Minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open surgery: is there an advantage?

Patterns of Recurrence and Long-Term Survival of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Versus Open Esophagectomy for Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: a Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) as a treatment for patients with esophageal cancer has recently become more common worldwide. However, differences in the pattern of recurrence between MIE and open esophagectomy (OE) using the transthoracic approach have not been fully investigated, particularly in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

We searched the prospective databases of two institutes for patients with esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy between 2011 and 2018. Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to reduce bias from confounding patient-related variables. Operative outcomes, regionally harvested lymph nodes (LNs), recurrence pattern, and prognosis were investigated in two groups.

RESULTS

We identified 410 patients who underwent OE (n = 263) and MIE (n = 147). After propensity score matching, 131 pairs of patients were selected. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics after matching. The total number of harvested LNs in both groups was similar (55.1 vs. 58.9, P = 0.132). The incidence of LN recurrence in the MIE group was significantly lower than that in the OE group (27% vs. 15%, P = 0.010). In particular, the incidence of mediastinal LN recurrence in the MIE group was significantly lower than that in the OE group (16% vs. 6%, P = 0.017). There were no significant differences between the two groups in hematogenous (19% vs.12%, P = 0.173), dissemination (5% vs. 4%, P = 0.769), local (4% vs. 1%. P = 0.213), and other recurrence (3% vs. 3%, P = 1.000). The 3-year disease-free and overall survival of MIE were significantly better than OE (71.4% vs. 50.5%, P = 0.004 and 80.3% vs. 61.2%, P = 0.002, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that the thoracic approach (OE vs. MIE) (HR 1.93, P = 0.004) was an independent prognostic factor, along with the pathological N stage (HR 3.05, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

MIE has less intramediastinal LN recurrence than OE and may lead to a better long-term prognosis in patients with advanced esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Comparison of Up-Front Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy versus Open Esophagectomy on Quality of Life for Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer

This study investigates whether minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a safe and effective way for patients with resectable esophageal cancer by comparing the short-term quality of life (QOL) after minimally invasive esophagectomy and open esophagectomy (OE). A total number of 104 patients who underwent esophagectomy from January 2013 to March 2014 were enrolled in this study. These patients were divided into two groups (MIE and OE group). Three scoring scales of quality of life were used to evaluate QOL before the operation and at the first, third, sixth and twelfth months after MIE or OE, which consist of Karnofshy performance scale (KPS), the European Organization for Research and Treatment questionnaire QLQC-30 (EORTC QLQC-30) and esophageal cancer supplement scale (OES-18). The MIE group was higher than the OE group in one-year survival rate (92.54% vs. 72.00%). Significant differences between the two groups were observed in intraoperative bleeding volume (158.53 ± 91.07 mL vs. 228.97 ± 109.33 mL, p = 0.001), and the incidence of postoperative pneumonia (33.33% vs. 58.62%, p = 0.018). The KPS of MIE group was significantly higher than the OE group at the first (80 vs. 70, p = 0.004 < 0.05), third (90 vs. 80, p = 0.006 < 0.05), sixth (90 vs. 80, p = 0.007 < 0.05) and twelfth months (90 vs. 80, p = 0.004 < 0.05) after surgery. The QLQC-30 score of MIE group was better than OE group at first and twelfth months after the operation. The OES-18 score of MIE group was significantly better than OE group at first, sixth and twelfth months after surgery. The short-term quality of life in MIE group was better than OE group.

[Transhiatal esophagectomy for cardia and esophagus cancer]

AIM

To present the result of transhiatal esophagectomies with simultaneous repair.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 67 procedures. In 35 cases surgery was carried out for adenocarcinoma of distal esophagus or cardia with high transition to esophagus, in 32 cases - for epidermal carcinoma of the esophagus. Gastric graft and left half of the colon were used in 60 and 7 cases respectively for simultaneous repair. 29 patients underwent transhiatal instrumental esophagectomy using author's original technique.

Minimally invasive Mckeown esophagectomy with modified three-field lymphadenectomy in case of situs inversus totalis with carcinoma mid esophagus

Performing complex surgical procedures in patients with situs inversus totalis is a challenge because of the need to orient to the completely mirror transposed abdominal and thoracic viscera. We report our experience in performing a three phase minimally invasive (thoracoscopic and laparoscopic) esophagectomy for carcinoma of the mid esophagus in a patient with situs inversus totalis. We believe that this is the first reported case of this kind.

Laparoscopic gastric tube formation with pyloromyotomy for reconstruction in patients with esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To analyze the benefit and feasibility of this procedure compared with those of open method.

METHODS

Abdominal procedure includes laparoscopic gastric mobilization, celiac axis lymph node dissection, formation of the gastric tube, and pyloromyotomy. The actual procedure performed during open surgery is the same as those of laparoscopic surgery except for the main incision. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) was performed on 54 patients with esophageal cancer. The short-term outcomes, including postoperative complications were analyzed and compared with 44 cases of open method.

RESULTS

Although the total operative time was not different between 2 groups (349.8 minutes vs. 374.8 minutes, P = 0.153), the operation time of abdominal procedure was shorter in laparoscopic group (90.6 minutes vs. 162.1 minutes, P < 0.001). Operation related complications and hospital stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The number of transfused patients was significantly smaller in laparoscopic group (11.1% vs. 27.9%, P = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic gastric tubing with pyloromyotomy is a feasible and safe treatment option for patients with esophageal cancer.

Single-position, minimally invasive Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy for lower thoracic oesophageal cancer

Although several surgical approaches exist for lower thoracic oesophageal cancer, standardized techniques for minimally invasive oesophageal resection and intrathoracic anastomosis have not yet been established. Thus, optimization of the approach and identification of the ideal anastomosis technique are needed. Seven consecutive patients with lower thoracic oesophageal cancer were treated using a single-position, minimally invasive surgical technique with laparoscopy and thoracoscopy. In the present article, we describe this technique in detail and discuss the outcomes of these patients. No adverse events occurred intraoperatively, no failures in the intrathoracic oesophagogastrostomy were detected and favourable short-term outcomes were obtained. Thus, the procedure described is safe and technically feasible and appears to be promising as an alternative approach for the treatment of patients with lower thoracic oesophageal cancer.