Reply to: a letter to the editors: Re: minimally invasive oesophagectomy: current status and future direction
Letter to the Editor--Reply
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:
- 383 Downloads
Keywords
Public Health Abdominal Surgery Time Trial Surgical Endoscopy Transthoracic Approach
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
We thank Maas et al. for their letter regarding our review article [1] of minimally invasive oesophagectomy for cancer published in Surgical Endoscopy. We also thank them for agreeing with the content of our paper, which is very encouraging.
The omission of Scheepers et al.’s paper [2] is regrettable, the inclusion of which would have been useful for readers.
We are looking forward to the results of the TIME trial [3], which will provide useful information regarding the differences when performing oesophagectomy via open transthoracic versus minimally invasive transthoracic approach. I think this trial is long overdue.
Notes
Disclosures
Dr M. A. Memon, Dr N. Butler, Dr S. Collins and Mrs B. Memon have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
References
- 1.Butler N, Collins S, Memon B, Memon MA (2011) Current status of minimal access surgery for oesophagus. Surg Endosc 35(4):473–487Google Scholar
- 2.Scheepers JJG, Veenhof AAFA, van der Peet DL, van Groeningen C, Mulder C, Meijer S, Cuesta MA (2008) Laparoscopic transhiatal resection for malignancies of the distal oesophagus. Outcome of the first 50 resected patients. Surgery 143(2):278–285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Biere SS, Mass KW, Bonavina L, Garcia JR, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Rosman C, de Lange ES, Bonjer HJ, Cuesta MA, van der Peet DL (2011) Traditional invasive vs minimally invasive oesophagectomy: a multicentre, randomized trial (TIME-trial). BMC Surg 11(1):2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012