Abstract
Surgical resection continues to be the gold standard treatment approach for early invasive and locoregional esophageal cancer. Esophagectomy has historically had a reputation as a complex operation with high mortality and morbidity. Increasingly, results from high-volume specialized centers have demonstrated that mortality rates of below 4% should be expected and that patients can potentially demonstrate excellent levels of quality of life following surgical resection. Up until recently, virtually all surgical resections were done utilizing an open approach utilizing either a transthoracic or a transhiatal operation. Over the past several years, however, a variety of fully minimally invasive or hybrid procedures have been advocated with a view of improving mortality and morbidity outcomes. In the absence of either randomized or controlled prospective comparisons, this series of papers will review current perceptions of the advantages of both minimally invasive and open surgery for the treatment of esophageal cancer.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Boone J, Livestro DP, Elias SG, Borel Rinkes IH, van Hillegersberg R. International survey on esophageal cancer: part I surgical techniques. Dis Esophagus 2009;22:195–202.
Lagarde SM, Vrouenraets BC, Stassen LP, van Lanschot JJ. Evidence-based surgical treatment of esophageal cancer: overview of high-quality studies. Ann Thorac Surg 2010;89:1319–1326.
Park A, Lee G, Seagull FJ, Meenaghan N, Dexter D. Patients benefit while surgeons suffer: an impending epidemic. J Am Coll Surg 2010;210:306–313.
Kohn GP, Galanko JA, Meyers MO, Feins RH, Farrell TM. National trends in esophageal surgery—are outcomes as good as we believe? J Gastrointest Surg 2009;13:1900–1910.
Manner H, May A, Pech O, Gossner L, Rabenstein T, Gunter E, Vieth M, Stolte M, Ell C. Early Barrett’s carcinoma with “low-risk” submucosal invasion: long-term results of endoscopic resection with a curative intent. Am J Gastroenterol 2008;103:2589–2597.
Yamada K, Murakami M, Okamoto Y, Okuno Y, Nakajima T, Kusumi F, Takakuwa H, Matsusue S. Treatment results of chemoradiotherapy for clinical stage I (T1N0M0) esophageal carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;64:1106–1111.
Bedenne L. Radiochimiothérapie (RCT): une alternative curative à la chirurgie du cancer de ľoesophage? [Chemoradiation: an alternative to surgery for the curative treatment esophageal cancer?] Gastroenterol Clin Biol 2005;29:551–556.
Stahl M, Walz MK, Stuschke M, Lehmann N, Meyer HJ, Riera-Knorrenschild J, Langer P, Engenhart-Cabillic R, Bitzer M, Konigsrainer A, Budach W, Wilke H. Phase III comparison of preoperative chemotherapy compared with chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:851–856.
Stassen LP, Bemelman WA, Meijerink J. Risks of minimally invasive surgery underestimated: a report of the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate. Surg Endosc 2010;24:495–498.
Verhage RJ, Hazebroek EJ, Boone J, van Hillegersberg R. Minimally invasive surgery compared to open procedures in esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Minerva Chir 2009;64:135–146.
Biere SS, Cuesta MA, van der Peet DL. Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Minerva Chir 2009;64:121–133.
Paulson EC, Ra J, Armstrong K, Wirtalla C, Spitz F, Kelz RR. Underuse of esophagectomy as treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. Arch Surg 2008;143:1198–1203.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Low, D.E. Open Versus Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: What Is the Best Approach? Frame the Issue. J Gastrointest Surg 15, 1497–1499 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-011-1559-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-011-1559-x