Current status of minimally invasive esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2013;61:513-521. [PMID: 23661109 DOI: 10.1007/s11748-013-0258-9]

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Provides Better Short- and Long-Term Outcomes Than Open Esophagectomy in Locally Advanced Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been increasingly performed for locally advanced esophageal cancer in place of open transthoracic esophagectomy (OE). This study explored the significance of MIE for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), focusing mainly on the depth of primary esophageal tumors.

METHODS

This study retrospectively assessed short- and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent esophagectomy for ESCC from 2005 through 2021. The inverse probability of the treatment-weighting (IPTW) method was used to compare the outcomes between OE and MIE. The outcomes also were evaluated in the subgroups stratified by cT category.

RESULTS

Among 1117 patients, 447 (40%) underwent OE and 670 (60%) underwent MIE. After IPTW adjustment, the incidence of any postoperative complications was significantly higher in the OE group than in the MIE group (60.8% vs 53.7%; p = 0.032), whereas the R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the MIE group (98.6% vs 92.7%; p < 0.001). The MIE group showed better 3 year overall and cancer-specific survival than the OE group (p < 0.001). The incidence of locoregional recurrence within the surgical field was significantly more frequent in the OE group (p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis stratified by cT category, the R0 resection rate was significantly higher and the incidence of locoregional recurrence was lower in the MIE group among the patients with cT3-4 tumors. In the patients with cT1-2 tumors, MIE showed no significant benefit over OE.

CONCLUSIONS

For the patients with cT3-4 tumors, MIE showed fewer postoperative complications, better locoregional control, and better prognosis than OE. Compared with OE, MIE is beneficial, especially for locally advanced ESCC.

Anatomical factor associated with thoracic procedural difficulty in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgical systems with full articulation of instruments, tremor filtering, and motion scaling can potentially overcome the procedural difficulties in endoscopic surgeries. However, whether robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) can overcome anatomical difficulties during thoracoscopic esophagectomy remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify the anatomical and clinical factors that influence the difficulty of RAMIE in the thoracic region.

METHODS

Forty-five patients who underwent curative-intent RAMIE with upper mediastinal lymph node dissection for esophageal cancer were included. Using preoperative computed tomography images, we calculated previously reported anatomical indices to assess the upper mediastinal narrowness and vertebral body projections in the middle thoracic region. The factors influencing thoracic operative time were then investigated.

RESULTS

During the thoracic procedure, the median operative time was 215 (124-367) min and the median blood loss was 20 (5-190) mL. Postoperatively, pneumonia, anastomotic leakage, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy occurred in 17.8%, 2.2%, and 6.7% of the patients, respectively. The multiple linear regression model revealed that a narrow upper mediastinum and greater blood loss during the thoracic procedure were significant factors associated with a prolonged thoracic operative time (P = 0.025 and P < 0.001, respectively). Upper mediastinal narrowing was not associated with postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

A narrow upper mediastinum was significantly associated with a prolonged thoracic operative time in patients with RAMIE.

Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Esophagectomy

Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer can be performed in multiple positions, such as the lateral decubitus position or prone position, using various techniques. Each approach has its own advantages and disadvantages, and surgeons can select an appropriate approach based on their preferences. Except for the reduction of pulmonary complications, the benefits of thoracoscopic esophagectomy, including oncologic outcomes, have not been proven scientifically. This review describes the approaches and procedures of thoracoscopic esophagectomy and presents scientific evidence for this procedure.

Short- and mid-term outcomes of robotic versus thoraco-laparoscopic McKeown esophagectomy for squamous cell esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched study

Controversy exists on the advantages of robotic McKeown esophagectomy (RME) versus thoraco-laparoscopic McKeown esophagectomy (TLME). The aim was to evaluate the short- and mid-term outcomes of RME and TLME in the treatment of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). A consecutive series of 652 patients, 280 in RME and 372 in TLME, who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for ESCC at our department from November 2015 to June 2018 was analyzed. A propensity score-matched comparison with clinicopathological covariates was performed between the two groups. Complications were categorized based on the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) recommendation. To identify the recurrence, all patients with R0 resection were followed with a median follow-up period of 20.2 months (range 1-33 months). After propensity score matching, 271 patients were identified for each cohort. In the matched cohorts, two patients died within 90 days in TLME, whereas no patients died in RME. RME was associated with similar intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.895), but with shorter surgical duration (244.5 vs. 276.0 min, P < 0.001), shorter thoracic duration (85.0 vs. 102.9 min, P < 0.001) and lower thoracic conversions (0.7% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.001). In spite of the similar results on total and thoracic lymph nodes dissection, RME yielded more lymph nodes along recurrent laryngeal nerve (4.8 vs. 4.1, P = 0.012), as well as the higher incidence of recurrent nerve injury (29.2% vs. 15.1%, P < 0.001) when compared to TLME. Tumor recurrence occurred in 30 patients and was locoregional only in 9 (3.5%) patients, systemic only in 17 (6.7%) patients, and combined in 4 (1.6%) patients in RME, while in 26 patients and was locoregional only in 10 (10.6%) patients, systemic only in 7 (2.8%) patients, and combined in 9 (3.6%) patients in TLME. RME was associated with a lower rate of mediastinal lymph nodes recurrence (2.0% vs. 5.3%, P = 0.044). Overall and disease-free survival was not different between the two cohorts (P = 0.097 and P = 0.248, respectively). RME was shown to be a safe and oncologically effective approach with favorable short- and mid-term outcomes in the treatment of patients with ESCC.

Determination of the optimal surgical procedure by identifying risk factors for pneumonia after transthoracic esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is associated with a high risk of postoperative complications, and the respiratory complications are the most common. Therefore, stratification of patients based on preoperative risk factors is essential. This study aimed to identify the risk of postoperative pneumonia (POP) based on the preoperative factors and determine the optimal perioperative surgical management strategy.

METHODS

This retrospective study involved 207 patients who underwent esophagectomy. The patients were divided into two groups, namely, with POP and without POP. To identify the risk factors for POP, the pre- and perioperative characteristics were analyzed. A receiver operating characteristics curve was used to determine a cutoff value of 2.40 L for the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1.0) and the cohort was divided into a high- and low-FEV1.0 group. A second analysis was then performed to determine the optimal surgical management for patients at a high risk for POP.

RESULTS

POP occurred in 45 (21.7%) patients. A multiple logistic regression analysis showed that FEV1.0 was significantly lower in the POP (+) group (P = 0.020); thus, a low FEV1.0 was found to be a risk factor for POP. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that open thoracotomy was a significant risk factor for POP in low FEV1.0 patients (P = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

A low FEV1.0 and an open thoracotomy are risk factors for POP. Therefore, patients with low FEV1.0 should be managed carefully and video-assisted thoracic surgery should be considered.

Comparative study of three types of lymphadenectomy along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve by minimally invasive esophagectomy

Background

The objective of this study was to compare three kinds of lymphadenectomy methods along the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) and assess the safety and effectiveness of the new method.

Methods

A total of 194 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) at our institution from May 2013 to May 2017 were analyzed retrospectively. According to the method of lymphadenectomy along the left RLN, the patients were divided into three groups: 75 cases underwent the conventional method (A group), 80 cases the skeletonized method (B group) and 39 cases the modified Bascule method (C group). The number of dissected lymph nodes and surgical outcomes were recorded and compared to identify differences among the three groups.

Results

The frequency of metastasis to the LRLN lymph node was 18.6% among all patients, and 12%, 20% and 28% in groups A, B and C, respectively. The number of harvested lymph nodes (total/chest/LRLN/LRLN+) in group B and group C were significantly greater than that of group A, but not significant between group B and group C. The hoarseness rate in group C was 15.4%, which was lower than the rate in group B (21.3%) and higher than the rate in group A (13.3%), but there was no statistical significance.

Conclusions

The new method for lymphadenectomy along the left RLN during MIE in the semi‐prone position is safe and reliable. It provides sufficient lymph node dissection along the left RLN.

Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE) versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: protocol for a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial (RAMIE trial, robot-assisted minimally invasive Esophagectomy)

Background

Currently, there are three main surgical approaches for resectable esophageal cancer: open transthoracic esophagectomy (OTE), conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE). Previous studies had demonstrated the better short-term outcomes in MIE or RAE when compared to OTE, respectively. However, to date, no prospective study was designed to compare these two minimally invasive approaches (MIE and RAE). The primary objective of this study is to compare the outcomes on survival, safety and efficacy, quality of life between RAE and MIE in the treatment for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Methods

This study is designed as a multicenter, prospective, randomized, non-inferiority phase III clinical trial, investigating the safety and efficacy of RAE compared with MIE in the treatment of resectable ESCC. Eligible patients are randomly assigned to either RAE (n = 180) or MIE (n = 180) group. The follow-up visits will be scheduled at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months in the first two years, and then every 6 months until the end of the study. During the follow-up period, clinical data and quality of life questionnaires will be examined. The primary endpoint is the 5-year overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints are 3-year OS, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), short-term outcomes as well as quality of life.

Discussion

This is the first prospectively randomized controlled trial designed to compare RAE with MIE as surgical treatment for resectable ESCC. According to our hypothesis, RAE will result in at least similar oncologic outcomes and long-term quality of life, but with a shorter operation time, lower percentage of perioperative complications, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay when compared with MIE. This study started in July 2017. Follow-up will terminate after 5 years from the time when the last patient was enrolled.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT03094351 (March 29, 2017). The trial was prospectively registered.

Long-term weight development after esophagectomy for cancer-comparison between open Ivor-Lewis and minimally invasive surgical approaches

Esophagectomy is an extensive procedure with severe postoperative effects. It can be assumed that the greater the trauma, the longer the nutritional recovery. This retrospective observational single-center cohort study compared weight development after esophagectomy with open and minimally invasive techniques. Three groups were compared in this study, one representing the first 41 patients who underwent the minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (MIMK). The second group included the first 84 consecutive patients operated with the minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (MIIL). The third group comprised 100 consecutive patients operated with open thoracoabdominal Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (IL). Virtually all patients submitted to a minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and the majority with an IL had a jejunal catheter inserted during operation for postoperative enteral feeding. All together 225 patients were included in this study. The mean weight loss during the first year was 13.1% (±4.1), 11.2% (±6.1), and 9.6% (±7.5) in the IL, MIIL, and MIMK group, respectively (P = 0.85 and P = 0.95, respectively). The median duration of postoperative enteral nutrition support varied substantially within the groups and was 23.5 days in the IL group (range: 0-2033 days), 54.5 days in those having an MIIL (range: 0-308 days; P ≤ 0.001) and 57.0 days among patients in the MIMK group (range: 0-538 days; P ≤ 0.022). There was no difference in the risk of losing at least 10% of the preoperative weight at 3 or 6 months postoperatively between the groups. However, in patients who suffered severe complications (Clavien-Dindo score ≥ IIIb) after MIIL, there was a nonsignificant trend toward a lower risk of a 10% or greater weight loss, 3 months postoperatively. In conclusion, the greater surgical trauma associated with the traditional open esophagectomy was not followed by more severe weight loss, or other signs of poorer nutritional recovery, when compared to minimal invasive surgical techniques.

Recent advances in thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Technical advances and developments in endoscopic equipment and thoracoscopic surgery have increased the popularity of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). However, there is currently no established scientific evidence supporting the use of MIE as an alternative to open esophagectomy (OE). To date, a number of single-institution studies and several meta-analyses have demonstrated acceptable short-term outcomes of thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer, and we recently reported one of the largest propensity score-matched comparison studies between MIE and OE for esophageal cancer, based on a nationwide Japanese database. We found that, in general, MIE had a longer operative time and less blood loss than OE. Moreover, compared to OE, MIE was associated with a lower rate of pulmonary complications such as pneumonia, and both methods had similar mortality rates. Although MIE may reduce the occurrence of postoperative respiratory complications, MIE and OE seem to have comparable short-term outcomes. However, the oncological benefit to patients undergoing MIE remains to be scientifically proven, as no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to verify each method's impact on the long-term survival of cancer patients. An ongoing randomized phase III study (JCOG1409) is expected to determine the impact of each method with regard to short- and long-term outcomes.

Matched-pair comparisons of minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

BACKGROUND

Open esophagectomy (OE) with radical lymphadenectomy is known as one of the most invasive digestive surgeries with the high rate of complications. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has developed very rapidly and has formed several available technical approaches. This systematic review and meta-analysis is aiming at how beneficial, and to what extent MIE resection really will be.

METHODS

A systematic literature search will be performed through May 31, 2018 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for relevant articles published in any language. Randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, and propensity score matched comparative studies will be included. If data are sufficient, subgroup analyses will be conducted in different surgical procedures of MIE.

RESULTS

The results of this systematic review and meta-analysis will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

CONCLUSION

This will be the first systematic review and meta-analysis using data of randomized controlled, prospective, and propensity score matched comparative studies to compare the outcomes between MIE and OE updating to May 31, 2018.

Future Perspectives of Surgery for Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Surgery plays an important role in the treatment strategies for esophageal cancer. Recent advances in surgical techniques and perioperative management have dramatically improved the mortality rate; however, esophagectomy remains a highly invasive procedure that can lead to severe postoperative complications. Future advances in thoracoscopic surgery with the development of surgical endoscopy systems such as three-dimensional (3D) imaging systems with a 4K ultra high-definition camera or two-dimensional (2D) imaging systems with an 8K camera, which is expected to provide 3D-like visual sensation, will enable us to further understand the microscopic anatomy of the thoracic cavity and mediastinum, and to perform delicate surgical procedures that enable minimally invasive esophagectomy with mediastinal lymphadenectomy. A robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy is attractive for surgeons and may be beneficial to esophageal cancer patients. Preoperative simulation and intraoperative real-time navigation are expected to further help surgeons safely perform esophagectomy with lymphadenectomy. Reduction of the lymphadenectomy field and setting of lymphadenectomy areas with highest priority may be feasible when sentinel node (SN) navigation is appropriately performed in cN0 early-stage esophageal cancer. These technical advances are expected to decrease the morbidity and mortality rate of surgery for esophageal cancer and hopefully improve oncological outcomes.

Quality of life after robot-assisted transmediastinal radical surgery for esophageal cancer

Background

The aim of this retrospective study was to assess postoperative quality of life (QOL) after robot-assisted radical transmediastinal esophagectomy, defined as a nontransthoracic esophagectomy with radical mediastinal lymphadenectomy combining a robotic transhiatal approach and a video-assisted cervical approach. The results were compared to those of transthoracic esophagectomy.

Methods

In this study, all consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted radical transmediastinal esophagectomy or transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer at University of Tokyo between January 2010 and December 2014 were included. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)’s quality of life questionnaires QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OES18 were sent to all patients that were still living, had no recurrence or other malignancy, and had not undergone a reoperation because of complications after esophagectomy.

Results

We were able to survey 63 (98.4%) of 64 eligible patients. We assessed and compared the QOL scores of both groups of patients. Compared to transthoracic esophagectomy, transmediastinal esophagectomy was associated with better QOL. Global health status and the physical, role, and cognitive function scale scores were significantly superior in the transmediastinal esophagectomy group (P = 0.004, < 0.0001, 0.007, 0.002, respectively). Fatigue, nausea and vomiting, pain, appetite loss, reflux, and taste scores were significant lower (superior) in the transmediastinal esophagectomy group (P = 0.003, 0.032, 0.025, 0.018, 0.001, 0.041, respectively).

Conclusions

This study indicates that robot-assisted radical transmediastinal esophagectomy is associated with better postoperative QOL compared to transthoracic esophagectomy. A larger study and prospective analyses are needed to confirm the current results.

Hybrid and total minimally invasive esophagectomy: how I do it

Esophagectomy is a major surgical procedure associated with a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is becoming the preferred approach because of the potential to limit surgical trauma, reduce respiratory complications, and promote earlier functional recovery. Various hybrid and total minimally invasive surgical techniques have been introduced in clinical practice over the past 20 years, and minimally invasive esophagectomy has been shown equivalent to open surgery concerning the short-term outcomes. Implementation of a minimally invasive esophagectomy program is technically demanding and requires a significant learning curve and the infrastructure of a dedicated multidisciplinary center where optimal staging, individualized therapy, and perioperative care can be provided to the patient. Both hybrid and total minimally invasive techniques of esophagectomy have proven safe and effective in expert centers. The choice of the surgical approach should be driven by preoperative staging, tumor site and histology, comorbidity, patient's anatomy and physiological status, and surgeon's experience.

Recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node dissection in minimally invasive esophagectomy

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has become increasingly important in the treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. However, it's still controversial about the effects of recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node dissection in MIE. Patient was placed in the lateral prone position. RLN lymph node dissection was performed in MIE. MIE can get comparable results of RLN lymph node dissection as open surgery. The number of dissected lymph nodes is 9.8±4.3 pieces and the time of lymphadenectomy is about 24 mins. RLN lymph node dissection is feasible and safe in MIE. The helpful surgical techniques include clear exposure of RLN, good collaboration with assistant, esophageal suspension, and so on.

Changes in oncological outcomes: comparison of the conventional and minimally invasive esophagectomy, a single institution experience

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is becoming the routine procedure for resectable esophageal cancer. The aim of this retrospective study is to analyze the oncologic adequacy of these two procedures at our Centre. Out of 1252 registered esophageal cancer patients at our institute from 2006 to 2015, 206 patients who underwent a surgical resection with curative intent and a complete medical record were retrospectively evaluated thru hospital medical record system (HIS). Patients were allocated into the conventional open OE, and minimally invasive MIE and Hybrid esophagectomy groups. Primary outcomes are tumor recurrence and disease-free survival over a minimum follow-up of 1 year along with assessment of adequacy of pathological specimen in terms of lymph nodes harvested and clear longitudinal <1 cm and circumferential (≥1 mm) resection margins for patients with post-neo-adjuvant residual disease. Secondary endpoint is to look for trends in the adequacy of oncologic clearance in each group over the study period. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) between groups (OE vs. MIE vs. Hybrid) for median number of lymph nodes retrieved (13 vs.14 vs.15), resection margin positive disease (55.8 vs. 35.7 vs. 44 % of patients with any residual disease N = 103,50 %), or tumor recurrence (45.2 vs. 37.3 vs. 25 %). Disease-free survival over a mean follow-up of 2.3 years was higher in the conventional group (13.8 months vs. 9.7MIE and 11.8hybrid) without any statistical significance. Learning curve for MIE to achieve a comparable mean lymph nodes harvest to OE was 1 year, while pathological complete resection stayed persistently better with minimally invasive approach. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is found to be oncologically adequate and gives results matching their conventional analogue with an increasing experience.

Total minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: approaches and outcomes

Since the introduction of minimally invasive esophagectomy 25 years ago, its use has been reported in several high volume centers. With only one published randomized control trial and five meta-analyses comparing its outcomes to open esophagectomy, available level I evidence is very limited. Available technical approaches include total minimally invasive transthoracic (Ivor Lewis or McKeown) or transhiatal esophagectomy; several hybrid options are available with one portion of the procedure completed via an open approach. A review of available level I evidence with focus on total minimally invasive esophagectomy is presented. The old debate regarding the superiority of a transthoracic versus transhiatal approach to esophagectomy may have been settled by minimally invasive esophagectomy as only few centers are reporting on the latter being utilized. The studies with the highest level of evidence available currently show that minimally invasive techniques via a transthoracic approach are associated with less overall morbidity, fewer pulmonary complications, and shorter hospital stays than open esophagectomy. There appears to be no detrimental effect on oncologic outcomes and possibly an added benefit derived by improved lymph node retrieval. Quality of life improvements may also translate into improved survival, but no conclusive evidence exists to support this claim. Robotic and hybrid techniques have also been implemented, but there currently is no evidence showing that these are superior to other minimally invasive techniques.

Minimally invasive surgery for upper gastrointestinal cancer: Our experience and review of the literature

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for upper gastrointestinal (GI) cancer, characterized by minimal access, has been increasingly performed worldwide. It not only results in better cosmetic outcomes, but also reduces intraoperative blood loss and postoperative pain, leading to faster recovery; however, endoscopically enhanced anatomy and improved hemostasis via positive intracorporeal pressure generated by CO2 insufflation have not contributed to reduction in early postoperative complications or improvement in long-term outcomes. Since 1995, we have been actively using MIS for operable patients with resectable upper GI cancer and have developed stable and robust methodology in conducting totally laparoscopic gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer and prone thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer using novel technology including da Vinci Surgical System (DVSS). We have recently demonstrated that use of DVSS might reduce postoperative local complications including pancreatic fistula after gastrectomy and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy after esophagectomy. In this article, we present the current status and future perspectives on MIS for gastric and esophageal cancer based on our experience and a review of the literature.

Impact of minimally invasive surgery in the treatment of esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgical treatment of esophageal cancer is associated to a high morbidity and mortality rate. The open transthoracic or transhiatal esophagectomy are considerably invasive procedures and have been associated to high rates of complications and operative mortality. In this way, minimally invasive esophageal surgery has been suggested as an alternative to the classic procedures because would produce improvement in clinical longterm postoperative outcomes.

AIM

To assess survival, mortality and morbidity results of esophagectomy due to esophageal cancer submitted to minimally invasive techniques and compare them to results published in international literature.

METHOD

An observational, prospective study. Between 2003 and 2012, 69 patients were submitted to a minimally invasive esophagectomy due to cancer. It was recorded postoperative morbidity and mortality according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The survival rate was analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method. The number of lymph nodes obtained during the lymph node dissection, as an index of the quality of the surgical technique, was analysed.

RESULTS

63.7% of patients had minor complications (type I-II Clavien Dindo), while nine (13%) required surgical re-exploration. The most common postoperative complication corresponded to leak of the cervical anastomosis seen in 44 (63.7%) patients but without clinical repercusion, only two of them required reoperation. The mortality rate was 4.34%, and reoperation was necessary in nine (13%) cases. The average survival time was 22.59 ± 25.38 months, with the probability of a 3-year survival rate estimated at 30%. The number of resected lymph nodes was 17.17 ± 9.62.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive techniques have lower morbidity and mortality rate, very satisfactory lymphnodes resection and similar long term outcomes in term of quality of life and survival compared to results observed after open surgery.

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.

A Prospective Randomized Trial of Enteral Nutrition After Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Several studies have reported that postoperative enteral nutrition (EN) reduced complications and decreased weight loss and hospital stay periods; however, the majority of patients analyzed in these studies underwent open thoracic surgery. No studies have been conducted regarding EN in patients after thoracoscopic esophagectomy as a less invasive surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of EN after thoracoscopic esophagectomy.

METHODS

Fifty patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were divided into two groups: parenteral nutrition (PN; n = 25) and EN (n = 25). The rate of weight loss at postoperative day (POD) 14, levels of prealbumin at POD 10, postoperative complications until POD 14, and other perioperative data were collected for each group.

RESULTS

This study analyzed data for 47 patients. The rate of weight loss at POD 14 was significantly lower in the EN group (3.0 ± 3.2 %) than in the PN group (5.1 ± 3.7 %; p = 0.020). Prealbumin levels were 21.0 ± 7.5 mg/dL in the PN group and 18.4 ± 5.8 mg/dL in the EN group at POD 10, with no significant differences between the groups. However, the incidence of postoperative pneumonia was higher in the PN group (30.4 %) than in the EN group (12.5 %).

CONCLUSIONS

EN could suppress weight loss and reduce the incidence of pneumonia after thoracoscopic esophagectomy.

Surgical and endoscopic management of high grade dysplasia and early oesophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The introduction of endoscopic techniques has led to debate about optimal management of early oesophageal adenocarcinoma. The aim was to evaluate patient selection and outcomes for endoscopic or surgical treatment at a tertiary referral centre.

METHODS

A prospectively collected database of consecutive patients staged with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) or T1 oesophageal adenocarcinoma treated with curative intent between 2005 and 2013 was undertaken. All patients were discussed at the multidisciplinary team meeting. Surgical treatment was by thoracoscopic assisted or standard/laparoscopic assisted Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy. Endoscopic treatment was a structured programme of endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and/or radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Outcomes included treatment variables, recurrence and complications.

RESULTS

83 patients treated; 50 with endoscopic therapy (EMR only-4, EMR then RFA-22, RFA only-24) and 38 by surgery (33 straight to surgery and 5 following EMR). Median age (67) and mean follow-up (21 months) were similar. HGD was more common in the endoscopic group (32/50, 64%, vs.3/33, 9%, p = 0.0001). Significant complications were more common following surgery (13/38, 34%, vs. 1/50, 2%, p = 0.0001). There were two in-hospital deaths following oesophagectomy (1 open, 1 thoracoscopic). Endoscopic treatment beyond 12 months for persisting HGD/intramucosal disease was required in 2 patients. Recurrence of HGD/invasive cancer was diagnosed in 2/36 (5.6%, T1a recurrence) of endoscopic and 1/38 (2.6%, T2N0 - subsequent hepatic metastases) surgical patients.

CONCLUSION

A management algorithm including both endoscopic treatment and oesophagectomy provides optimal outcome for these patients. Due to additional morbidity of surgery, endoscopic treatment is appropriate first-line treatment.

A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a Japanese nationwide web-based database

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to create a risk model of mortality associated with esophagectomy using a Japanese nationwide database.

METHODS

A total of 5354 patients who underwent esophagectomy in 713 hospitals in 2011 were evaluated. Variables and definitions were virtually identical to those adopted by the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 65.9 years, and 84.3% patients were male. The overall morbidity rate was 41.9%. Thirty-day and operative mortality rates after esophagectomy were 1.2% and 3.4%, respectively. Overall morbidity was significantly higher in the minimally invasive esophagectomy group than in the open esophagectomy group (44.3% vs 40.8%, P = 0.016). The odds ratios for 30-day mortality in patients who required preoperative assistance in activities of daily living (ADL), those with a history of smoking within 1 year before surgery, and those with weight loss more than 10% within 6 months before surgery were 4.2, 2.6, and 2.4, respectively. The odds ratios for operative mortality in patients who required preoperative assistance in ADL, those with metastasis/relapse, male patients, and those with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were 4.7, 4.5, 2.3, and 2.1, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was the first, as per our knowledge, to perform risk stratification for esophagectomy using a Japanese nationwide database. The 30-day and operative mortality rates were relatively lower than those in previous reports. The risk models developed in this study may contribute toward improvements in quality control of procedures and creation of a novel scoring system.

Minimally invasive surgery for oesophageal cancer

Worldwide an increasing part of oncologic oesophagectomies is performed in a minimally invasive way. Over the past decades multiple reports have addressed the perioperative outcomes and oncologic safety of minimally invasive oesophageal surgery. Although many of these (retrospective) case-control studies identified minimally invasive oesophagectomy as a safe alternative to open techniques, the clear benefit remained subject to debate. Recently, this controversy has partially resolved due to the results of the first randomized controlled trial that compared both techniques. In this trial short-term benefits of minimally invasive oesophagectomy were demonstrated in terms of lower incidence of pulmonary infections, shorter hospital stay and better postoperative quality of life. However, the current lack of long-term data on recurrence rate and overall survival precludes a comprehensive comparison of minimally invasive and open oesophagectomy. Proclaiming minimally invasive oesophagectomy as the standard of care for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer would therefore be a premature decision.