Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Utility of a Novel Hybrid Position Combining the Left Lateral Decubitus and Prone Positions During Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy

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

Abstract

Background

We developed a hybrid of the prone and left lateral decubitus positions for thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) in 2009. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of applying this novel TE position.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 78 patients who underwent TE at our institution between 2005 and 2010. Altogether, 33 patients underwent TE in the left lateral decubitus position (LD-TE) from 2005 to 2008, and 45 underwent TE in the hybrid position (hybrid-TE) from 2009 to 2010. Radical lymphadenectomy along the bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerves was performed in both groups. The thoracic duct was preserved in the LD-TE group and resected in the hybrid-TE group. In the LD-TE group, all thoracic procedures were performed with the patient in the left lateral decubitus position. In the hybrid-TE group, the upper mediastinal procedure was performed with the patient in the left lateral decubitus position, and procedures at the middle and lower mediastinum were performed with the patient in the prone position under CO2 pneumothorax.

Results

Hybrid-TE was associated with increased operating time. The number of harvested mediastinal nodes and the PaO2/FiO2 ratio on postoperative day 1 were both greater in this position. Although vocal cord palsy was observed more frequently in the hybrid-TE group, there was no significant difference in the rate of other complications or in-hospital mortality between the two groups.

Conclusions

The novel hybrid position is believed feasible for use during TE. We believe that this position facilitates a more radical mediastinal lymphadenectomy with minimal intraoperative pulmonary damage.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cuschieri A, Shimi S, Banting S (1992) Endoscopic oesophagectomy through a right thoracoscopic approach. J R Coll Surg Edinb 37:7–11

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Akaishi T, Kaneda I, Higuchi N et al (1996) Thoracoscopic en bloc total esophagectomy with radical mediastinal lymphadenectomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 112:1533–1540 (discussion 1540–1531)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kawahara K, Maekawa T, Okabayashi K et al (1999) Video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 13:218–223

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Smithers BM, Gotley DC, McEwan D et al (2001) Thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus: a 6-year experience. Surg Endosc 15:176–182

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO et al (2003) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg 238:486–494 (discussion 494–485)

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Osugi H, Takemura M, Higashino M et al (2003) 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 90:108–113

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Palanivelu C, Prakash A, Senthilkumar R et al (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 

  8. Takeuchi H, Oyama T, Saikawa Y et al (2012) Novel thoracoscopic intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis technique for patients with esophageal cancer. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 22:88–92

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C (2009) TNM classification of malignant tumours, 7th edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  10. 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 

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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Leibman S, Smithers BM, Gotley DC et al (2006) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: short- and long-term outcomes. Surg Endosc 20:428–433

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 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 379:1887–1892

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ozawa S, Ito E, Kazuno A et al (2013) Thoracoscopic esophagectomy while in a prone position for esophageal cancer: a preceding anterior approach method. Surg Endosc 27:40–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Isono K, Sato H, Nakayama K (1991) Results of a nationwide study on the three-field lymph node dissection of esophageal cancer. Oncology 48:411–420

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Akiyama H, Tsurumaru M, Udagawa H et al (1994) Radical lymph node dissection for cancer of the thoracic esophagus. Ann Surg 220:364–372 (discussion 372–363)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Igaki H, Kato H, Ando N et al (2008) A randomized trial of postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for clinical stage II/III squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus (JCOG 9907). J Clin Oncol 26:4510

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ando N, Kato H, Igaki H et al (2012) A randomized trial comparing postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil versus preoperative chemotherapy for localized advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus (JCOG9907). Ann Surg Oncol 19:68–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Luketich J, Pennathur A, Catalano PJ et al (2009) Results of a phase II multicenter study of minimally invasive esophagectomy (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study E2202). J Clin Oncol 27:4516

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nguyen NT, Hinojosa MW, Smith BR et al (2008) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: lessons learned from 104 operations. Ann Surg 248:1081–1091

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Osugi H, Takemura M, Higashino M et al (2002) Video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy and radical lymph node dissection for esophageal cancer: a series of 75 cases. Surg Endosc 16:1588–1593

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yamamoto S, Kawahara K, Maekawa T et al (2005) Minimally invasive esophagectomy for stage I and II esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 80:2070–2075

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Kunisaki C, Kosaka T, Ono HA et al (2011) Significance of thoracoscopy-assisted surgery with a minithoracotomy and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for esophageal cancer: the experience of a single surgeon. J Gastrointest Surg 15:1939–1951

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gockel I, Kneist W, Keilmann A et al (2005) Recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis (RLNP) following esophagectomy for carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol 31:277–281

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Decker G, Coosemans W, De Leyn P et al (2009) Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 35:13–20 (discussion 20–11)

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 160-8582, Japan

    Takuji Kaburagi, Hiroya Takeuchi, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Tai Omori & Yuko Kitagawa

  2. Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Tokai University School of Medicine, 143 Kasuya, Isehara, Kanagawa, 259-1193, Japan

    Soji Ozawa

Authors
  1. Takuji Kaburagi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hiroya Takeuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hirofumi Kawakubo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tai Omori
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Soji Ozawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yuko Kitagawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroya Takeuchi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kaburagi, T., Takeuchi, H., Kawakubo, H. et al. Clinical Utility of a Novel Hybrid Position Combining the Left Lateral Decubitus and Prone Positions During Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy. World J Surg 38, 410–418 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2258-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-013-2258-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation