Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Cancer: Prospective Evaluation of Laparoscopic Gastric Mobilization

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

Abstract

Background

Esophagectomy carries high morbidity, mainly respiratory. Minimally invasive surgery has been demonstrated to improve postoperative outcome in digestive surgery, without impairment of oncological results. A prospective study was conducted to evaluate feasibility, postoperative outcome, and mid-term oncological results of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in cancer.

Methods

From July 2001 to August 2005, 25 patients underwent esophagectomy with laparoscopic gastric mobilization (LGM) for epidermoid carcinoma (n = 15) or adenocarcinoma (n = 10). Tumors were located on the cardia (n = 6), on the lower third (n = 14), or on the median third (n = 5) of the esophagus. Following LGM, transthoracic esophagectomy was performed.

Results

Complete LGM was achieved in all patients but 1. Mean operative time for LGM was 191 ± 49 minutes. Fifteen patients (60%) developed complications, mainly respiratory. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 2 patients, with a favorable outcome. Pylorospasm (n = 1) was the only intra-abdominal complication. Median hospital stay was 18 days. Two patients died (8%). Twenty-three patients underwent R0 resection. A mean of 12 ± 4 lymph nodes (range 4–19 nodes) were analyzed. With a mean follow-up of 14 months (1–46 months), actuarial survival at 1 and 2 years was, respectively, 73% and 56%.

Conclusion

Esophagectomy with LGM is feasible with few specific complications. However, no decrease in morbidity and hospital stay could be observed. Mid-term oncological results seem comparable to those of conventional surgery. Further studies are required to evaluate the extent of lymphadenectomy and the oncologic safety of MIE.

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

Figure 1.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Braga M, Vignali A, Gianotti L, et al. Laparoscopic versus open colorectal surgery: a randomized trial on short-term outcome. Ann Surg 2002;236:759–766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy Study Group. A comparison of laparoscopically assisted and open colectomy for colon cancer. N Engl J Med 2004;350:2050–2059

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lacy AM, Garcia-Valdecasas JC, Delgado S, et al. Laparoscopy-assisted colectomy versus open colectomy for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 2002;359:2224–2229

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Huscher CG, Mingoli A, Sgarzini G, et al. Laparoscopic versus open subtotal gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer: five-year results of a randomized prospective trial. Ann Surg 2005;241:232–237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ackroyd R, Watson DI, Majeed AW, et al. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open fundoplication for gastro-esophageal reflux disease. Br J Surg 2004;91:975–982

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Patti MG, Fisichella PM, Perretta S, et al. Impact of minimally invasive surgery on the treatment of esophageal achalasia: a decade of change. J Am Coll Surg 2003;196:698–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Curet MJ. Port site metastases. Am J Surg 2004;187:705–712

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Griffin SM, Shaw IH, Dresner SM. Early complications after Ivor Lewis subtotal esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy: risk factors and management. J Am Coll Surg 2002;194:285–297

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Karl RC, Schreiber R, Boulware D, et al. Factors affecting morbidity, mortality, and survival in patients undergoing Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy. Ann Surg 2000;231:635–643

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bailey SH, Bull DA, Harpole DH, et al. Outcomes after esophagectomy: a ten-year prospective cohort. Ann Thorac Surg 2003;75:217–222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Earlam R, Cunha-Melo JR. Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. I. A critical review of surgery. Br J Surg 1980;67:381–390

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Hulscher JB, van Sandick JW, de Boer AG, et al. Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1662–1669

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hulscher JB, Tijssen JG, Obertop H, et al. Transthoracic versus transhiatal resection for carcinoma of the esophagus: a meta-analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72:306–313

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Gossot D, Fritsch S, Halimi B, et al. Can a reduction of morbidity of esophagectomy be expected with the thoracoscopic approach? Gastroenterol Clin Biol 1995;19:176–181

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gossot D, Fourquier P, Celerier M. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy: technique and initial results. Ann Thorac Surg 1993;56:667–670

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg 2003;238:486–494

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Luketich JD, Schauer PR, Christie NA, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 2000;70:906–911

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Nguyen NT, Schauer PR, Luketich JD. Combined laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approach to esophagectomy. J Am Coll Surg 1999;188:328–332

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Nguyen NT, Follette DM, Wolfe BM, et al. Comparison of minimally invasive esophagectomy with transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy. Arch Surg 2000;135:920–925

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Osugi H, Takemura M, Higashino M, et al. A comparison of video-assisted thoracoscopic oesophagectomy and radical lymph node dissection for squamous cell cancer of the oesophagus with open operation. Br J Surg 2003;90:108–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Nguyen NT, Roberts P, Follette DM, et al. Thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for benign and malignant disease: lessons learned from 46 consecutive procedures. J Am Coll Surg 2003;197:902–913

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Siewert JR, Feith M, Werner M, et al. Adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction: results of surgical therapy based on anatomical/topographic classification in 1002 consecutive patients. Ann Surg 2000;232:353–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Jagot P, Sauvanet A, Berthoux L, et al. Laparoscopic mobilization of the stomach for esophageal replacement. Br J Surg 1996;83:540–542

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Urschel JD, Blewett CJ, Young JE, et al. Pyloric drainage (pyloroplasty) or no drainage in gastric reconstruction after esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Dig Surg 2002;19:160–164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Orringer MB, Marshall B, Iannettoni MD. Transhiatal esophagectomy: clinical experience and refinements. Ann Surg 1999;230:392–400

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Goldminc M, Maddern G, Le Prise E, et al. Oesophagectomy by a transhiatal approach or thoracotomy: a prospective randomized trial. Br J Surg 1993;80:367–370

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Nilsson G, Larsson S, Johnsson F. Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open fundoplication: blind evaluation of recovery and discharge period. Br J Surg 2000;87:873–878

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Abraham NS, Young JM, Solomon MJ. Meta-analysis of short-term outcomes after laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. Br J Surg 2004;91:1111–1124

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Collard JM. Role of videoassisted surgery in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Ann Chir Gynaecol 1995;84:209–214

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Bosset JF, Gignoux M, Triboulet JP, et al. Chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone in squamous-cell cancer of the esophagus. N Engl J Med 1997;337:161–167

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Martin DJ, Bessell JR, Chew A, et al. Thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy: initial experience and outcomes. Surg Endosc 2005;19:1597–1601

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Bizekis CS, Kent MS, Luketich JD, et al. Initial experience with minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. In: The 52nd Southern Thoracic Surgical Association Meeting, Orlando, FL, 2005, p 62

  33. Leibman S, Smithers BM, Gotley DC, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy. Short- and long-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 2006;20:428–433

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Collins G, Johnson E, Kroshus T, et al. Experience with minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 2006;20:298–301

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Mariette C, Taillier G, Van Seuningen I, et al. Factors affecting postoperative course and survival after en bloc resection for esophageal carcinoma. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78:1177–1183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Rentz J, Bull D, Harpole D, et al. Transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy: a prospective study of 945 patients. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;125:1114–1120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Whooley BP, Law S, Murthy SC, et al. Analysis of reduced death and complication rates after esophageal resection. Ann Surg 2001;233:338–344

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Fotiadis RJ, Badvie S, Weston MD, et al. Epidural analgesia in gastrointestinal surgery. Br J Surg 2004;91:828–841

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Bozzetti F, Braga M, Gianotti L, et al. Postoperative enteral versus parenteral nutrition in malnourished patients with gastrointestinal cancer: a randomised multicentre trial. Lancet 2001;358:1487–1492

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Gabor S, Renner H, Matzi V, et al. Early enteral feeding compared with parenteral nutrition after esophageal or oesophagogastric resection and reconstruction. Br J Nutr 2005;93:509–513

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Marc Lemann, MD PhD, for his contribution to the statistical analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Digestive and Endocrine Surgery, Hospital Saint-Louis, 1 avenue Claude Vellefaux, 75010, Paris, France

    Gaelle Godiris-Petit MD, Nicolas Munoz-Bongrand MD, Isabelle Honigman MD, Pierre Cattan MD, PhD & Emile Sarfati MD PhD

Authors
  1. Gaelle Godiris-Petit MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicolas Munoz-Bongrand MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Isabelle Honigman MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pierre Cattan MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Emile Sarfati MD PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Munoz-Bongrand MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Godiris-Petit, G., Munoz-Bongrand, N., Honigman, I. et al. Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Cancer: Prospective Evaluation of Laparoscopic Gastric Mobilization. World J. Surg. 30, 1434–1440 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-0627-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-0627-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation