Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Surgery 1/2023

Open Access 01-12-2023 | Esophagus Resection | Research

Analysis of factors associated with operative difficulty in thoracoscopic esophageal cancer surgery in the left-decubitus position: a single-center retrospective study

Authors: Koichi Okamoto, Noriyuki Inaki, Hiroto Saito, Mari Shimada, Takahisa Yamaguchi, Toshikatsu Tsuji, Hideki Moriyama, Jun Kinoshita, Isamu Makino, Keishi Nakamura, Hiroyuki Takamura, Itasu Ninomiya

Published in: BMC Surgery | Issue 1/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The degree of difficulty in the overall procedure and forceps handling encountered by surgeons is greatly influenced by the positional relationship of intrathoracic organs in minimally invasive esophagectomy. This study aimed to identify the anatomical factors associated with the difficulty of minimally invasive esophagectomy assessed by intraoperative injuries and postoperative outcomes.

Methods

Minimally invasive esophagectomy in the left-decubitus position was performed in 258 patients. We defined α (mm) as the anteroposterior distance between the front of the vertebral body and aorta, β (mm) as the distance between the center of the vertebral body and center of the aorta, and γ (degree) as the angle formed at surgeon’s right-hand port site by insertion of lines from the front of aorta and from the front of vertebrae in the computed tomography slice at the operator’s right-hand forceps hole level. We retrospectively analyzed the correlations among clinico-anatomical factors, surgeon- or assistant-caused intraoperative organ injuries, and postoperative complications.

Results

Intraoperative injuries significantly correlated with shorter α (0.2 vs. 3.9), longer β (33.0 vs. 30.5), smaller γ (3.0 vs. 4.3), R1 resection (18.5% vs. 8.3%), and the presence of intrathoracic adhesion (46% vs. 26%) compared with the non-injured group. Division of the median values into two groups showed that shorter α and smaller γ were significantly associated with organ injury. Longer β was significantly associated with postoperative tachycardia onset, respiratory complications, and mediastinal recurrence. Furthermore, the occurrence of intraoperative injuries was significantly associated with the onset of postoperative pulmonary complications.

Conclusions

Intrathoracic anatomical features greatly affected the procedural difficulty of minimally invasive esophagectomy, suggesting that preoperative computed tomography simulation and appropriate port settings may improve surgical outcomes.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Kuwano H, Nishimura Y, Oyama T, et al. Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of carcinoma of the esophagus April 2012 edited by the Japan Esophageal Society. Esophagus. 2015;12(1):1–30.CrossRefPubMed Kuwano H, Nishimura Y, Oyama T, et al. Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of carcinoma of the esophagus April 2012 edited by the Japan Esophageal Society. Esophagus. 2015;12(1):1–30.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Takeuchi H, Miyata H, Gotoh M, et al. A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a japanese nationwide web-based database. Ann Surg. 2014;260(2):259–66.CrossRefPubMed Takeuchi H, Miyata H, Gotoh M, et al. A risk model for esophagectomy using data of 5354 patients included in a japanese nationwide web-based database. Ann Surg. 2014;260(2):259–66.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9829):1887–92.CrossRefPubMed Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9829):1887–92.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Yoshida N, Yamamoto H, Baba H, et al. Can minimally invasive Esophagectomy Replace Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer? Latest analysis of 24,233 esophagectomies from the Japanese National Clinical Database. Ann Surg. 2020;272(1):118–24.CrossRefPubMed Yoshida N, Yamamoto H, Baba H, et al. Can minimally invasive Esophagectomy Replace Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer? Latest analysis of 24,233 esophagectomies from the Japanese National Clinical Database. Ann Surg. 2020;272(1):118–24.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Osugi H, Takemura M, Lee S, et al. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for intrathoracic esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;11(4):221–7.PubMed Osugi H, Takemura M, Lee S, et al. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for intrathoracic esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;11(4):221–7.PubMed
6.
go back to reference Uchihara T, Yoshida N, Baba Y, et al. Esophageal position affects short-term outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a retrospective Multicenter Study. World J Surg. 2020;44(3):831–7.CrossRefPubMed Uchihara T, Yoshida N, Baba Y, et al. Esophageal position affects short-term outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: a retrospective Multicenter Study. World J Surg. 2020;44(3):831–7.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Fujiwara Y, Lee S, Gyobu K, et al. Predictive factors of difficulty of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left decubitus position. Esophagus. 2019;16(3):316–23.CrossRefPubMed Fujiwara Y, Lee S, Gyobu K, et al. Predictive factors of difficulty of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left decubitus position. Esophagus. 2019;16(3):316–23.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. TNM classification of malignant tumors (UICC international union against cancer). 8th ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2017. Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. TNM classification of malignant tumors (UICC international union against cancer). 8th ed. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell; 2017.
9.
go back to reference Ninomiya I, Okamoto K, Fushida S, et al. Efficacy of CO2 insufflation during thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left lateral position. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;65(10):587–93.CrossRefPubMed Ninomiya I, Okamoto K, Fushida S, et al. Efficacy of CO2 insufflation during thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left lateral position. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2017;65(10):587–93.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):187–96.CrossRefPubMed Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):187–96.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Molena D, Mungo B, Stem M, et al. Incidence and risk factors for respiratory complications in patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignancy: a NSQIP analysis. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;26(4):287–94.CrossRefPubMed Molena D, Mungo B, Stem M, et al. Incidence and risk factors for respiratory complications in patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignancy: a NSQIP analysis. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;26(4):287–94.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Yoshida N, Watanabe M, Baba Y, et al. Risk factors for pulmonary complications after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Today. 2014;44(3):526–32.CrossRefPubMed Yoshida N, Watanabe M, Baba Y, et al. Risk factors for pulmonary complications after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Today. 2014;44(3):526–32.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Shiozaki A, Fujiwara H, Okamura H, et al. Risk factors for postoperative respiratory complications following esophageal cancer resection. Oncol Lett. 2012;3(4):907–12.PubMedPubMedCentral Shiozaki A, Fujiwara H, Okamura H, et al. Risk factors for postoperative respiratory complications following esophageal cancer resection. Oncol Lett. 2012;3(4):907–12.PubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Yoshida N, Nakamura K, Kuroda D, et al. Preoperative smoking cessation is integral to the prevention of postoperative morbidities in minimally invasive esophagectomy. World J Surg. 2018;42(9):2902–9.CrossRefPubMed Yoshida N, Nakamura K, Kuroda D, et al. Preoperative smoking cessation is integral to the prevention of postoperative morbidities in minimally invasive esophagectomy. World J Surg. 2018;42(9):2902–9.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Yibulayin W, Abulizi S, Lv H, et al. Minimally invasive oesophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;8(1):304.CrossRef Yibulayin W, Abulizi S, Lv H, et al. Minimally invasive oesophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2016;8(1):304.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Okamura A, Watanabe M, Mine S, et al. Factors influencing difficulty of the thoracic procedure in minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(10):4279–85.CrossRefPubMed Okamura A, Watanabe M, Mine S, et al. Factors influencing difficulty of the thoracic procedure in minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(10):4279–85.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Ferguson MK, Celauro AD, Prachand V. Prediction of major pulmonary complications after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;91:1494–500. discussion 1500–1501.CrossRefPubMed Ferguson MK, Celauro AD, Prachand V. Prediction of major pulmonary complications after esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2011;91:1494–500. discussion 1500–1501.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Uchihara T, Yoshida N, Baba Y, et al. Risk factors for pulmonary morbidities after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(6):2852–8.CrossRefPubMed Uchihara T, Yoshida N, Baba Y, et al. Risk factors for pulmonary morbidities after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(6):2852–8.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Koshenkov VP, Yakoub D, Livingstone AS, Franceschi D. Tracheobronchial injury in the setting of an esophagectomy for cancer: postoperative discovery a bad omen. J Surg Oncol. 2014;109:804–7.CrossRefPubMed Koshenkov VP, Yakoub D, Livingstone AS, Franceschi D. Tracheobronchial injury in the setting of an esophagectomy for cancer: postoperative discovery a bad omen. J Surg Oncol. 2014;109:804–7.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Palanivelu C, Prakash A, Senthilkumar R, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus and mediastinal lymphadenectomy in prone position–experience of 130 patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203(1):7–16.CrossRefPubMed Palanivelu C, Prakash A, Senthilkumar R, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus and mediastinal lymphadenectomy in prone position–experience of 130 patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203(1):7–16.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Otsubo D, Nakamura T, Yamamoto M, et al. Prone position in thoracoscopic esophagectomy improves postoperative oxygenation and reduces pulmonary complications. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:1136–41.CrossRefPubMed Otsubo D, Nakamura T, Yamamoto M, et al. Prone position in thoracoscopic esophagectomy improves postoperative oxygenation and reduces pulmonary complications. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:1136–41.CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Iwahashi M, Nakamori M, Nakamura M, et al. Clinical benefits of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Surg Today. 2014;44(9):1708–15.CrossRefPubMed Iwahashi M, Nakamori M, Nakamura M, et al. Clinical benefits of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Surg Today. 2014;44(9):1708–15.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Markar SR, Wiggins T, Antonowicz S, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: lateral decubitus vs. prone positioning; systematic review and pooled analysis. Surg Oncol. 2015;24:212–9.CrossRefPubMed Markar SR, Wiggins T, Antonowicz S, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: lateral decubitus vs. prone positioning; systematic review and pooled analysis. Surg Oncol. 2015;24:212–9.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Higuchi T, Ozawa S, Koyanagi K, et al. Usefulness of prone-position computed tomography as preoperative simulation prior to thoracoscopic esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer. Esophagus. 2021;18(4):764–72.CrossRefPubMed Higuchi T, Ozawa S, Koyanagi K, et al. Usefulness of prone-position computed tomography as preoperative simulation prior to thoracoscopic esophagectomy for thoracic esophageal cancer. Esophagus. 2021;18(4):764–72.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference n der Sluis PC, May AN, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy Versus Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269(4):621–30.CrossRefPubMed n der Sluis PC, May AN, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy Versus Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer: a Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269(4):621–30.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Fujita T, Sato K, Ozaki A, et al. Propensity-matched analysis of the short-term outcome of Robot-Assisted minimally invasive Esophagectomy Versus Conventional Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy in thoracic esophageal Cancer. World J Surg. 2022;46(8):1926–33.CrossRefPubMed Fujita T, Sato K, Ozaki A, et al. Propensity-matched analysis of the short-term outcome of Robot-Assisted minimally invasive Esophagectomy Versus Conventional Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy in thoracic esophageal Cancer. World J Surg. 2022;46(8):1926–33.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Yoshimura S, Mori K, Yamagata Y, et al. Quality of life after robot-assisted transmediastinal radical surgery for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(5):2249–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yoshimura S, Mori K, Yamagata Y, et al. Quality of life after robot-assisted transmediastinal radical surgery for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2018;32(5):2249–54.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Analysis of factors associated with operative difficulty in thoracoscopic esophageal cancer surgery in the left-decubitus position: a single-center retrospective study
Authors
Koichi Okamoto
Noriyuki Inaki
Hiroto Saito
Mari Shimada
Takahisa Yamaguchi
Toshikatsu Tsuji
Hideki Moriyama
Jun Kinoshita
Isamu Makino
Keishi Nakamura
Hiroyuki Takamura
Itasu Ninomiya
Publication date
01-12-2023
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Surgery / Issue 1/2023
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2482
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-023-02131-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2023

BMC Surgery 1/2023 Go to the issue