Effectiveness of combined thoracoscopic–laparoscopic esophagectomy: comparison of postoperative complications and midterm oncological outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer
- 566 Downloads
During esophagectomy, laparoscopy can be used together with thoracoscopy, but it is not known whether a combined thoracoscopic–laparoscopic procedure is associated with fewer postoperative complications than open esophagectomy, and without compromising oncological outcome.
This was a longitudinal cohort study that included 185 esophageal cancer patients, including 72 who underwent combined thoracoscopic–laparoscopic esophagectomy (TLE), 34 who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE), and 79 who underwent open esophagectomy (OE) between January 2002 and May 2010. The main outcome measures were postoperative respiratory and overall complications. The secondary outcome was 2-year relapse-free survival (RFS).
Respiratory complications occurred in 9 patients who underwent TLE, 13 who underwent TE, and 31 who underwent OE. TLE was associated with fewer respiratory complications (TLE vs. OE: odds ratio [OR], 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09–0.53 and TE vs. OE: OR, 0.71; 95% CI 0.29–1.76). Overall complications occurred in 34 patients who underwent TLE, 20 who underwent TE, and 54 who underwent OE. TLE was associated with fewer overall complications (TLE vs. OE: OR, 0.47; 95% CI 0.23–0.94 and TE vs. OE: OR, 0.51; 95% CI 0.21–1.25). The 2-year RFS rates were similar among the three groups: 71.6% for TLE, 57.7% for TE, and 58.3% for OE (TLE vs. OE: hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI 0.35–1.20 and TE vs. OE: hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI 0.45–1.82).
Unlike TE, TLE was associated with fewer postoperative complications than was OE, with no compromise of 2-year RFS. A randomized controlled trial with longer follow-up is needed.
KeywordsEsophagectomy Thoracoscopy Minimally invasive surgery Esophageal cancer Laparoscopy
American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status classification
Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events
Forced expiratory volume in 1 s as a percentage of the forced vital capacity
Minimally invasive esophagectomy
Tumor Node Metastasis classification
Yousuke Kinjo, Noriaki Kurita, Fumiaki Nakamura, Hiroshi Okabe, Eiji Tanaka, Yoshiki Kataoka, Atsushi Itami, Yoshiharu Sakai, and Shunichi Fukuhara have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 10.Noshiro H, Iwasaki H, Kobayashi K, Uchiyama A, Miyasaka Y, Masatsugu T, Koike K, Miyazaki K (2010) Lymphadenectomy along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve by a minimally invasive esophagectomy in the prone position for thoracic esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 24:2965–2973PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Swanson SJ, Batirel HF, Bueno R, Jaklitsch MT, Lukanich JM, Allred E, Mentzer SJ, Sugarbaker DJ (2001) Transthoracic esophagectomy with radical mediastinal and abdominal lymph node dissection and cervical esophagogastrostomy for esophageal carcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg 72:1918–1924 discussion 1924-1915PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Sato N, Koeda K, Ikeda K, Kimura Y, Aoki K, Iwaya T, Akiyama Y, Ishida K, Saito K, Endo S (2002) Randomized study of the benefits of preoperative corticosteroid administration on the postoperative morbidity and cytokine response in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg 236:184–190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Sobin LH, Wittekind C (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumours (UICC), 6th edn. Wiley-Liss, New YorkGoogle Scholar