1Illustration of lymphadenectomy along the left RLN. (a) A crochet needle is punctured into the thorax to lift the esophagus with double 0# silk suture which has looped the esophagus at the level of the aortic arch. (b) The tracheoesophageal and primary esophageal arteries are identified in the esophageal mesenteriolum. (c) With good countertraction, the left RLN is clearly exposed and separated in the esophageal mesenteriolum above the level of the aortic arch. (d) The paratracheal lymph node is dissected and the left inferior thyroid artery is occasionally visible. (e) When the infra‐aortic arch lymph nodes have been dissected, the initial segment of the left RLN is confirmed. The trunk of the left pulmonary artery under the aortic arch is visible. (f) Following removal of the left RLN lymph nodes, the left RLN is easily clarified as running toward the oral side along the space between the lifted esophagus and trachea. A couple of superior cardiac branches of the sympathetic nerve system were identified. The thoracic duct is preserved.
Clinical pathological characteristics of the 194 patients with esophageal cancer
| A group | B group | C group |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 75 | 80 | 39 | |
| Age (years) | 60.67 ± 8.17 | 61.51 ± 6.88 | 58.90 ± 7.87 | 0.934 |
| Gender (male/female) | 52/23 | 53/27 | 23/16 | 0.540 |
| Location of the main tumor (upper/middle/lower) | 3/54/18 | 4/59/17 | 4/29/6 | 0.312 |
| Differentiation (G1/G2/G3) | 13/38/24 | 13/44/23 | 4/24/11 | 0.804 |
| T category | 0.911 | |||
| T1 | 17 | 14 | 9 | |
| T2 | 18 | 25 | 11 | |
| T3 | 34 | 34 | 15 | |
| T4 | 6 | 7 | 4 | |
| N status | 0.290 | |||
| N0 | 44 | 40 | 20 | |
| N1 | 14 | 24 | 11 | |
| N2 | 9 | 8 | 5 | |
| N3 | 8 | 8 | 3 | |
| Lymphatic and venous invasion | 0.737 | |||
| No | 61 | 61 | 31 | |
| Yes | 14 | 19 | 8 | |
| Nerve invasion | 0.397 | |||
| No | 73 | 74 | 37 | |
| Yes | 2 | 6 | 2 | |
| Tumor size (cm) | 3.41 ± 1.45 | 3.75 ± 1.56 | 3.55 ± 1.38 | 0.884 |
| <3 | 21 | 20 | 10 | |
| 3–5 | 48 | 53 | 25 | |
| >5 | 6 | 7 | 4 |
Surgical outcomes of the patients using three different methods
| A group | B group | C group |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Operation time (minutes) | ||||
| Chest | 75.8 ± 30.11 | 90.5 ± 18.7 | 85.9 ± 19.2 | 0.001 |
| Estimated blood loss in the chest | 53.7 ± 18.5 | 60.7 ± 25.4 | 60.9 ± 19.8 | 0.180 |
| Number of dissected lymph nodes | ||||
| Total | 16.91 ± 6.47 | 24.01 ± 7.15 | 24.10 ± 10.01 | 0.001 |
| Chest | 9.09 ± 3.93 | 14.02 ± 5.37 | 14.49 ± 5.39 | 0.001 |
| Along the left RLN | 1.59 ± 0.84 | 4.02 ± 1.96 | 4.31 ± 2.14 | 0.001 |
| Positive number of lymph nodes | ||||
| Total | 1.71 ± 3.04 | 2.08 ± 3.85 | 1.95 ± 3.92 | 0.812 |
| Chest | 0.95 ± 2.11 | 1.32 ± 2.68 | 1.31 ± 2.60 | 0.590 |
| Along the left RLN | 0.13 ± 0.38 | 0.32 ± 0.74 | 0.46 ± 0.91 | 0.035 |
| Mortality | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| Postoperative morbidity related to the left RLN | ||||
| Hoarseness | 10 | 17 | 6 | 0.265 |
| Pneumonia | 6 | 8 | 3 | 0.912 |
| Anastomotic leakage | 11 | 16 | 5 | 0.523 |
| Chylothorax | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.460 |
Lymph node metastasis status in the three groups
| Lymph node metastasis rate | Degree of lymph node metastasis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Total | LRLN | Total | LRLN |
| A | 41.3% (31/75) | 12% (9/75) | 10.1% (128/1268) | 8.4% (10/119) |
| B | 50% (40/80) | 20% (16/80) | 8.6% (166/1921) | 8.1% (26/322) |
| C | 48.7% (19/39) | 28% (11/39) | 8.1% (76/940) | 10.7% (18/168) |