Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Thoracolaparoscopic Esophagectomy Versus Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer

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.

Abstract

The standard curative treatment for patients with esophageal cancer is perioperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by open transthoracic esophagectomy (OTE). Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy (RAMIE) may reduce complications.

Related collections

Most cited references 19

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

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

Surya S A Y Biere, Mark I van Berge Henegouwen, Kirsten W. Maas … (2012)

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.

0 comments Cited 379 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

International Consensus on Standardization of Data Collection for Complications Associated With Esophagectomy: Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG).

Donald Low, Derek Alderson, Ivan Cecconello … (2015)

Perioperative complications influence long- and short-term outcomes after esophagectomy. The absence of a standardized system for defining and recording complications and quality measures after esophageal resection has meant that there is wide variation in evaluating their impact on these outcomes.

0 comments Cited 328 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

Jan B. F. Hulscher, Johanna W van Sandick, Angela G. E. M. de Boer … (2002)

Controversy exists about the best surgical treatment for esophageal carcinoma. We randomly assigned 220 patients with adenocarcinoma of the mid-to-distal esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastric cardia involving the distal esophagus either to transhiatal esophagectomy or to transthoracic esophagectomy with extended en bloc lymphadenectomy. Principal end points were overall survival and disease-free survival. Early morbidity and mortality, the number of quality-adjusted life-years gained, and cost effectiveness were also determined. A total of 106 patients were assigned to undergo transhiatal esophagectomy, and 114 to undergo transthoracic esophagectomy. Demographic characteristics and characteristics of the tumor were similar in the two groups. Perioperative morbidity was higher after transthoracic esophagectomy, but there was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality (P=0.45). After a median follow-up of 4.7 years, 142 patients had died--74 (70 percent) after transhiatal resection and 68 (60 percent) after transthoracic resection (P=0.12). Although the difference in survival was not statistically significant, there was a trend toward a survival benefit with the extended approach at five years: disease-free survival was 27 percent in the transhiatal-esophagectomy group, as compared with 39 percent in the transthoracic-esophagectomy group (95 percent confidence interval for the difference, -1 to 24 percent [the negative value indicates better survival with transhiatal resection]), whereas overall survival was 29 percent as compared with 39 percent (95 percent confidence interval for the difference, -3 to 23 percent). Transhiatal esophagectomy was associated with lower morbidity than transthoracic esophagectomy with extended en bloc lymphadenectomy. Although median overall, disease-free, and quality-adjusted survival did not differ statistically between the groups, there was a trend toward improved long-term survival at five years with the extended transthoracic approach. Copyright 2002 Massachusetts Medical Society

0 comments Cited 273 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Title: Annals of Surgery

Abbreviated Title: Annals of Surgery

Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

ISSN (Print): 0003-4932

Publication date Created: 2019

Publication date (Print): April 2019

Volume: 269

Issue: 4

Pages: 621-630

Article

DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003031

PubMed ID: 30308612

SO-VID: f9ddf43c-89c6-406d-aac7-2a9348e24557

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Cited by 180

See all cited by

Most referenced authors 1,017

See all reference authors

Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Thoracolaparoscopic Esophagectomy Versus Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer : A Randomized Controlled Trial

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Procedural speed in criminal law

Most cited references 19

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

International Consensus on Standardization of Data Collection for Complications Associated With Esophagectomy: Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG).

Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

Author and article information

Journal

Article

History

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 2,518

Cited by 180

Most referenced authors 1,017