Thoracoscopic and Laparoscopic Esophagectomy with Cervical Manual Anastomosis for Esophageal Cancer

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florin Zaharie ◽  
Mocan Lucian ◽  
Tomuş Claudiu ◽  
Roxana Zaharie ◽  
Dana Bartos ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 31113.1-31113.6
Author(s):  
Touraj Asvadi Kermani ◽  
◽  
Seyed Ziaeddin Rasihashemi ◽  
Hoseinpour Feyzi ◽  
Moein Hoseinpour Feyzi ◽  
...  

Background: Esophagectomy is performed in all patients with resectable esophageal cancer. Transthoracic-Laparoscopic Esophagectomy (TLE) is a minimally invasive method and considered to be the most appropriate method. In this study, we aim to evaluate and compare the perioperative outcome, and 1-year overall survival of TLE and Transhiatal Esophagectomy (THE) approaches. Methods: In this retrospective study, we reviewed the medical records of 108 patients with esophageal cancer undergoing TLE (n=44) or THE (n=64) between 2015 and 2018. The patients were followed for one year. The intraoperative and postoperative findings, as well as 1-year overall-survival, were compared between the two groups. Results: TLE compared to THE had a longer surgery duration (278.63±33.28 vs 223.28±33.99 min, P=0.001), a higher number of dissected lymph nodes (15.06±2.95 vs 10.21±2.58, P=0.001), less blood loss (345.45±178.76 vs 585.15±294.75 mL, P<0.001), and need for transfusion (20.5% vs 45.3%, P=0.006) during surgery as well as lower ICU stay (2.59±0.77 vs 3.90±0.83 days, P<0.001) and ward stay (8.77±0.96 vs 11.42±1.71 days, P<0.001). THE had somewhat higher complication than TLE, but with no significant differences. Conclusion: TLE had a similar rate of complication to THE approach, but with lower blood loss and lower ICU and hospital stay, it is a more appropriate method for esophagectomy.


2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter Christiaan Van Der Sluis ◽  
Sylvia van der Horst ◽  
Anne Maria May ◽  
Carlo Schippers ◽  
Lodewijk Brosens ◽  
...  

6 Background: The standard curative treatment for patients with esophageal cancer is perioperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by open transthoracic esophagectomy (OTE). Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy (RAMIE) may reduce perioperative complications and improve functional recovery. Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, 112 patients with resectable intrathoracic esophageal cancer were randomly assigned to RAMIE or OTE. The composite primary endpoint was the occurrence of overall postoperative complications (modified Clavien–Dindo classification (MCDC) grade 2-5). Results: Postoperative complications occurred less frequently after RAMIE (59%) compared to OTE (80%) (RR 0.74 (0.57-0.96; P = 0.02). RAMIE resulted in a less median blood loss (400ml versus 568ml, P < 0.001), a lower percentage of surgery-related complications (RR 0.74 (0.57-0.96; P = 0.02), pulmonary complications (RR 0.54 (0.34-0.85; P = 0.005) and cardiac complications (RR 0.47 (0.27-0.83; P = 0.006)) and lower mean postoperative pain (visual analogue scale, 1.86 versus 2.62; p < 0.000) compared to OTE. Functional recovery at postoperative day 14 was better in the RAMIE group (RR 1.48 (1.03–2.13; P = 0.038)) with better quality of life score at discharge (mean difference quality of life score 13.4 (2.0-24.7, p = 0.02) and 6 weeks post-discharge (mean difference 11.1 quality of life score (1.0-21.1; p = 0.03)). Mean costs for RAMIE were €34.892 and mean costs for OTE were €39.463 (p = 0.07). Oncological outcomes at short term (radicality, number of lymph nodes) and long term (overall and disease-free survival) were equal at a medium follow up of 38 months. Conclusions: RAMIE resulted in a lower percentage of overall, surgery-related and (cardio)pulmonary complications with lower postoperative pain, better quality of life and a better short term postoperative functional recovery compared to OTE. Oncological outcomes were equal. This randomized controlled trial provides evidence for the use of RAMIE to improve postoperative outcome in patients with resectable esophageal cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT01544790.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-72
Author(s):  
Ho Huu Thien ◽  
Tran Nghiem Trung ◽  
Pham Trung Vy ◽  
Phan Hai Thanh ◽  
Nguyen Thanh Xuan ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (S8) ◽  
pp. S834-S842 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvia van der Horst ◽  
Teun Johannes Weijs ◽  
Jelle Pieter Ruurda ◽  
Nadia Haj Mohammad ◽  
Stella Mook ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (S3) ◽  
pp. 1350-1356 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. C. van der Sluis ◽  
J. P. Ruurda ◽  
R. J. J. Verhage ◽  
S. van der Horst ◽  
L. Haverkamp ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 114-114
Author(s):  
Hua Tang ◽  
Kenan Huang ◽  
Xinyu Ding ◽  
Bin Wu ◽  
Zhifei Xu

Abstract Background Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been an alternative treatment for esophageal cancer. The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety and feasibility of single-port CO2-inflatabled mediastinoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Methods Retrospective analysis of clinical data was performed on 12 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent a single-port CO2-inflatabled mediastinoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy by one surgical team in Shanghai Changzheng hospital. Recorded outcome measures included operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, and perioperative complications. Results No perioperative mortality, pulmonary infection, arrhythmia, recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) palsy and thoracic duct injury was observed in all patients. The operative time, intraoperative blood loss and pressure of CO2 was (219 ± 9.3)min, (26.3 ± 2.7)ml and (50.5 ± 4.6)mmHg. The mean number of dissected thoracic lymph nodes was 19 ± 1.5. One patient was converted to open surgery because of massive bleeding intraoperation. Two patients occurred postoperative anastomotic leakage. Conclusion A single-port CO2-inflatabled mediastinoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy provides safe and feasible approach to minimally invasive esophagectomy for patients with early esophageal cancer. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.


2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shao-hui Zhou ◽  
Yong-bin Song ◽  
Li-jun Liu ◽  
Hong-shang Cui

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document