Propensity Score-Matched Analysis Comparing Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Versus Minimally Invasive Mckeown Esophagectomy

被引:66
|
作者
van Workum, Frans [1 ]
Slaman, Annelijn E. [2 ,3 ]
Henegouwen, Mark I. van Berge [2 ,3 ]
Gisbertz, Suzanne S. [2 ,3 ]
Kouwenhoven, Ewout A. [4 ]
van Det, Marc J. [4 ]
van den Wildenberg, Frits J. H. [5 ]
Polat, Fatih [5 ]
Luyer, Misha D. P. [6 ]
Nieuwenhuijzen, Grard A. P. [6 ]
Rosman, Camiel [1 ]
机构
[1] Radboudumc, Dept Surg, POB 9101, NL-6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands
[2] Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, Dept Surg, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ Amsterdam, Amsterdam Canc Ctr, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[4] ZGT Hosp, Dept Surg, Almelo, Netherlands
[5] Canisius Wilhelmina Hosp, Dept Surg, Nijmegen, Netherlands
[6] Catharina Hosp, Dept Surg, Eindhoven, Netherlands
关键词
cervical anastomosis; intrathoracic anastomosis; Ivor Lewis esophagectomy; McKeown esophagectomy; minimally invasive esophagectomy; transthoracic esophagectomy; PROFICIENCY-GAIN; CANCER; COMPLICATIONS; ESOPHAGUS; SURVIVAL; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1097/SLA.0000000000002982
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Introduction: Totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE) is increasingly used in treatment of patients with esophageal carcinoma. However, it is currently unknown if McKeown TMIE or Ivor Lewis TMIE should be preferred for patients in whom both procedures are oncologically feasible. Methods: The study was performed in 4 high-volume Dutch esophageal cancer centers between November 2009 and April 2017. Prospectively collected data from consecutive patients with esophageal cancer localized in the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction undergoing McKeown TMIE or Ivor Lewis TMIE were included. Patients were propensity score matched for age, body mass index, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, Charlson Comorbidity Index, tumor type, tumor location, clinical stage, neoadjuvant treatment, and the hospital of surgery. The primary outcome parameter was anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation. Secondary outcome parameters were operation characteristics, pathology results, complications, reinterventions, reoperations, length of stay, and mortality. Results: Of all 787 included patients, 420 remained after matching. The incidence of anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation was 23.3% after McKeown TMIE versus 12.4% after Ivor Lewis TMIE (P = 0.003). Ivor Lewis TMIE was significantly associated with a lower incidence of pulmonary complications (46.7% vs 31.9%), recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (9.5% vs 0.5%), reoperations (18.6% vs 11.0%), 90-day mortality (7.1% vs 2.9%), shorter median intensive care unit length of stay (2 days vs 1 day) and shorter median hospital length of stay (12 vs 11 days) (all P < 0.05). R0 resection rate was similar between the groups. The median number of examined lymph nodes was 21 after McKeown TMIE and 25 after Ivor Lewis TMIE (P < 0.001). Conclusions: Ivor Lewis TMIE is associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage, 90-day mortality and other postoperative morbidity compared to McKeown TMIE in patients in whom both procedures are oncologically feasible.
引用
收藏
页码:128 / 133
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Minimally invasive esophagectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis of semiprone versus prone position
    Maarten F. J. Seesing
    Lucas Goense
    Jelle P. Ruurda
    Misha D. P. Luyer
    Grard A. P. Nieuwenhuijzen
    Richard van Hillegersberg
    [J]. Surgical Endoscopy, 2018, 32 : 2758 - 2765
  • [2] Minimally invasive esophagectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis of semiprone versus prone position
    Seesing, Maarten F. J.
    Goense, Lucas
    Ruurda, Jelle P.
    Luyer, Misha D. P.
    Nieuwenhuijzen, Grard A. P.
    van Hillegersberg, Richard
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2018, 32 (06): : 2758 - 2765
  • [3] Response: "A Propensity Score-matched Analysis of Open Versus Minimally Invasive Transthoracic Esophagectomy in the Netherlands''
    Seesing, Maarten F. J.
    Wijnhoven, Bas P. L.
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2018, 268 (06) : E75 - E76
  • [4] Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy
    Wee, Jon O.
    Morse, Christopher R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2012, 144 (03): : S60 - S62
  • [5] Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy
    Nguyen, NT
    Follette, DM
    Lemoine, PH
    Roberts, PF
    Goodnight, JE
    [J]. ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2001, 72 (02): : 593 - 596
  • [6] Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy
    Gray, Katherine D.
    Molena, Daniela
    [J]. SURGICAL ONCOLOGY CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2024, 33 (03) : 529 - 538
  • [7] Correction to: Comparison of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and left transthoracic esophagectomy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients: a propensity score-matched analysis
    Qi Wang
    Zixiang Wu
    Tianwei Zhan
    Shuai Fang
    Sai Zhang
    Gang Shen
    Ming Wu
    [J]. BMC Cancer, 20
  • [8] Outcomes of Open Versus Minimally Invasive Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis of NSQIP Database
    Naffouje, Samer A.
    Salloum, Rony H.
    Khalaf, Zaynab
    Salti, George I.
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2019, 26 (07) : 2001 - 2010
  • [9] Outcomes of Open Versus Minimally Invasive Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis of NSQIP Database
    Samer A. Naffouje
    Rony H. Salloum
    Zaynab Khalaf
    George I. Salti
    [J]. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2019, 26 : 2001 - 2010
  • [10] McKeown or Ivor Lewis minimally invasive esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Wang, Jingpu
    Hu, Jingfeng
    Zhu, Dengyan
    Wang, Kankan
    Gao, Chunzhi
    Shan, Tingting
    Yang, Yang
    [J]. TRANSLATIONAL CANCER RESEARCH, 2020, 9 (03) : 1518 - +