Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization for esophageal cancer with the patient in prone position

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Surgical resection is the mainstay treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is performed with increasing frequency and proves to be a safe and effective surgical alternative to the open technique. Minimally invasive esophagectomy using thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization with the patient in prone position seems to offer some advantages with regard to surgeon ergonomics and clinical outcome.

Methods

Between July 2005 and September 2010, 46 patients (35 men and 11 women) underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy in the prone position at the authors’ institution. Three patients had previously undergone a thoracic intervention (one patient had previously undergone left pneumonectomy because of lung cancer). The preoperative indication was squamous cell carcinoma for 35 patients and adenocarcinoma for 11 patients. In one case, the histology of the biopsy samples showed a squamous cell carcinoma with neuroendocrine differentiation. Neoadjuvant treatment was administered to 15 patients.

Results

All 46 patients underwent esophagectomy using minimally invasive thoracic mobilization of the esophagus with the patient in prone position. The abdominal stage of intervention was performed by laparoscopy for 37 patients and by laparotomy for 9 patients. No thoracotomic conversion was performed. In all cases, a cervical end-to-side anastomosis was performed using a circular stapler. The mean operative time was 263 min. The median intensive care unit stay was 2 days, and the median postoperative hospital stay was 15 days. The mean number of procured lymph nodes was 13. The perioperative morbidity rate was 37%, and the perioperative mortality rate was 4.4%.

Conclusions

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is safe and technically feasible. It entails a lower mortality rate and a shorter hospital stay than those reported in most open series. Thoracoscopy with the patient in prone position offers results comparable with those obtained using other minimally invasive techniques regarding the number of procured lymph nodes. This technique shows considerable advantages such as improved surgeon ergonomics, increased operative field exposure, and satisfactory respiratory results.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Smithers BM, Gotley DC, Martin I, Thomas JM (2007) Comparison of the outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Surg 245:232–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kelsen DP, Ginsberg R, Pajak TF, Sheahan DG, Gunderson L, Mortimer J, Estes N, Haller DG, Ajani J, Kocha W, Minsky BD, Roth JA (1998) Chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone for localized esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 339:1979–1984

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, Christie NA, McCaughan JS, Litle VR, Schauer PR, Close JM, Fernando HC (2003) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg 238:486–494

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Palanivelu C, Prakash A, Senthikumar R, Senthilnathan P, Parthasarathi R, Rajan PS, Venkatachlam S (2006) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus and mediastinal lymphadenectomy in prone position: experience of 130 patients. J Am Coll Surg 203:7–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Cuschieri A (1994) Thoracoscopic subtotal oesophagectomy. Endosc Surg Allied Technol 2:21–25

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Dexter SP, Martin IG, McMahon MJ (1996) Radical thoracoscopic esophagectomy for cancer. Surg Endosc 10:147–151

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Smithers BM, Gotley DC, McEwan D, Martin I, Bessell J, Doyle L (2001) Thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus: a 6-year experience. Surg Endosc 15:176–182

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Cadière GB, Torres R, Dapri G, Capelluto E, Hainaux B, Himpens J (2006) Thoracoscopic and laparoscopic oesophagectomy improves the quality of extended lymphadenectomy. Surg Endosc 20:1308–1309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dapri G, Himpens J, Cadière GB (2008) Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer: Laparoscopic transhiatal procedure or thoracoscopy in prone position followed by laparoscopy? Surg Endosc 22:1060–1069

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Fabian T, McKelvey AA, Kent MS, Federico JA (2007) Prone thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization for minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 21:1667–1670

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Verhage RJ, Hazebroek EJ, Boone J, Van Hillegersberg R (2009) Minimally invasive surgery compared to open procedures in esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Minerva Chir 64:135–146

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Fabian T, Martin J, Katigbak M (2008) Thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization during minimally invasive esophagectomy: a head-to-head comparison of prone versus decubitus positions. Surg Endosc 22:2485–2491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. DePaula AL, Hashiba K, Ferreira EA, dePaula RA, Grecco E (1995) Laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy with esophagogastroplasty. Surg Laparosc Endosc 5:1–5

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nguyen NT, Roberts P, Follette DM, Rivers R, Wolfe BM (2003) Thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for benign and malignant disease: lessons learned from 46 consecutive procedures. J Am Coll Surg 197:902–913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fukuda H, Ogino N, Takao T, Kobayashi S, Kido T (1990) A case report of synchronous double cancer of the lung and esophagus. Nippon Kyobu Geka Gakkai Zasshi 38:1053–1058

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Morimoto M, Ohno T, Yamashita Y, Honda M, Asada S (1991) Two surgical cases of synchronous double carcinoma of the lung and esophagus and review of 10 documented cases in Japan. Nippon Kyobu Geka Gakkai Zasshi 39:245–250

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Fekete F, Sauvanet A, Kaisserian G, Jauffret B, Zouari K, Berthoux L, Flejou JF (1994) Associated primary esophageal and lung carcinoma: a study of 39 patients. Ann Thorac Surg 58:837–842

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Reardon MJ, Estrera AL, Conklin LD, Reardon PR, Brunicardi FC, Beall AC (2000) Esophagectomy after pneumonectomy: a surgical challenge. Ann Thorac Surg 69:286–288

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Altorki N, Kent M, Ferrara C, Port J (2002) Three-field lymph node dissection for squamous cell and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Ann Surg 236:177–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lerut T, Nafteux P, Moons J, Coosemans W, Decker G, De Leyn P, Van Raemdonck D, Ectors N (2004) Three-field lymphadenectomy for carcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction in 174 R0 resections: impact on staging, disease-free survival, and outcome: a plea for adaptation of TNM classification in upper-half esophageal carcinoma. Ann Surg 240:962–972; Discussion 972–974

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Roberto Petri, Marco Zuccolo, Marco Brizzolari, Luca Rossit, Alessandro Rosignoli, Vittorio Durastante, Gianfranco Petrin, Lucio De Cecchis and Mario Sorrentino have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria of Udine “Santa Maria della Misericordia”, Piazzale Santa Maria della Misericordia, 15, 33100, Udine, Italy

    Roberto Petri, Marco Zuccolo, Marco Brizzolari, Luca Rossit, Alessandro Rosignoli, Vittorio Durastante, Gianfranco Petrin, Lucio De Cecchis & Mario Sorrentino

Authors
  1. Roberto Petri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Zuccolo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marco Brizzolari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luca Rossit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alessandro Rosignoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Vittorio Durastante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Gianfranco Petrin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Lucio De Cecchis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Mario Sorrentino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roberto Petri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Petri, R., Zuccolo, M., Brizzolari, M. et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization for esophageal cancer with the patient in prone position. Surg Endosc 26, 1102–1107 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2006-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2006-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation