| Literature DB >> 35118262 |
Liang Zheng1, Xiaobin Zhang1, Lei Zhang1, Qianyun Wang1, Zhonglin Wang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies in larger populations and long-term outcomes of Mediastinoscopic esophagectomy (ME) were needed. The aim of this study was to report the long-term survival and surgical process for reducing the postoperative complications after ME.Entities:
Keywords: Long-term; esophageal cancer; mediastinoscopic esophagectomy (ME)
Year: 2019 PMID: 35118262 PMCID: PMC8794451 DOI: 10.21037/med.2019.08.01
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mediastinum ISSN: 2522-6711
Patient features and postoperative complications
| Variables | Total population (n=269) | ME (before Nov. 2014) (n=193) | ME (after Nov. 2014) (n=76) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | 0.742 | |||
| Male | 180 | 128 | 52 | |
| Female | 89 | 65 | 24 | |
| Age (years, mean ± SEM) | 63.5±8.04 | 62.7±7.82 | 65.4±8.32 | 0.351 |
| Macroscopic tumor type | 0.078 | |||
| Superficial | 147 | 99 | 48 | |
| Protruding | 46 | 41 | 5 | |
| Ulcerative | 76 | 53 | 23 | |
| Histological type | 0.976 | |||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 263 | 188 | 76 | |
| Others | 6 | 5 | 0 | |
| Tumor size (mm, mean ± SEM) | 22±10 | 22±10 | 22±11 | 0.500 |
| Depth of tumor invasion | <0.05 | |||
| T1 | 193 | 147 | 46 | |
| T2 | 57 | 41 | 16 | |
| T3 | 19 | 5 | 14 | |
| Dissected lymph node stations (mean ± SEM) | 3.18±1.60 | 3.11±1.68 | 3.26±1.40 | 0.182 |
| Dissected lymph nodes (mean ± SEM) | 10±7 | 10±7 | 12±6 | <0.01 |
| Positive rate of LRLN lymph nodes | 28/339 (8.3%) | 18/270 (6.7%) | 10/69 (14.5%) | <0.05 |
| Dissected efficiency of LRLN lymph nodes | 128/269 (47.6%) | 96/193 (49.7%) | 32/76 (42.1%) | 0.129 |
| Nodal metastasis | 0.527 | |||
| N0 | 223 | 162 | 61 | |
| N1 | 34 | 23 | 11 | |
| N2 | 10 | 6 | 4 | |
| N3 | 2 | 2 | 0 | |
| TNM stage | <0.05 | |||
| I | 212 | 159 | 53 | |
| II | 29 | 19 | 10 | |
| III | 26 | 13 | 13 | |
| IV | 2 | 2 | 0 | |
| Complications | 64 (23.8%) | 55 (28.5%) | 9 (11.8%) | <0.05 |
| Anastomotic fistula | 33 (12.3%) | 29 (15%) | 4 (5.3%) | <0.05 |
| Vocal cord paralysis | 22 (8.2%) | 19 (9.8%) | 3 (3.9%) | <0.05 |
| Atelectasis | 1 (0.4%) | 1 (0.5%) | 0 | 0.265 |
| Atrial fibrillation | 3 (1.1%) | 2 (1%) | 1 (1.3%) | 0.578 |
| Pneumonia | 5 (1.9%) | 4 (2.1%) | 1 (1.3%) | 0.340 |
ME, mediastinoscopic esophagectomy; LRLN, left recurrent laryngeal nerve.
Figure 1The photos of a side-to-side stapled technique and the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (LRLN) under direct vision. (A) The side-to-side esophagogastric anastomosis with Endo-GIA stapler; (B) the posterior wall of anastomosis; (C) interrupted suture (white arrowhead) for reinforcing the posterior wall of anastomosis; (D) the anterior wall of anastomosis by hand suture; (E) the lymph nodes along the LRLN; (F) the isolated LRLN exposed in mediastinoscope.
Figure 2Cumulative survival of patients treated with mediastinoscopic esophagectomy (ME) in total population, ME before Nov. 2014 and ME after Nov. 2014. There is no difference between three groups, P=0.64 (Log-rank test).
Figure 3Cumulative survival among patients undergoing mediastinoscopic esophagectomy (ME) in T1, T2 and T3 stage. The difference is significantly in Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test and Log-rank test for trend, P<0.01.
Figure 4Cumulative survival among patients undergoing mediastinoscopic esophagectomy (ME) in N0, N1 and N2+3 stage. The difference is significantly in Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test and Log-rank test for trend, P<0.01.