+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Minimally Invasive Oesophagectomy: Preliminary Results after Introduction of an Intrathoracic Anastomosis

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Background: Intrathoracic anastomosis after oesophagectomy has recently been associated with reduced functional morbidity compared to a cervical anastomosis. Methods: From January 2011 until August 2012, all operable patients were scheduled to undergo minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIE) with intrathoracic anastomosis. Patient characteristics, complications, morbidity and mortality were prospectively registered and analysed. Results: Forty-five patients underwent MIE with intrathoracic stapled end-to-side anastomosis. Major changes in operative technique were made 2 times due to non-satisfactory results, dividing the patients into 3 groups. One patient in group 1 died. The anastomotic leakage rate decreased from 44% in group 1 to 0% in groups 2 and 3 (p = 0.007). The pulmonary complication rate decreased from 67% in group 1 to 44% in group 2 (not significant, NS) and 22% in group 3 (p = 0.04). The median hospital stay decreased from 17 days in group 1 to 14 days in group 2 (NS) and 8 days in group 3 (p < 0.001). There were no stenoses, no dilatations and no patients with recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. Conclusions: The introduction of the intrathoracic anastomosis led to favourable functional results but was initially associated with considerable morbidity. Results improved after changing operative techniques, but the learning curve may also be responsible.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

          Surgical resection is regarded as the only curative option for resectable oesophageal cancer, but pulmonary complications occurring in more than half of patients after open oesophagectomy are a great concern. We assessed whether minimally invasive oesophagectomy reduces morbidity compared with open oesophagectomy. We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial at five study centres in three countries between June 1, 2009, and March 31, 2011. Patients aged 18-75 years with resectable cancer of the oesophagus or gastro-oesophageal junction were randomly assigned via a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive either open transthoracic or minimally invasive transthoracic oesophagectomy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, and investigators undertaking interventions, assessing outcomes, and analysing data, were not masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was pulmonary infection within the first 2 weeks after surgery and during the whole stay in hospital. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR TC 2452. We randomly assigned 56 patients to the open oesophagectomy group and 59 to the minimally invasive oesophagectomy group. 16 (29%) patients in the open oesophagectomy group had pulmonary infection in the first 2 weeks compared with five (9%) in the minimally invasive group (relative risk [RR] 0·30, 95% CI 0·12-0·76; p=0·005). 19 (34%) patients in the open oesophagectomy group had pulmonary infection in-hospital compared with seven (12%) in the minimally invasive group (0·35, 0·16-0·78; p=0·005). For in-hospital mortality, one patient in the open oesophagectomy group died from anastomotic leakage and two in the minimally invasive group from aspiration and mediastinitis after anastomotic leakage. These findings provide evidence for the short-term benefits of minimally invasive oesophagectomy for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer. Digestive Surgery Foundation of the Unit of Digestive Surgery of the VU University Medical Centre. Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients.

            Esophagectomy is a complex operation and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In an attempt to lower morbidity, we have adopted a minimally invasive approach to esophagectomy. Our primary objective was to evaluate the outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in a large group of patients. Our secondary objective was to compare the modified McKeown minimally invasive approach (videothoracoscopic surgery, laparoscopy, neck anastomosis [MIE-neck]) with our current approach, a modified Ivor Lewis approach (laparoscopy, videothoracoscopic surgery, chest anastomosis [MIE-chest]). We reviewed 1033 consecutive patients undergoing MIE. Elective operation was performed on 1011 patients; 22 patients with nonelective operations were excluded. Patients were stratified by surgical approach and perioperative outcomes analyzed. The primary endpoint studied was 30-day mortality. The MIE-neck was performed in 481 (48%) and MIE-Ivor Lewis in 530 (52%). Patients undergoing MIE-Ivor Lewis were operated in the current era. The median number of lymph nodes resected was 21. The operative mortality was 1.68%. Median length of stay (8 days) and ICU stay (2 days) were similar between the 2 approaches. Mortality rate was 0.9%, and recurrent nerve injury was less frequent in the Ivor Lewis MIE group (P < 0.001). MIE in our center resulted in acceptable lymph node resection, postoperative outcomes, and low mortality using either an MIE-neck or an MIE-chest approach. The MIE Ivor Lewis approach was associated with reduced recurrent laryngeal nerve injury and mortality of 0.9% and is now our preferred approach. Minimally invasive esophagectomy can be performed safely, with good results in an experienced center.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Surgical therapy of oesophageal carcinoma.

              During the past 10 years, postoperative mortality associated with surgical treatment of oesophageal carcinoma has been reduced by one-half. However, it appears that all efforts to improve long-term survival with extensive excisional procedures and adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy have failed. Fifty-six of 100 patients presenting to the surgeon with an oesophageal carcinoma have resectable disease. Recent studies suggest that seven of them will die from postoperative complications and 49 patients will be discharged from the hospital after an average of 3 weeks. Of these patients, 27 will survive the first, 12 the second, and ten the fifth year. Although it may be possible to further reduce postoperative complications and mortality, the chances of improving the long-term prognosis of patients with oesophageal carcinoma seem small.

                Author and article information

                Dig Surg
                Digestive Surgery
                S. Karger AG
                July 2014
                23 April 2014
                : 31
                : 2
                : 95-103
                aDepartment of Surgery, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, bDepartment of Surgery, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                Author notes
                *Frans van Workum, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital Nijmegen, PO Box 9015, NL-6500 GS, Nijmegen (The Netherlands), E-Mail F.vanworkum@cwz.nl
                358812 Dig Surg 2014;31:95-103
                © 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 2, Pages: 9
                Original Paper


                Comment on this article