Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
World Journal of Surgery
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 8/2015

Open Access 01-08-2015 | Original Scientific Report

Quality of Life and Late Complications After Minimally Invasive Compared to Open Esophagectomy: Results of a Randomized Trial

Authors: K. W. Maas, M. A. Cuesta, M. I. van Berge Henegouwen, J. Roig, L. Bonavina, C. Rosman, S. S. Gisbertz, S. S. A. Y. Biere, D. L. van der Peet

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 8/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is widely being implemented for esophageal cancer in order to reduce morbidity and improve quality of life. Non-randomized studies investigating the mid-term quality of life after MIE show conflicting results at 1-year follow-up. Therefore, the aim of this study is to determine whether MIE has a continuing better mid-term 1-year quality of life than open esophagectomy (OE) indicating both a faster recovery and less procedure-related symptoms.

Methods

A one-year follow-up analysis of the quality of life was conducted for patients participating in the randomized trial in which MIE was compared with OE. Late complications as symptomatic stenosis of anastomosis are also reported.

Results

Quality of life at 1 year was better in the MIE group than in the OE group for the physical component summary SF36 [50 (6; 48–53) versus 45 (9; 42–48) p .003]; global health C30 [79 (10; 76–83) versus 67 (21; 60–75) p .004]; and pain OES18 module [6 (9; 2–8) versus 16 (16; 10–22) p .001], respectively. Twenty six patients (44 %) in the MIE and 22 patients (39 %) in the OE group were diagnosed and treated for symptomatic stenosis of the anastomosis.

Conclusions

This first randomized trial shows that MIE is associated with a better mid-term one-year quality of life compared to OE.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
2.
Sjoquist KM, Burmeister BH, Smithers BM, Zalcberg JR, Simes RJ, Barbour A, Gebski V (2011) Survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for respectable esophageal carcinoma: an updated meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol 12:681–692PubMedCrossRef
3.
van Hagen P, Hulshof MCCM, van Lanschot JJB et al (2012) Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancer improves survival. N Engl J Med 366:2074–2084PubMedCrossRef
4.
Scarpa M, Valente S, Alfieri R, Cagol M, Diamantis G, Ancona E, Castoro C (2011) Systematic review of health related quality of life after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. World J Gastroenterol 17(42):4660–4674PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
5.
Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW et al (2012) Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer: a multicenter, open label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 379:1887–1892PubMedCrossRef
6.
De Boer AG, van Lanschot JJ, van Sandwick JW et al (2004) Quality of life after transhiatal compared with extended transthoracic resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. J Clin Oncol 22:4202–4208PubMedCrossRef
7.
Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Bunaventura PO et al (2003) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg 238:486–494PubMedCentralPubMed
8.
Parameswaran R, Blazeby JM, Hughes R, Mitchell K, Berrisford RG, Wajed SA (2010) Health-related quality of life after minimally invasive esophagectomy. Br J Surg 97:525–531PubMedCrossRef
9.
Parameswaran R, Titcomb DR, Blencowe NS et al (2013) Assessment and comparison of recovery after open and minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer: an exploratory study in two centers. Ann Surg Oncol 20(6):1970–1977PubMedCrossRef
10.
Nafteux P, MOEns J, COEsemans W, Decaluwé H, Decker G, De Leyn P, Van Raemdonck D, Lerut T (2011) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: a valuable alternative to open esophagectomy for the treatment of early esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction carcinoma. Eur J Cardiothoracic Surg 40(6):1455–1463
11.
Sundaram A, Geronimo JC, Willer BL, Hoshino M, Torgersen Z, Juhasz A, Lee TH, Mittal SK (2012) Survival and quality of life after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a single surgeon experience. Surg Endosc 26(1):168–176PubMedCrossRef
12.
Kim T, Hochwald SN, Sarosi GA, Caban AM, Rossidis G, Ben-David K (2012) Review of minimally invasive esophagectomy and current controversies. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2012:683213PubMedCentralPubMed
13.
Mehran R, Rice D, El-Zein R, Huang JL, Vaporciyan A, GOEdyear A, Mehta A, Correa A, Walsh G, Roth J, Swisher S, Hofstetter W (2011) Minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy, a symptom assessment study. Dis Esophagus 24(3):147–152PubMedCrossRef
14.
15.
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 203:7–16PubMedCrossRef
16.
Biere SS, Cuesta MA, van der Peet DL (2009) Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Minerva Chir 64:121–133PubMed
17.
Zingg U, McQuinn A, DiValentino D et al (2009) Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer. Ann Thor Surg 87:911–919CrossRef
18.
Nguyen NT, Hinojosa MW, Smith BR, Chang KJ, Gray J, Hoyt D (2008) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: lessons learned from 104 operations. Ann Surg 248:1081–1091PubMedCrossRef
19.
Hulscher JBF, van Sandwick JW, de Boer AG et al (2002) Extended thoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. N Eng J Med 347:1662–1669CrossRef
20.
Wildgaard K, Ravn J, Kehlet H (2009) Chronic post-thoracotomy pain: a critical review of pathogenic mechanisms and strategies for prevention. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 36:170–180PubMedCrossRef
21.
Gottschalk A, Cohen SP, Yang A, Ochroch A (2006) Preventing and treating pain after thoracic surgery. Anesthesiol 104:594–600CrossRef
22.
23.
Maguire MF, Ravenscroft A, Beggs D et al (2006) A questionnaire study investigating the prevalence of the neuropathic component of chronic pain after thoracic surgery. Eur J Cardiothoracic Surg 29:800–805CrossRef
24.
Elshiekh MA, Lo TT, Shipolini AR, McCormack DJ (2013) Does muscle-sparing thoracotomy as opposed to posterolateral thoracotomy result in better recovery? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 16:60–67PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
25.
Rutegard M, Lagergren P, Rouvelas I et al (2008) Population-based study of surgical factors in relation to health-related quality of life after esophageal cancer resection. Br J Surg 95:592–601PubMedCrossRef
26.
Blazeby JM, Farndon JR, Donovan J et al (2000) A prospective longitudinal study examining the quality of life of patients with esophageal carcinoma. Cancer 88:1781–1787PubMedCrossRef
27.
Gutschow AC, Holschner AH, Leers J (2013) Fuchs, Bludau M, Prenzel KL, Bollschweiler E, Schroder W. Health-related quality of life after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Langenbecks Arch Surg 398:231–237PubMedCrossRef
28.
Li CL, Zhang FL, Wang YD et al (2013) Characteristics of recurrence after radical esophagectomy with two field lymph node dissection for thoracic esophageal cancer. Oncol Lett 5:355–359PubMedCentralPubMed
29.
Nederlof N, Tilanus HW, Tran TC et al (2011) End-to-end versus end-t-side esophagogastrostomy after esophageal cancer resection. A prospective randomized study. Ann Surg 254:226–233PubMedCrossRef
30.
van Heijl M, GOEszen JA, Fockens P et al (2010) Risk factors for development of benign cervical structures after esophagectomy. Ann Surg 251:1064–1069PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Quality of Life and Late Complications After Minimally Invasive Compared to Open Esophagectomy: Results of a Randomized Trial
Authors
K. W. Maas
M. A. Cuesta
M. I. van Berge Henegouwen
J. Roig
L. Bonavina
C. Rosman
S. S. Gisbertz
S. S. A. Y. Biere
D. L. van der Peet
Publication date
01-08-2015
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 8/2015
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-015-3100-y

Other articles of this Issue 8/2015

World Journal of Surgery 8/2015 Go to the issue

Original Scientific Report

Parathyroid Reimplantation in Forearm Subcutaneous Tissue During Thyroidectomy: A Simple and Effective Way to Avoid Hypoparathyroidism

Original Scientific Report

The Implementation of the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology Improves Malignancy Detection Despite Lower Rate of Thyroidectomy in Indeterminate Nodules

Editorial Perspective

What Should We Tell Our Patients? Lifetime Guarantee or is it 5- to 10-year Warranty on a Parathyroidectomy for Primary Hyperparathyroidism?

Original Scientific Report

The Tight Adaptation at Pancreatic Anastomosis Without Parenchymal Laceration: An Institutional Experience in Introducing and Modifying the New Procedure

Letter to the Editor

Relative Risk of Prolonged Operative Times From Inconsistent Surgical Teams

Original Scientific Report

Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Pathway After Pancreaticoduodenectomy in Patients with Low Drain Fluid Amylase