351 SINGLE-PORT MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY TO TREAT ESOPHAGEAL CANCER: EXPERIENCE OF 144 CASES

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jang-Ming Lee ◽  
Chen Ke-Cheng ◽  
Lin Mong-Wei ◽  
Yang Pei-Wen ◽  
Huang Pei-Ming
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Single Incision ◽  
Single Port ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Procedures ◽  
The Mean

Abstract   Single-incision thoracoscopic and laparoscopic procedures has have been applied in treating various diseases. However, it is limited in literature for such procedures used in treating esophageal cancer. Methods Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) with a single-incision approach in the thoracoscopic and laparoscopic procedures was attempted in 144 patients with esophageal cancer. Results There was 96 patients underwent a McKeown procedure and 48 an Ivor Lewis procedure repectively. The mean ventilator usage of the patients after surgery was 0.3 ± 0.6 days, the mean ICU stay was 7.42 ± 17.15 days, and the mean number of dissected lymph nodes was 43.5 ± 21.8. There 11 patients suffered from postoperative complications, including 3 pulmonary complications, 4 anastomotic leakage and 4 vocal cord palsy. There are no 30-day mortality, however, there were one patient died from ARDS 40 days after surgery. Conclusion Single-port MIE seems to be a feasible option for treating patients with esophageal cancer, which offers an acceptable perioperative surgical outcome. However, the long-term survival results of the patients requires to be follow-up in the future.

PS02.023: SINGLE-INCISION MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY FOR TREATING ESOPHAGEAL CANCER

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 126-126
Author(s):  
Jang-Ming Lee ◽  
Sunn-Mao Yang ◽  
Pei-Ming Huang
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Anastomotic Leakage ◽  
Single Incision ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Vocal Cord Palsy ◽  
Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Matched Comparison

Abstract Background Single-incision throacoscopic and laparoscopic procedure has been applied to treating various diseases. In the current study, we applied this novel surgical technique in the minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Methods Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) with single-port approach in the thoracoscopic and laparoscopic procedures was attempted for patients with esophageal cancer. Patients with esophageal cancer who underwent MIE from 2006 to 2016 were evaluated. A 3–4 cm incision was created both in the thoracoscopic and the laparoscopic phases during the single-incision MIE procedures. A propensity-matched comparison was made between the two groups of patients with single-incision and multi-incision MIE. Results We analyzed a total of 48 pairs of patients with propensity-matched from the cohort of 360 patients undergoing MIE during 2006–2015. There were 12 patients having postoperative complications (25%), including 4 (8.3%) of anastomotic leakage one (2.1%) of pulmonary complications and 3 (6.3%) with vocal cord palsy in the patients undergoing single-incision MIE (SIMIE). There is no statistical difference in terms of postoperative ICU and hospital stay, number of dissected lymph nodes and presence of major surgical complications (anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications) between the two groups of patients. The pain score one week after surgery was significantly lower in the single-incision group (P < 0.05). There was no surgical mortality in the single-incision MIE group. Conclusion Minimally invasive esophogectomy performed with a single-incision approach is feasible for treating patients with esophageal cancer, with a comparable perioperative outcome with that of multi-incision approaches. The postoperative pain one week after surgery was significantly reduced in patients undergoing single-incision MIE. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

696 LONG-TERM OUTCOMES OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY COMPARED TO OPEN ESOPHAGECTOMY: A RETROSPECTIVE ANALYSIS OF 2958 CASES IN SINGLE CANCER CENTER

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xue-feng Leng ◽  
Kexun Li ◽  
Qifeng Wang ◽  
Wenwu He ◽  
Kun Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Open Esophagectomy ◽  
Single Cancer

Abstract   Esophageal cancer is the fourth primary cause of cancer-related death in the male in China.The cornerstone of treatment for resectable esophageal cancer is surgery. With the development of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), it is gradually adopted as an alternative to open esophagectomy (OE) in real-world practice. The purpose of this study is to explore whether MIE vs. OE will bring survival benefits to patients with the advancement of treatment techniques and concepts. Methods Data were obtained from the Sichuan Cancer Hospital & Institute Esophageal Cancer Case Management Database (SCH-ECCM Database). We retrospective analyzed esophageal cancer patients who underwent esophagectomy from Jan. 2010 to Nov. 2017. Patients were divided into two groups: MIE and OE groups. Clinical outcome and survival data were compared using TNM stages of AJCC 8th edition. Results After 65.3 months of median follow-up time, 2958 patients who received esophagectomy were included. 1106 of 2958 patients (37.4%) were underwent MIE, 1533 of 2958 patients (51.8%) were underwent OE. More than half of the patients (56.7%, 1673/2958) were above stage III. The median overall survival (OS) of 2958 patients was 51.6 months (95% CI 45.2–58.1). The MIE group's median OS was 74.6 months compared to 42.4 months in the OE group (95% CI 1.23–1.54, P &lt; 0.001). The OS at 1, 3, and 5 years were 90%, 68%, 58% in the MIE group; 85%, 54%, 42% in the OE group,respectively (P&lt;0.001). Conclusion The nearly 8-year follow-up data from this single cancer center suggests that with the advancement of minimally invasive surgical technology, MIE can bring significant benefits to patients' long-term survival compared with OE. Following the continuous progression of minimally invasive surgery and establishing a mature surgical team, MIE should be encouraged.

Long-term survival in esophageal cancer after minimally invasive esophagectomy compared to open esophagectomy

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Eivind Gottlieb-Vedi ◽  
Joonas H. Kauppila ◽  
Fredrik Mattsson ◽  
Mats Lindblad ◽  
Magnus Nilsson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Open Esophagectomy

623 MINIMALLY INVASIVE VERSUS OPEN MCKEOWN FOR PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yan Zheng ◽  
Wenqun Xing ◽  
Xianben Liu ◽  
Haibo Sun
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Group 14 ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Long Term Survival ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Open Esophagectomy ◽  
Surgery Department

Abstract   McKeown Minimally invasive esophagectomy(McKeown-MIE) offers advantages in short-term outcomes compared with McKeown open esophagectomy(McKeown-OE). However, debate as to whether MIE is equivalent or better than OE regarding survival outcomes is ongoing. The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival between McKeown-MIE and McKeown-OE in a large cohort of esophageal cancer(EC) patients. Methods We used a prospective database of the Thoracic Surgery Department at our Cancer Hospital and included patients who underwent McKeown-MIE and McKeown-OE for EC during January 1, 2015, to January 6, 2018. The perioperative data and overall survival(OS) rate in the two groups were retrospectively compared. Results We included 502 patients who underwent McKeown-MIE (n = 306) or McKeown-OE (n = 196) for EC. The median age was 63 years. All baseline characteristics were well-balanced between two groups. There was a significantly shorter mean operative time (269.76 min vs. 321.14 min, P &lt; 0.001) in OE group. The 30-day and in hospital mortality were 0 and no difference for 90-day mortality (P = 0.116). The postoperative stay was shorter in MIE group, 14 days and 18 days in the MIE and OE groups(P &lt; 0.001). The OS at 32 months was 76.82% and 64.31% in the MIE and OE groups (P = 0.001); hazard ratio(HR) (95% CI): 2.333 (1.384–3.913). Conclusion These results showed the McKeown-MIE group was associated with a better long-term survival, compared with open-MIE for patients with resectable EC.

PS02.016: MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY IN ESOPHAGEAL CANCER: EXPERIENCE IN THE FIRST 100 CASES

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 124-125
Author(s):  
Atila Eroglu ◽  
Coskun Daharli ◽  
Yener Aydin ◽  
Ali Ulas ◽  
Haci Alici
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Hospital Stay ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy ◽  
Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background In this study, the efficiency of minimally invasive esophagectomy in esophageal cancer was examined. Methods A total of 100 consecutive patients who were hospitalized due to esophageal cancer and planned minimally invasive esophagectomy were evaluated prospectively between September 2013 and December 2017 in our clinic. Laparoscopic and thoracoscopic esophagectomy was performed in all of the patients included in the study. Inoperable cases were not included in the study. Age and sex of the patients, symptoms, localization of tumor, histopathological type, surgical modality, operation time, length of hospital stay and morbidity and mortality rates were reviewed. Results Thirty-eight (38%) patients were male and 62 (62%) patients were female. The mean age was 55.5 ± 10.8 (32–75 years). The most symptoms were dysphagy (96%) and weight loss (39%). Eighty-one patients (81%) had squamous cell cancer, ten (10%) had adenocarcinoma and nine had another form of esophageal cancer. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was performed in 36 of the 100 patients. Laparoscopic and thoracoscopic esophagectomy and intrathoracic anastomosis were performed in 94 patients (94%). Laparoscopic and thoracoscopic esophagectomy and neck anastomosis were performed in six patients (6%). The mean duration of operation was 260.1 ± 33.4 minutes (185–335 minutes). The mean intraoperative blood loss was 114.2 ± 191.4 ml (10–800 ml). In 51 (51%) of the patients, complications occurred in perioperative, early postoperative and late postoperative periods. In postoperative complications, anastomotic leak rate was eight patients (8%) and pulmonary complication rate was 21 patients (21%). While mortality was seen in three patients that had diabetes mellitus and hypertension, the 30-day mortality was 2% and the hospital mortality was 3%. The mean hospital stay was 11.2 ± 8.3 days (range 8–44). In our study, the probability of one-year overall survival was 91% and the probability of two years overall survival was 66%. Conclusion Minimally invasive esophagectomy is a safe and preferred method with low mortality, acceptable morbidity, short operative time and short hospital stay and has become a routine approach in the treatment of esophageal cancers. Multicenter studies to be performed in the near future will further assist in defining the benefits of minimally invasive esophagectomy. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

O100 WORLDWIDE TECHNIQUES AND OUTCOMES OF ROBOT-ASSISTED MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY (RAMIE): RESULTS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL UGIRA REGISTRY

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
B F Kingma ◽  
P P Grimminger ◽  
M J van Det ◽  
Y K Chao ◽  
P Chiu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Radical Resection ◽  
Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Cardiac Complications ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to gain insight in the techniques and outcomes of RAMIE worldwide. Background & Methods Although robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is increasingly adopted. The current literature on RAMIE mainly consists of single-center case series with considerable variation in reported techniques and outcomes. To gain an overview of the worldwide practice in RAMIE, an online registry was established by the Upper GI International Robotic Association (UGIRA). The collected data involve patient- and treatment characteristics, as well as postoperative outcomes that include complications as defined by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group, length of stay, re-admissions (i.e. <30 days after discharge), mortality (i.e. in-hospital or <30 days after surgery), and pathological results. The outcomes were descriptively analyzed for this interim report. Results A total of 434 patients who underwent RAMIE for esophageal cancer between 2016-2019 were included in this interim analysis. The mean age was 63 years (SD ±9.7), the majority was male (n=359, 83%), and nearly all patients had an ASA score ≥2 (n=398, 92%). Adenocarcinoma (n=253, 58%) and squamous cell carcinoma (n=162, 37%) were most prevalent. The usual surgical approach was transthoracic (n=428, 99%) with the patient in semiprone position (n=393, 91%). Gastric conduit reconstruction was performed in all except one patient, who received a colonic interposition. The anastomosis was created by hand-sewing (n=207, 48%), circular stapling (n=142, 32%), or linear stapling (n=85, 20%). The median intraoperative blood loss was 120 milliliters (IQR 70-280) and the median operating time was 392 minutes (IQR 353-455). Postoperative complications occurred in 251 patients (59%) and mainly involved pulmonary complications (n=138, 32%), anastomotic leakage (n=80, 18%), and cardiac complications (n=55, 13%). Mortality occurred in 9 patients (2%) and re-admission because of complications was required in 57 patients (14%). A median of 28 lymph nodes (IQR 21-35) were removed and a radical resection was achieved in 400 patients (92%). Conclusion The presented results are the first to provide an overview of the techniques that are commonly used in RAMIE. By demonstrating results that are in line with recent benchmarking literature, this study demonstrates the safety and feasibility of RAMIE.

scholarly journals The Impact of Infectious Complications after Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer on Cancer Prognosis and Treatment Strategy

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (19) ◽  
pp. 4614
Author(s):  
Eisuke Booka ◽  
Hirotoshi Kikuchi ◽  
Yoshihiro Hiramatsu ◽  
Hiroya Takeuchi
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Invasive Procedure ◽  
Infectious Complications ◽  
Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Cancer Prognosis ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
The Impact

Despite advances in the perioperative management of esophagectomy, it is still a highly invasive procedure for esophageal cancer and is associated with severe postoperative complications. The two major postoperative infectious complications after esophagectomy are pulmonary complications and anastomotic leakage. We previously reported that postoperative infectious complications after esophagectomy adversely affect long-term survival significantly in a single institution and meta-analysis. Additionally, we reviewed the mechanisms of proinflammatory cytokines, such as C-X-C motif ligand 8 (CXCL8) and its cognate receptor, C-X-C chemokine receptor 2 (CXCR2), in contributing to tumorigenesis and tumor progression. Moreover, we previously reported that introducing minimally invasive esophagectomy, including robot assistance, laparoscopic gastric mobilization, and multidisciplinary team management, significantly reduced postoperative infectious complications after esophagectomy. Further, this review also suggests future treatment strategies for esophageal cancer, considering the adverse effect of postoperative infectious complications after esophagectomy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document