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 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
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
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 12/2010

01-12-2010

Open versus minimally invasive esophagectomy: a single-center case controlled study

Authors: Sebastian F. Schoppmann, Gerhard Prager, Felix B. Langer, Franz M. Riegler, Barbara Kabon, Edith Fleischmann, Johannes Zacherl

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 12/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Recent advances in laparoscopic and thoracoscopic surgery have made it possible to perform esophagectomy using minimally invasive techniques. Although technically complex, recent case studies showed that minimally invasive approaches to esophagectomy are feasible and have the potential to improve mortality, hospital stay, and functional outcome.

Methods

We have performed a case controlled pair-matched study comparing 62 patients who had undergone either minimally invasive (MIE) or open esophagectomy (OE) between 2004 and 2007. Patients were matched by tumor stage and localization, sex, age, and preoperative ASA score. Pathologic stage, operative time, blood loss, transfusion requirements, hospital length of stay, postoperative morbidity, and mortality were recorded.

Results

Statistically significant differences were seen in the overall number of patients with surgical morbidity (MIE: 25% vs. OE: 74%, p = 0.014), the transfusion rate (MIE: 12.9% vs. OE: 41.9%, p = 0.001), and the rate of postoperative respiratory complications (MIE: 9.7% vs. OE: 38.7%, p = 0.008). There was no difference with respect to the duration of surgery. The number of resected lymph nodes and rate of pathologic complete resection were comparable. ICU stay [MIE: 3 days (range = 0–15) vs. OE: 6 days (range = 1–40), p = 0.03] and hospital stay [MIE: 12 days (range = 8–46) vs. OE: 24 days (range = 10–79), p = 0.001] were significantly shorter in the MIE group.

Conclusion

The results of this case-controlled study provide further evidence for the feasibility and possible improvements in the postoperative morbidity of minimally invasive esophagectomy. Our data are comparable to those from other centers and lead us to initiate the first prospectively randomized study comparing the morbidity of total minimally invasive esophagectomy with the open technique.
Literature
1.
Putnam JB Jr, Suell DM, McMurtrey MJ, Ryan MB, Walsh GL, Natarajan G, Roth JA (1994) Comparison of three techniques of esophagectomy within a residency training program. Ann Thorac Surg 57:319–325CrossRefPubMed
2.
Bailey SH, Bull DA, Harpole DH, Rentz JJ, Neumayer LA, Pappas TN, Daley J, Henderson WG, Krasnicka B, Khuri SF (2003) Outcomes after esophagectomy: a ten-year prospective cohort. Ann Thorac Surg 75:217–222 (discussion 222)CrossRefPubMed
3.
Gluch L, Smith RC, Bambach CP, Brown AR (1999) Comparison of outcomes following transhiatal or Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma. World J Surg 23:271–275 (discussion 275-276)CrossRefPubMed
4.
Cuschieri A, Shimi S, Banting S (1992) Endoscopic oesophagectomy through a right thoracoscopic approach. J R Coll Surg Edinb 37:7–11PubMed
5.
Bonavina L, Bona D, Binyom PR, Peracchia A (2004) A laparoscopy-assisted surgical approach to esophageal carcinoma. J Surg Res 117:52–57CrossRefPubMed
6.
Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, Christie NA, McCaughan JS, Litle VR, Schauer PR, Close JM, Fernando HC (2003) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg 238:486–494 (discussion 494-485)PubMed
7.
Smithers BM, Gotley DC, Martin I, Thomas JM (2007) Comparison of the outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Surg 245:232–240CrossRefPubMed
8.
Jamieson GG, Lamb PJ, Thompson SK (2009) The role of lymphadenectomy in esophageal cancer. Ann Surg 250:206–209CrossRefPubMed
9.
Silberhumer GR, Gyori G, Burghuber C, Neumayer C, Riegler M, Jakesz R, Prager G, Schoppmann SF, Zacherl J (2009) The value of protecting the longitudinal staple line with invaginating sutures during esophageal reconstruction by gastric tube pull-up. Dig Surg 26:337–341CrossRefPubMed
10.
Schoppmann SF, Prager G, Langer F, Riegler M, Fleischman E, Zacherl J (2009) Fifty-five minimally invasive esophagectomies: a single centre experience. Anticancer Res 29:2719–2725PubMed
11.
Ashrafi A, Keely S, Shende M, Luketich J (2007) Minimally invasive esophagectomy. Eur Surg 39:141–150CrossRef
12.
Kappel A, Bichler C, Wolf B, Schoppmann SF, Zacherl J, Kandioler D (2008) Turning the tables on surgical oncology: the Pancho trial unplugged. Eur Surg 40:277–283CrossRef
13.
Collins G, Johnson E, Kroshus T, Ganz R, Batts K, Seng J, Nwaneri O, Dunn D (2006) Experience with minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 20:298–301CrossRefPubMed
14.
Godiris-Petit G, Munoz-Bongrand N, Honigman I, Cattan P, Sarfati E (2006) Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer: prospective evaluation of laparoscopic gastric mobilization. World J Surg 30:1434–1440CrossRefPubMed
15.
Luketich JD, Schauer PR, Christie NA, Weigel TL, Raja S, Fernando HC, Keenan RJ, Nguyen NT (2000) Minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 70:906–911 (discussion 911-902)CrossRefPubMed
16.
Nguyen NT, Follette DM, Lemoine PH, Roberts PF, Goodnight JE Jr (2001) Minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg 72:593–596CrossRefPubMed
17.
Nguyen NT, Gelfand D, Stevens CM, Chalifoux S, Chang K, Nguyen P, Luketich JD (2004) Current status of minimally invasive esophagectomy. Minerva Chir 59:437–446PubMed
18.
Palanivelu C, Prakash A, Senthilkumar R, Senthilnathan P, Parthasarathi R, Rajan PS, Venkatachlam S (2006) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus and mediastinal lymphadenectomy in prone position—experience of 130 patients. J Am Coll Surg 203:7–16CrossRefPubMed
19.
Perry Y, Fernando HC, Buenaventura PO, Christie NA, Luketich JD (2002) Minimally invasive esophagectomy in the elderly. JSLS 6:299–304PubMed
20.
Senkowski CK, Adams MT, Beck AN, Brower ST (2006) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: early experience and outcomes. Am Surg 72:677–683 (discussion 683)PubMed
21.
Omloo JM, Lagarde SM, Hulscher JB, Reitsma JB, Fockens P, van Dekken H, Ten Kate FJ, Obertop H, Tilanus HW, van Lanschot JJ (2007) Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the mid/distal esophagus: five-year survival of a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 246:992–1000 (discussion 1000-1001)CrossRefPubMed
22.
Dapri G, Himpens J, Cadiere GB (2008) Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer: laparoscopic transhiatal procedure or thoracoscopy in prone position followed by laparoscopy? Surg Endosc 22:1060–1069CrossRefPubMed
23.
Perry KA, Enestvedt CK, Diggs BS, Jobe BA, Hunter JG (2009) Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic transhiatal inversion esophagectomy compare favorably with those of combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 23:2147–2154CrossRefPubMed
24.
Sanders G, Borie F, Husson E, Blanc PM, Di Mauro G, Claus C, Millat B (2007) Minimally invasive transhiatal esophagectomy: lessons learned. Surg Endosc 21:1190–1193CrossRefPubMed
25.
Bardini R, Bonavina L, Asolati M, Ruol A, Castoro C, Tiso E (1994) Single-layered cervical esophageal anastomoses: a prospective study of two suturing techniques. Ann Thorac Surg 58:1087–1089 (discussion 1089-1090)CrossRefPubMed
26.
Bruce J, Krukowski ZH, Al-Khairy G, Russell EM, Park KG (2001) Systematic review of the definition and measurement of anastomotic leak after gastrointestinal surgery. Br J Surg 88:1157–1168CrossRefPubMed
27.
Urschel JD (1995) Esophagogastrostomy anastomotic leaks complicating esophagectomy: a review. Am J Surg 169:634–640CrossRefPubMed
28.
Takemura M, Osugi H, Higashino M, Takada N, Lee S, Kinoshita H (2005) Effect of substituting allogenic blood transfusion with autologous blood transfusion on outcomes after radical oesophagectomy for cancer. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 11:293–300PubMed
29.
Decker G, Coosemans W, De Leyn P, Decaluwe H, Nafteux P, Van Raemdonck D, Lerut T (2009) Minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 35(1):13–20 (discussion 20-21)CrossRefPubMed
30.
Wong AC, Law S, Wong J (2003) Influence of the route of reconstruction on morbidity, mortality and local recurrence after esophagectomy for cancer. Dig Surg 20:209–214CrossRefPubMed
31.
Walther B, Johansson J, Johnsson F, Von Holstein CS, Zilling T (2003) Cervical or thoracic anastomosis after esophageal resection and gastric tube reconstruction: a prospective randomized trial comparing sutured neck anastomosis with stapled intrathoracic anastomosis. Ann Surg 238:803–812 (discussion 812-804)CrossRefPubMed
32.
Bartels H, Thorban S, Siewert JR (1993) Anterior versus posterior reconstruction after transhiatal oesophagectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Surg 80:1141–1144CrossRefPubMed
33.
Gawad KA, Hosch SB, Bumann D, Lubeck M, Moneke LC, Bloechle C, Knoefel WT, Busch C, Kuchler T, Izbicki JR (1999) How important is the route of reconstruction after esophagectomy: a prospective randomized study. Am J Gastroenterol 94:1490–1496CrossRefPubMed
34.
Urschel JD, Urschel DM, Miller JD, Bennett WF, Young JE (2001) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of route of reconstruction after esophagectomy for cancer. Am J Surg 182:470–475CrossRefPubMed
35.
Johnstone PA, Rohde DC, Swartz SE, Fetter JE, Wexner SD (1996) Port site recurrences after laparoscopic and thoracoscopic procedures in malignancy. J Clin Oncol 14:1950–1956PubMed
36.
Law S, Wong J (1999) Does lymphadenectomy add anything to the treatment of esophageal cancer? Adv Surg 33:311–327PubMed
Metadata
Title
Open versus minimally invasive esophagectomy: a single-center case controlled study
Authors
Sebastian F. Schoppmann
Gerhard Prager
Felix B. Langer
Franz M. Riegler
Barbara Kabon
Edith Fleischmann
Johannes Zacherl
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 12/2010
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1083-1

Other articles of this Issue 12/2010

Surgical Endoscopy 12/2010 Go to the issue

Dynamic Manuscript

Laparoscopic completion radical cholecystectomy for T2 gallbladder cancer

OriginalPaper

Intraoperative hydrocolonic ultrasonography for localization of small colorectal tumors in laparoscopic surgery

OriginalPaper

Multivariate study of predictive factors for clearly defined lung lesions without visible endobronchial lesions in transbronchial biopsy

OriginalPaper

Population-based trend analysis of laparoscopic Nissen and Toupet fundoplications for gastroesophageal reflux disease

OriginalPaper

What is the utilization of the SAGES guidelines by its members?

OriginalPaper

Reduced-port surgery: preservation of the critical view in single-port-access cholecystectomy