Clinical Outcomes of Corrective Surgical Treatment for Esophageal Cancer.
- Author:
Se Min RYU
1
;
Won Min JO
;
Young Ho CHOI
;
Young Jae MOK
;
Hyun Koo KIM
;
Yang Hyun CHO
;
Young sang SOHN
;
Hark Jei KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, College of Medicine, Korea University, Korea. kughcs@korea.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Esophageal neoplasms;
Esophageal surgery;
Neoplasm outcomes
- MeSH:
Adenocarcinoma;
Colon;
Deglutition Disorders;
Drug Therapy;
Early Diagnosis;
Esophageal Neoplasms*;
Esophagogastric Junction;
Esophagus;
Follow-Up Studies;
Hand;
Hemorrhage;
Hepatitis;
Humans;
Melanoma;
Neck;
Neoplasms, Squamous Cell;
Pneumonia;
Sepsis;
Stomach;
Survival Rate;
Weight Loss
- From:The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2005;38(2):157-163
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes of esophageal cancer have not been satisfactory in spite of the development of surgical skills and protocols of adjuvant therapy. We analyzed the results of corrective surgical patients for esophageal cancer from January 1992 to July 2002. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Among 129 patients with esophageal cancer, ths study was performed in 68 patients who received corrective surgery. The ratio of sex was 59 : 9 (male : female) and mean age was 61.07+/-7.36 years old. Chief complaints of this patients were dysphagia, epigastric pain and weight loss, etc. The locations of esophageal cancer were 4 in upper esophagus, 36 in middle, 20 in lower, 8 in esophagogastric junction. 60 patients had squamous cell cancer and 7 had adenocarcinoma, and 1 had malignant melanoma. Five patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy. RESULT: The postoperative stage I, IIA, IIB, III, IV patients were 7, 25, 12, 17 and 7, respectively. The conduit for replacement of esophagus were stomach (62 patients) and colon (6 patients). The neck anastomosis was performed in 28 patients and intrathoracic anastomosis in 40 patients. The technique of anastomosis were hand sewing method (44 patients) and stapling method (24 patients). One of the early complications was anastomosis leakage (3 patients) which had only radiologic leakage that recovered spontaneously. The anastomosis technique had no correlation with postoperative leakage, which stapling method (2 patients) and hand sewing method (1 patient). There were 3 respiratory failures, 6 pneumonia, 1 fulminant hepatitis, 1 bleeding and 1 sepsis. The 2 early postoperative deaths were fulminant hepatitis and sepsis. Among 68 patients, 23 patients had postoperative adjuvant therapy and 55 paitents were followed up. The follow up period was 23.73+/-22.18 months (1~76 month). There were 5 patients in stage I, 21 in stage 2A, 9 in stage IIB, 15 in stage III and 5 in stage IV. The 1, 3, 5 year survival rates of the patients who could be followed up completely was 58.43+/-6.5%, 35.48+/-7.5% and 18.81+/-7.7%, respectively. Statistical analysis showed that long-term survival difference was associated with a stage, T stage, and N stage (p <0.05) but not associated with histology, sex, anastomosis location, tumor location, and pre and postoperative adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSION: The early diagnosis, aggressive operative resection, and adequate postoperative treatment may have contributed to the observed increase in survival for esophageal cancer patients.
