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
World Journal of Surgical Oncology
Published in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research

Comparison of the outcomes between thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy via retrosternal and prevertebral lifting paths by the same surgeon

Authors: Bing Lv, Yong-Zhong Tao, Yu Zhu, Jing Wu, Bin Zhong, Fu-Chao Luo, Yang Liu, Ze-Xue Zhang

Published in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The objective of the study is to explore the effects of retrosternal and prevertebral lifting paths of the tubular stomach on postoperative complications of patients undergoing cervical anastomosis in thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy.

Methods

Sixty-three patients were retrospectively analyzed. The patients received thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy by the same surgeon. According to the path by which the stomach was lifted upward, the patients were divided into two groups: the retrosternal path group (32 patients) and the prevertebral path group (31 patients). Operative indications and complications of postoperative patients in these two groups were observed.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference in the time duration of surgery, amount of bleeding, number of dissected lymph node, and postoperative hospitalization time between the retrosternal and prevertebral lifting paths (P > 0.05). Furthermore, the two groups did not show significant difference in the incidence rate of postoperative anastomosis fistula complications (P = 0.702). Instead, the amount of postoperative gastric drainage and the incidence rates of the pulmonary infection were significantly lower in the retrosternal path group than in the prevertebral path group, respectively (P = 0.001, P = 0.012, respectively).

Conclusion

The esophagogastrostomic cervical anastomoses performed via the retrosternal and prevertebral paths are both feasible methods of digestive tract reconstruction. The amount of postoperative gastric drainage volume and the pulmonary infection incidence rate in the retrosternal path group were lower than those in the prevertebral path group. Therefore, gastroesophageal anastomosis via the retrosternal lifting path may be preferably considered for thoracoscopic and laparoscopic surgery for esophageal carcinoma patients.
Literature
1.
Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Estimating the world cancer burden: Globocan 2000. Int J Cancer. 2001;94:153–6.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Gholipour C, Shalchi RA, Abbasi M. A histopathological study of esophageal cancer on the western side of the Caspian littoral from 1994 to 2003. Dis Esophagus. 2008;21:322–7.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Tran GD, Sun XD, Abnet CC, Fan JH, Dawsey SM, Dong ZW, et al. Prospective study of risk factors for esophageal and gastric cancers in the Linxian general population trial cohort in China. Int J Cancer. 2005;113:456–63.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, Levy RM, Keeley S, Shende M, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg. 2012;256:95–103.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Zhang R, Wang P, Zhang X, Zhang L, Li C. Gastric tube reconstruction prevents postoperative recurrence and metastasis of esophageal cancer. Oncol Lett. 2016;11:2507–9.PubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Esophageal cancer Chinese Cancer Association Professional Committee of the chief editor. Specification of guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of esophageal cancer. Beijing: Peking Union Medical College press; 2011.
7.
Akiyama H, Tsurumaru M, Udagawa H, Kajiyama Y. Radical lymph node dissection for cancer of the thoracic esophagus. Ann Surg. 1994;220:364–72. discussion 372-3CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Wang H, Feng M, Tan L, Wang Q. Comparison of the short-term quality of life in patients with esophageal cancer after subtotal esophagectomy via video-assisted thoracoscopic or open surgery. Dis Esophaqus. 2010;23:408–14.
9.
Noshiro H, Nagai E, Shimizu S, Uchiyama A, Kojima M, Tanaka M. Minimally invasive radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Artic Esophagus. 2007. doi:10.​1007/​s10388-007-0109-9.
10.
Elorza-Orúe JL, Larburu-Etxaniz S, Asensio-Gallego JI. Minimally invasive esophagectomy. Cir Esp. 2006;80:151–6.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zingg U, Smithers BM, Gotley DC, Smith G, Aly A, Clough A, et al. Factors associated with postoperative pulmonary morbidity after esophagectomy for cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:1460–8.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Chen HM, Li RZ, Luo SG, Gao J, Tan RB. Comparison of clinical effects of two different types of esophageal lifting in the treatment of esophageal cancer. You Jiang Yi Xue. 2016;03:277–9.
13.
Zhang YF. Influences of trans-substernal and trans-esophageal bed lifting paths of tubular stomach on operative complications of patients with esophageal cancer. China Mod Doct. 2014;25:128–30,133.
14.
Wang HD, Yang G, Lian KL. The clinical research of gastric tube anastomosis on affecting the quality of life in patients with esophageal cancer after operation. Chongqing Med. 2011;40:1162–3.
15.
Zhang XH. Application of gastric tube in the prevention of radical resection of esophageal cancer and cardia cancer complications. Chin J Mod Drug Appl. 2014;8:50–1.
16.
van Lanschot JJ, Hop WC, Voormolen MH, van Deelen RA, Blomjous JG, Tilanus HW. Quality of palliation and ossible benefit of extra-anatomic reconstruction inrecurrent dysphagia after resection of carcinoma of the esophagus. J Am Coll Surg. 1994;179:705–13.PubMed
17.
Urschel JD. Does the interponat affect outcome after esophagectomy for cancer. Dis Esoph. 2001;14:124–30.CrossRef
18.
Urschel JD, Urschel DM, Miller JD, Bennett WF, Young JE. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of route of reconstruction after esophagectomy for cancer. Am J Surg. 2001;182:470–5.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Qiao W. The effect of different path on patients after operation of thoracic thoracic esophageal cancer laparoscopic gastrectomy. Mod Prev Med. 2011;2:366–7.
20.
Katsoulis IE, Bobotis I, Kouraklis G, Yannopoulos P. Duodenogastric reflux after esophagectomy and gastric pull-up: the effect of the route of reconstruction. World J Surg. 2005;29:174–81.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Kato H, Miyazaki T, Sakai M, Sano A, Tanaka N, Kimura H, et al. Videofluoroscopic evaluation in oropharyngeal swallowing after radical esophagectomy with lymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Anticancer Res. 2007;27:4249–54.PubMed
22.
Zhu TX, Lan B, Fang ZM, Li RF. Comparison of postoperative complications after retrosternal and prevertebral gastric tube reconstruction during thoracoscopy and laparoscopy cervical esophago-gastric anastomosis. Chin J Clin (Electronic Edition). 2014;8:422–5.
23.
Wang H, Tan LJ, Li JP. Safety evaluation of thoracoscopic radical resection of esophageal carcinoma. Chin J Gastrointest Surg 2012;15:926-929.
24.
Feng MX, Wang Q, Jiang W. Comparison of different paths on the tubular stomach after resection of esophageal cancer. Chin J Gastrointest Surg. 2010;13:33–5.
25.
26.
Taguchi IS, Osug IH, Higashino M, et al. Comparison of three-field esophagectomy for esophageal cancer incorporating open or thoracoscopic thoracotomy. Surg Endosc. 2003;17:1445–50.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of the outcomes between thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy via retrosternal and prevertebral lifting paths by the same surgeon
Authors
Bing Lv
Yong-Zhong Tao
Yu Zhu
Jing Wu
Bin Zhong
Fu-Chao Luo
Yang Liu
Ze-Xue Zhang
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7819
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-017-1219-z

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

World Journal of Surgical Oncology 1/2017 Go to the issue

Research

Preoperative imatinib mesylate (IM) for huge gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST)

Case report

Debulking surgery for venous hemangioma arising from the epicardium: report of a case

Research

Impact of surgical resection extension on outcome for primary well-differentiated thyroid cancer—a retrospective analysis

Case Report

Report of a case combining solitary Peutz-Jeghers polyp, colitis cystica profunda, and high-grade dysplasia of the epithelium of the colon

Research

Predictive value of preoperative peripheral blood neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio for lymph node metastasis in patients of resectable pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a nomogram-based study

Research

Lipid raft-mediated miR-3908 inhibition of migration of breast cancer cell line MCF-7 by regulating the interactions between AdipoR1 and Flotillin-1