Comparison of modified McKeown minimally invasive approach and the left chest-neck incision approach esophagectomy to treat cancer of mid-to-distal thoracic esophagus
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1001-4497.2013.06.007
- VernacularTitle:微创McKeown术与左胸径路食管切除术治疗胸中下段食管癌的比较
- Author:
Baoxing LIU
;
Yin LI
;
Jianjun QIN
;
Ruixiang ZHANG
;
Xianben LIU
;
Haibo SUN
;
Shilei LIU
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Esophageal neoplasms;
Esophagectomy;
Thoracoscopy;
Laparoscopy
- From:
Chinese Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2013;(6):342-345
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the outcomes between modified McKeown minimally invasive approach and open left chest-neck incision approach esophagectomy for treatment cancer of mid-to-distal thoracic esophagus.Methods We retrospectively analyzed clinical data from 128 patients with mid-to-distal thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy from March 2009 to March 2012.One hundred and fifty patients were served as control that underwent open left chest-neck incision approach esophagectomy in the same period.Results All the operations were performed successfully.There was significant difference between modified McKeown minimally invasive approach and open left chest-neck incision approach esophagectomy with regard to respiratory complications (10.9 ％ vs.20.7％),pneumonia (4.7％ vs.11.3 ％),atelectasis (3.1％ vs.10.5 ％,),pleural effusion (3.1％ vs.10.0％) and delayed gastric emptying (8.6 ％ vs.1.3 ％) (P ＜ 0.05).Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the minimally-invasive group than the open group [(11.7 ± 3.6) days vs.(13.9 ± 6.5) days,P＜0.05],and had significantly less blood loss [(88.1 ±41.8) ml vs.(360.5 ±80.6) ml,P＜0.05] and the number of lymph nodes harvested (22.9 ±5.7 vs.16.8 ±4.5,P ＜0.05).No significant differences were observed on the operative time,mortality and other complication between the two groups.Conclusion Modified McKeown minimally invasive approach esophagectomy is techeniqually feasible and safely which have lower blood loss,lower respiratory complication,shorter hospital stay and more number of lymph nodes harvested comparing to open left chest-neck incision approach.
