Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Esophageal Position Affects Short-Term Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study

  • Original Scientific Report
  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Anatomical esophageal position may affect the short-term outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). A previous single-institutional retrospective study suggested that the presence of a left-sided esophagus (LSE) made MIE more difficult and increased the incidence of postoperative complications.

Methods

The current study was a multicenter retrospective study of 303 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent MIE at six esophageal cancer high-volume centers in Kyushu, Japan, between April 2011 and August 2016. The patients were divided into the LSE (66 patients) and non-LSE groups (237 patients) based on the esophageal position on computed tomography images obtained with the patients in the supine position.

Results

Univariate analysis showed that patients with LSE were significantly older than those with non-LSE (69 ± 8 vs. 65 ± 9 years; P = 0.002), had a significantly greater incidence of cardiovascular comorbidity (65.2% vs. 47.7%; P = 0.013), and a significantly longer operating time (612 ± 112 vs. 579 ± 102 min; P = 0.025). Logistic regression analysis verified that LSE was an independent risk factor for the incidence of pneumonia (odds ratio 3.3, 95% confidence interval 1.254–8.695; P = 0.016).

Conclusions

The presence of a LSE can increase the procedural difficulty of MIE and the incidence of morbidity after MIE. Thus, careful attention must be paid to anatomical esophageal position before performing MIE.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Takeuchi H, Miyata H, Gotoh M et al (2014) A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a Japanese nationwide web-based database. Ann Surg 260:259–266

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW et al (2012) Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet (Lond Engl) 379:1887–1892

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yoshida N, Yamamoto H, Baba H et al (2019) Can minimally invasive esophagectomy replace open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer? Latest analysis of 24,233 esophagectomies from the Japanese National Clinical Database. Ann Surg. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Baba Y, Yoshida N, Shigaki H et al (2016) Prognostic impact of postoperative complications in 502 patients with surgically resected esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a retrospective single-institution study. Ann Surg 264:305–311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Molena D, Mungo B, Stem M et al (2014) Incidence and risk factors for respiratory complications in patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignancy: a NSQIP analysis. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 26:287–294

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yoshida N, Watanabe M, Baba Y et al (2014) Risk factors for pulmonary complications after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Today 44:526–532

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Shiozaki A, Fujiwara H, Okamura H et al (2012) Risk factors for postoperative respiratory complications following esophageal cancer resection. Oncol Lett 3:907–912

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Paul DJ, Jamieson GG, Watson DI et al (2011) Perioperative risk analysis for acute respiratory distress syndrome after elective oesophagectomy. ANZ J Surg 81:700–706

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Ferguson MK, Celauro AD, Prachand V (2011) Prediction of major pulmonary complications after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 91:1494–1500 (discussion 1491–1500)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Uchihara T, Yoshida N, Baba Y et al (2017) Risk factors for pulmonary morbidities after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 32:2852–2858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yoshida N, Baba Y, Shigaki H et al (2016) Effect of esophagus position on surgical difficulty and postoperative morbidities after thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 28:172–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Edge SB, Compton CC (2010) The American Joint Committee on Cancer: the 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual and the future of TNM. Ann Surg Oncol 17:1471–1474

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kuwano H, Nishimura Y, Oyama T et al (2015) Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of carcinoma of the esophagus April 2012 edited by the Japan Esophageal Society. Esophagus Off J Jpn Esophageal Soc 12:1–30

    Google Scholar 

  14. Raymond DP, Seder CW, Wright CD et al (2016) Predictors of major morbidity or mortality after resection for esophageal cancer: a society of thoracic surgeons general thoracic surgery database risk adjustment model. Ann Thorac Surg 102:207–214

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Okamura A, Watanabe M, Mine S et al (2016) Factors influencing difficulty of the thoracic procedure in minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 30:4279–4285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zingg U, Smithers BM, Gotley DC et al (2011) Factors associated with postoperative pulmonary morbidity after esophagectomy for cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 18:1460–1468

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Dhungel B, Diggs BS, Hunter JG et al (2010) Patient and peri-operative predictors of morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP), 2005-2008. J Gastrointest Surg Off J Soc Surg Aliment Tract 14:1492–1501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nakamura M, Iwahashi M, Nakamori M et al (2008) An analysis of the factors contributing to a reduction in the incidence of pulmonary complications following an esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 393:127–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Yoshida N, Baba Y, Hiyoshi Y et al (2016) Duration of smoking cessation and postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: how long should patients stop smoking before surgery? World J Surg 40:142–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Yoshida N, Nakamura K, Kuroda D et al (2018) Preoperative smoking cessation is integral to the prevention of postoperative morbidities in minimally invasive esophagectomy. World J Surg 42:2902–2909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yamana I, Takeno S, Hashimoto T et al (2015) Randomized controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of a preoperative respiratory rehabilitation program to prevent postoperative pulmonary complications after esophagectomy. Dig Surg 32:331–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Inoue J, Ono R, Makiura D et al (2013) Prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications through intensive preoperative respiratory rehabilitation in patients with esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus Off J Int Soc Dis Esophagus 26:68–74

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Low DE (2015) Enhanced recovery pathways lead to an improvement in postoperative outcomes following esophagectomy: systematic review and pooled analysis. Dis Esophagus Off J Int Soc Dis Esophagus 28:468–475

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Yoshida N, Baba Y, Shigaki H et al (2016) Preoperative nutritional assessment by controlling nutritional status (CONUT) is useful to estimate postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. World J Surg 40:1910–1917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Filip B, Scarpa M, Cavallin F et al (2015) Postoperative outcome after oesophagectomy for cancer: nutritional status is the missing ring in the current prognostic scores. Eur J Surg Oncol J Eur Soc Surg Oncol Br Assoc Surg Oncol 41:787–794

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Akutsu Y, Matsubara H, Shuto K et al (2010) Pre-operative dental brushing can reduce the risk of postoperative pneumonia in esophageal cancer patients. Surgery 147:497–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Iwahashi M, Nakamori M, Nakamura M et al (2014) Clinical benefits of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Surg Today 44:1708–1715

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Markar SR, Wiggins T, Antonowicz S et al (2015) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: lateral decubitus vs. prone positioning; systematic review and pooled analysis. Surg Oncol 24:212–219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yoshimura S, Mori K, Yamagata Y et al (2018) Quality of life after robot-assisted transmediastinal radical surgery for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 32:2249–2254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Kelly Zammit, BVSc, and Cathel Kerr, PhD, from Edanz Group (www.edanzediting.com/ac) for editing a draft of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hideo Baba.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 22 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Uchihara, T., Yoshida, N., Baba, Y. et al. Esophageal Position Affects Short-Term Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Multicenter Study. World J Surg 44, 831–837 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05273-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05273-8

Navigation