Koshiro Ishiyama1, Junya Oguma1, Kentaro Kubo1, Kyohei Kanematsu1, Daisuke Kurita1, Hiroyuki Daiko2. 1. Division of Esophageal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-Ku, 104-0045, Japan. 2. Division of Esophageal Surgery, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-Ku, 104-0045, Japan. hdaiko@ncc.go.jp.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the advantage of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) over open esophagectomy (OE) in planned esophagectomy is being established, the utility of salvage MIE (S-MIE) remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the feasibility and advantage of S-MIE compared with salvage OE (S-OE). METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 82 patients who underwent salvage esophagectomy after definitive chemoradiotherapy for thoracic esophageal cancer between January 2007 and April 2020. Perioperative factors and postoperative complications were compared between the S-OE group (n = 62) and the S-MIE group (n = 20). Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the factors associated with postoperative complications. RESULTS: Regarding the patients' preoperative characteristics, the S-OE group had a significant number of grade ≥ cT3 patients vs the S-MIE group (69% vs 35%, respectively; p = 0.006), whereas ycT rates were comparable. Compared with S-OE, S-MIE had comparable operative time, number of harvested thoracic lymph nodes, and R0 resection, but significantly less estimated blood loss (150 ml and 395 ml, respectively; p = 0.003). Regarding postoperative complications, total complications (79% vs 50%; p = 0.01) and pneumonia (48.3% vs 20%; p = 0.02) rates were significantly lower with S-OE vs S-MIE, respectively. On multivariate analysis, S-MIE was an independent factor associated with postoperative pneumonia (odds ratio: 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.06-0.99; p = 0.04) and total complications (odds ratio: 0.26, 95% confidence interval: 0.07-0.86; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: S-MIE was feasible for salvage esophagectomy, with favorable short-term outcomes vs S-OE regarding postoperative pneumonia and total complications.
BACKGROUND: Although the advantage of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) over open esophagectomy (OE) in planned esophagectomy is being established, the utility of salvage MIE (S-MIE) remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the feasibility and advantage of S-MIE compared with salvage OE (S-OE). METHODS: We retrospectively assessed 82 patients who underwent salvage esophagectomy after definitive chemoradiotherapy for thoracic esophageal cancer between January 2007 and April 2020. Perioperative factors and postoperative complications were compared between the S-OE group (n = 62) and the S-MIE group (n = 20). Logistic regression analysis was performed to analyze the factors associated with postoperative complications. RESULTS: Regarding the patients' preoperative characteristics, the S-OE group had a significant number of grade ≥ cT3 patients vs the S-MIE group (69% vs 35%, respectively; p = 0.006), whereas ycT rates were comparable. Compared with S-OE, S-MIE had comparable operative time, number of harvested thoracic lymph nodes, and R0 resection, but significantly less estimated blood loss (150 ml and 395 ml, respectively; p = 0.003). Regarding postoperative complications, total complications (79% vs 50%; p = 0.01) and pneumonia (48.3% vs 20%; p = 0.02) rates were significantly lower with S-OE vs S-MIE, respectively. On multivariate analysis, S-MIE was an independent factor associated with postoperative pneumonia (odds ratio: 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.06-0.99; p = 0.04) and total complications (odds ratio: 0.26, 95% confidence interval: 0.07-0.86; p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: S-MIE was feasible for salvage esophagectomy, with favorable short-term outcomes vs S-OE regarding postoperative pneumonia and total complications.
Authors: J S Cooper; M D Guo; A Herskovic; J S Macdonald; J A Martenson; M Al-Sarraf; R Byhardt; A H Russell; J J Beitler; S Spencer; S O Asbell; M V Graham; L L Leichman Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-05-05 Impact factor: 56.272