Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Comparison of Early Surgical Outcomes From The Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database

被引:172
|
作者
Sihag, Smita
Kosinski, Andrzej S.
Gaissert, Henning A.
Wright, Cameron D.
Schipper, Paul H.
机构
[1] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Thorac Surg, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[2] Duke Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Biostat & Bioinformat, Durham, NC USA
[3] Duke Clin Res Inst, Durham, NC USA
[4] Oregon Hlth & Sci Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Cardiothorac Surg, Portland, OR 97201 USA
来源
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY | 2016年 / 101卷 / 04期
关键词
IVOR-LEWIS ESOPHAGECTOMY; SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES; PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES; VOLUME; MORTALITY; LOBECTOMY;
D O I
10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.09.095
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background. Open esophagectomy results in significant morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has become increasingly popular at specialized centers with the aim of improving perioperative outcomes. Numerous single-institution studies suggest MIE may offer lower short-term morbidity. The two approaches are compared using a large, multi institutional database. Methods. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) National Database (v2.081) was queried for all resections performed for esophageal cancer between 2008 and 2011 (n = 3,780). Minimally invasive approaches included both transhiatal (n = 214) and Ivor Lewis (n = 600), and these were compared directly with open transhiatal (n = 1,065) and Ivor Lewis (n = 1,291) procedures, respectively. Thirty-day outcomes were examined using nonparametric statistical testing. Results. Both open and MIE groups were similar in terms of preoperative risk factors. Morbidity and all cause mortality were equivalent at 62.2% and 3.8%. MIE was associated with longer median procedure times (443.0 versus 312.0 minutes; p < 0.001), but a shorter median length of hospital stay (9.0 versus 10.0 days; p < 0.001). Patients who underwent MIE had higher rates of reoperation (9.9% versus 4.4%; p < 0.001) and empyema (4.1% versus 1.8%; p < 0.001). Open technique led to an increased rate of wound infections (6.3% versus 2.3%; p < 0.001), postoperative transfusion (18.7% versus 14.1%; p = 0.002), and ileus (4.5% versus 2.2%; p = 0.002). Propensity score-matched analysis confirmed these findings. High-and low-volume centers had similar outcomes. Conclusions. Early results from the STS National Database indicate that MIE is safe, with comparable rates of morbidity and mortality as open technique. Longer procedure times and a higher rate of reoperation following MIE may reflect a learning curve. (C) 2016 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
引用
收藏
页码:1281 / 1289
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Comparisons of minimally invasive esophagectomy and open esophagectomy in lymph node metastasis/dissection for thoracic esophageal cancer
    Li, Zhenhua
    Gai, Chunyue
    Zhang, Yuefeng
    Wen, Shiwang
    Lv, Huilai
    Xu, Yanzhao
    Huang, Chao
    Zhao, Bo
    Tian, Ziqiang
    CHINESE MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2022, 135 (20) : 2446 - 2452
  • [12] Comparisons of minimally invasive esophagectomy and open esophagectomy in lymph node metastasis/dissection for thoracic esophageal cancer
    Li Zhenhua
    Gai Chunyue
    Zhang Yuefeng
    Wen Shiwang
    Lv Huilai
    Xu Yanzhao
    Huang Chao
    Zhao Bo
    Tian Ziqiang
    中华医学杂志英文版, 2022, 135 (20)
  • [13] Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Provides Equivalent Survival to Open Esophagectomy: An Analysis of the National Cancer Database
    Mitzman, Brian
    Lutfi, Waseem
    Wang, Chi-Hsiung
    Krantz, Seth
    Howington, John A.
    Kim, Ki-Wan
    SEMINARS IN THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2017, 29 (02) : 244 - 253
  • [14] Outcomes of robotic versus non-robotic minimally-invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: An American College of Surgeons NSQIP database analysis
    Harbison, Gregory J.
    Vossler, John D.
    Yim, Nicholas H.
    Murayama, Kenric M.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2019, 218 (06): : 1223 - 1228
  • [15] Cost-Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer
    Lawrence Lee
    Monisha Sudarshan
    Chao Li
    Eric Latimer
    Gerald M. Fried
    David S. Mulder
    Liane S. Feldman
    Lorenzo E. Ferri
    Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2013, 20 : 3732 - 3739
  • [16] Cost-Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer
    Lee, Lawrence
    Sudarshan, Monisha
    Li, Chao
    Latimer, Eric
    Fried, Gerald M.
    Mulder, David S.
    Feldman, Liane S.
    Ferri, Lorenzo E.
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2013, 20 (12) : 3732 - 3739
  • [17] Improving Oncologic Outcomes for Esophageal Cancer After Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy
    Mansour, Alexandra I.
    Reddy, Rishindra M.
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2022, 29 (09) : 5369 - 5371
  • [18] Improving Oncologic Outcomes for Esophageal Cancer After Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy
    Alexandra I. Mansour
    Rishindra M. Reddy
    Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2022, 29 : 5369 - 5371
  • [19] Outcomes After Converted Minimally Invasive to Open Esophagectomy in Patients With Esophageal Cancer
    Gergen, Anna K.
    Halpern, Alison L.
    Helmkamp, Laura
    Torphy, Robert J.
    White, Allana M.
    Mitchell, John D.
    Meguid, Robert A.
    Scott, Christopher D.
    Gleisner, Ana L.
    McCarter, Martin D.
    Weyant, Michael J.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2021, 112 (05): : 1593 - 1599
  • [20] Comparison of outcomes of open and minimally invasive esophagectomy in 183 patients with cancer
    Meng, Fanyu
    Li, Yin
    Ma, Haibo
    Yan, Ming
    Zhang, Ruixiang
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2014, 6 (09) : 1218 - 1224