Full Text:   <1525>

Summary:  <1230>

CLC number: R655.4

On-line Access: 2018-09-04

Received: 2018-07-17

Revision Accepted: 2018-08-10

Crosschecked: 2018-08-24

Cited: 0

Clicked: 2447

Citations:  Bibtex RefMan EndNote GB/T7714

 ORCID:

Zi-yi Zhu

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8890-7894

-   Go to

Article info.
Open peer comments

Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B 2018 Vol.19 No.9 P.718-725

http://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B1800329


Clinical analysis of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a single center by a single medical group


Author(s):  Zi-yi Zhu, Xu Yong, Rao-jun Luo, Yun-zhen Wang

Affiliation(s):  Department of Thoracic Surgery, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310016, China

Corresponding email(s):   zhuziyicn@zju.edu.cn

Key Words:  Minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (MIME), Surgical procedure, Learning curve


Zi-yi Zhu, Xu Yong, Rao-jun Luo, Yun-zhen Wang. Clinical analysis of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a single center by a single medical group[J]. Journal of Zhejiang University Science B, 2018, 19(9): 718-725.

@article{title="Clinical analysis of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a single center by a single medical group",
author="Zi-yi Zhu, Xu Yong, Rao-jun Luo, Yun-zhen Wang",
journal="Journal of Zhejiang University Science B",
volume="19",
number="9",
pages="718-725",
year="2018",
publisher="Zhejiang University Press & Springer",
doi="10.1631/jzus.B1800329"
}

%0 Journal Article
%T Clinical analysis of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a single center by a single medical group
%A Zi-yi Zhu
%A Xu Yong
%A Rao-jun Luo
%A Yun-zhen Wang
%J Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B
%V 19
%N 9
%P 718-725
%@ 1673-1581
%D 2018
%I Zhejiang University Press & Springer
%DOI 10.1631/jzus.B1800329

TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical analysis of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a single center by a single medical group
A1 - Zi-yi Zhu
A1 - Xu Yong
A1 - Rao-jun Luo
A1 - Yun-zhen Wang
J0 - Journal of Zhejiang University Science B
VL - 19
IS - 9
SP - 718
EP - 725
%@ 1673-1581
Y1 - 2018
PB - Zhejiang University Press & Springer
ER -
DOI - 10.1631/jzus.B1800329


Abstract: 
Objective: McKeown esophagectomy followed by cervical and abdominal procedures has been commonly used for invasive esophageal carcinoma. This minimally-invasive operative procedure in the lateral prone position has been considered to be the most appropriate method. We describe our experiences in minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (MIME) for esophageal cancer. Methods: Between March 2016 and February 2018, a total of 82 patients underwent MIME by a single group in our department (a single center). All procedure, operation, oncology, and complication data were reviewed. Results: All MIME procedures were completed successfully, with no conversions to open surgery. The median operative time was 260 min, and median blood loss was 100 ml. The average number of total harvested lymph nodes was 20.1 in the chest and 13.5 in the abdomen. There were no deaths within 30 postoperative days. Twenty cases (24.4%) developed postoperative complications, including anastomotic leak in 4 (4.9%), single lateral recurrent nerve palsy in 4 (4.9%), bilateral recurrent nerve palsy in 1 (1.2%), pulmonary problems in 3 (3.7%), chyle leak in 1 (1.2%), and other complications in 7 (including pleural effusions in 4, incomplete ileus in 2, and neck incision infection in 1; 8.54%). Average postoperative hospitalization time was 12 d. Blood loss, operation time, morbidity rate, and the number of harvested lymph nodes were analyzed by evaluating learning curves in different periods. Significant differences were found in operative time (P=0.006), postoperative hospitalization days (P=0.015), total harvested lymph nodes (P=0.003), harvested thoracic lymph nodes (P=0.006), and harvested abdominal lymph nodes (P=0.022) among different periods. Conclusions: Surgical outcomes following MIME for esophageal cancer are safe and acceptable. The MIME procedure for stages I and II could be performed proficiently and reached an experience plateau after approximately 25 cases.

单中心单医疗组全腔镜食管癌切除的临床分析

目的:颈胸腹联合三切口食管癌切除术(McKeown)被广泛应用于食管癌的治疗.侧俯卧位的全腔镜食管癌切除术目前被认为是合适的治疗方式.本文回顾性分析了本中心的食管癌全腔镜手术的经验.
创新点:目前全腔镜食管癌手术在国内仍是少数大的医疗中心开展,对于多数医院仍未能开展.本研究单中心单医疗组全腔镜食管癌病例分析以及学习曲线,目前国内类似经验总结尚不多,对于该术式推广有一定指导意义.
方法:在2016年4月至2018年2月之间,共82例食管癌病人在我中心由单医疗组进行全腔镜食管癌切除手术,手术方式、临床资料、手术、病理、并发症等资料被回顾性分析.全部的腔镜手术全部被成功完成,无一例术中转为开放手术.手术时间为260分钟,术中出血100毫升.胸部和腹部的淋巴结清扫枚数分别为20.1和13.5枚.术后30天内未出现死亡病例.总并发症率为24.4%,包括吻合口瘘4例(4.9%),喉返神经损伤5例(6.1%),肺部感染3例(3.7%),乳糜胸1例(1.2%),胸腔积液4例(4.9%),不全肠梗阻2例(2.5%),颈部切口感染1例(1.2%).术后平均住院天数12天.根据学习曲线,我们分析了不同阶段的出血量、手术时间、并发症率、淋巴结清扫数量等数据.不同阶段的手术时间(P=0.006)、术后住院天数(P=0.015)、总淋巴结清扫数(P=0.003)、胸腔内淋巴结清扫数(P=0.006)和腹腔内淋巴结清扫数(P=0.022)均有统计学差异.
结论:全腔镜食管癌切除手术被认为是安全的、合适的.对于I期、II期的食管癌病人,随着手术例数的积累手术技巧会更熟练,并在25例左右到达平台期.

关键词:全腔镜食管癌切除术(McKeown手术);手术技巧;学习曲线

Darkslateblue:Affiliate; Royal Blue:Author; Turquoise:Article

Reference

[1]Amin MB, Greene FL, Edge SB, et al., 2017. The Eighth Edition AJCC Cancer Staging Manual: continuing to build a bridge from a population-based to a more “personalized” approach to cancer staging. CA Cancer J Clin, 67(2):93-99.

[2]Bonavina L, Laface L, Abate E, et al., 2012. Comparison of ventilation and cardiovascular parameters between prone thoracoscopic and Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Updates Surg, 64(2):81-85.

[3]Chen WQ, Zheng RS, Zhang SW, et al., 2013. Report of incidence and mortality in China cancer registries, 2009. Chin J Cancer Res, 25(1):10-21.

[4]Cheng YJ, Chan KC, Chien CT, et al., 2006. Oxidative stress during 1-lung ventilation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 132(3):513-518.

[5]Fabian T, McKelvey AA, Kent MS, et al., 2007. Prone thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization for minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc, 21(9):1667-1670.

[6]Guo W, Ma X, Yang S, et al., 2016. Combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of outcomes. Surg Endosc, 30(9):3873-3881.

[7]Kanemura T, Makino T, Miyazaki Y, et al., 2017. Distribution patterns of metastases in recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph nodes in patients with squamous cell esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus, 30(1):1-7.

[8]Li XM, Li F, Liu ZK, et al., 2015. Investigation of one-lung ventilation postoperative cognitive dysfunction and regional cerebral oxygen saturation relations. J Zhejiang Univ-Sci B (Biomed & Biotechnol), 16(12):1042-1048.

[9]Low DE, Alderson D, Cecconello I, et al., 2015. International consensus on standardization of data collection for complications associated with esophagectomy: esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group. Ann Surg, 262(2):286-294.

[10]Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, et al., 2003. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg, 238(4):486-494.

[11]Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, et al., 2012. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg, 256(1):95-103.

[12]Lv L, Hu WD, Ren YC, et al., 2016. Minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. Onco Targets Ther, 9:6751-6762.

[13]Ma SH, Yan TS, Liu DD, et al., 2018. Minimally invasive esophagectomy in the lateral-prone position: experience of 124 cases in a single center. Thorac Cancer, 9(1):37-43.

[14]Meng FY, Li Y, Ma HB, et al., 2014. Comparison of outcomes of open and minimally invasive esophagectomy in 183 patients with cancer. J Thorac Dis, 6(9):1218-1224.

[15]Messager M, Pasquer A, Duhamel A, et al., 2015. Laparoscopic gastric mobilization reduces postoperative mortality after esophageal cancer surgery: a French nationwide study. Ann Surg, 262(5):817-823.

[16]Noshiro H, Miyake S, 2013. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy using prone positioning. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 19(6):399-408.

[17]Okamura A, Watanabe M, Mine S, et al., 2016. Factors influencing difficulty of the thoracic procedure in minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc, 30(10):4279-4285.

[18]Oshikiri T, Yasuda T, Hasegawa H, et al., 2017. Short-term outcomes and one surgeon’s learning curve for thoracoscopic esophagectomy performed with the patient in the prone position. Surg Today, 47(3):313-319.

[19]Tsujimoto H, Takahata R, Nomura S, et al., 2012. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for esophageal cancer attenuates postoperative systemic responses and pulmonary complications. Surgery, 151(5):667-673.

[20]Xi Y, Ma ZK, Shen YX, et al., 2016. A novel method for lymphadenectomy along the left laryngeal recurrent nerve during thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma. J Thorac Dis, 8(1):24-30.

[21]Ye LY, Liu DR, Li C, et al., 2013. Systematic review of laparoscopy-assisted versus open gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer. J Zhejiang Univ-Sci B (Biomed & Biotechnol), 14(6):468-478.

[22]Yukaya T, Saeki H, Kasagi Y, et al., 2015. Indocyanine green fluorescence angiography for quantitative evaluation of gastric tube perfusion in patients undergoing esophagectomy. J Am Coll Surg, 221(2):e37-e42.

[23]Zhai CB, Liu YJ, Li W, et al., 2015. A comparison of short-term outcomes between Ivor-Lewis and McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy. J Thorac Dis, 7(12):2352-2358.

[24]Zhou C, Zhang L, Wang H, et al., 2015. Superiority of minimally invasive oesophagectomy in reducing in-hospital mortality of patients with resectable oesophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE, 10(7):e0132889.

Open peer comments: Debate/Discuss/Question/Opinion

<1>

Please provide your name, email address and a comment





Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE, 38 Zheda Road, Hangzhou 310027, China
Tel: +86-571-87952783; E-mail: cjzhang@zju.edu.cn
Copyright © 2000 - 2022 Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE