ObjectivesTo compare the clinical efficacy of different surgical thoracic duct management on prevention of postoperative chylothorax and its impact on the outcome of the patients. MethodsWe searched the electronic databases including PubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2016), Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies and case-control studies related to the comparison of different surgical thoracic duct management during esophagectomy on prevention of postoperative chylothorax from inception to May 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then RevMan 5.2 software was used for meta-analysis. ResultsTwenty-three trials were included, involving four RCTs, four cohort studies and 15 case-control studies. The results of meta-analysis indicated:(1) Prophylactic thoracic duct ligation group had lower incidence of postoperative chylothorax compared with non thoracoic duct ligation group (RCT:OR=0.20, 95%CI 0.09 to 0.47, P=0.000 02; Co/CC:OR=0.20, 95%CI 0.14 to 0.28, P<0.000 01); (2) There were no significant differences between the two groups in the respect of mortality, morbidity and the 2-year, 3-year, 5-year survival rates (all P values >0.05); (3) Prophylactic thoracic duct ligation could reduce the reoperation rate of chylothorax complicating esophageal cancer patients (RCT:OR=0.17, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.28, P<0.000 01; Co/CC:OR=0.18, 95%CI to 0.11 to 0.32, P<0.000 01), and increase the cure rate of expectant treatment on them (OR=0.25, 95%CI 0.11 to 0.56, P=0.000 8); (4) En bloc thoracic duct ligation group had a lower incidence of postoperative chylothorax compared with single thoracic duct ligation group (OR=3.67, 95%CI 1.43 to 9.43, P=0.007). ConclusionProphylactic thoracic duct ligation during esophagectomy could effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative chylothorax and is good for reducing the reoperation rate of chylothorax complicating esophageal cancer patients. En bloc thoracic duct ligation has a better efficacy on prevention of postoperative chylothorax compared with single thoracic duct ligation.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effect of single mediastinal drainage tube and both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube for the patients who received thoracoscopic radical resection of esophageal carcinoma.MethodsWe enrolled 96 esophageal carcinoma patients who received thoracoscopic radical resection from June 2016 to October 2018. Of them, 49 patients were indwelt with both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube (a chest & mediastinal drainage group, a CMD group) while the other 47 patients were indwelt with single mediastinal drainage tube (a single mediastinal drainage group, a SMD group). The total drainage volume, intubation time and incidence of postoperative complications (postoperative atelectasis, pulmonary infection, pleural effusion and anastomotic leakage) between the two groups were compared. The pain score and comfort score were also compared between the two groups.ResultsThe total drainage volume and intubation time in the SMD group were not significantly different from those in the CMD group (1 321±421 mL vs. 1 204±545 mL, P=0.541; 6.1±3.7 d vs. 6.4 ±5.1 d, P=0.321). The incidence of postoperative complications (postoperative atelectasis, pulmonary infection, pleural effusion and anastomotic leakage) in the SMD group was not significantly different from that in the CMD group (10.6% vs. 6.1%, P=0.712; 4.3% vs. 10.2%, P=0.656; 6.4% vs. 12.2%, P=0.121; 2.1% vs. 4.1%, P=0.526). The numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores on the first to the fifth day after surgery and during extubation in the SMD group were significantly lower than those in the CMD group (3.2±2.1 vs. 5.1±2.4, P=0.041; 2.8±0.6 vs. 4.8±1.4, P=0.015; 2.1±0.4 vs. 4.5±0.4, P=0.019; 1.7±0.7 vs. 4.0±0.8, P=0.004; 1.8±0.7 vs. 3.2±1.2, P=0.006; 1.4±0.2 vs. 2.5±3.4, P=0.012). The VAS comfort scores in the SMD group were significantly lower than those in the CMD group (3.6±1.7 vs. 6.6±3.7, P=0.018; 2.9±2.0 vs. 5.1±3.4, P=0.007; 2.1±1.4 vs. 5.5±2.4, P=0.004; 3.0±0.9 vs. 4.6±3.8, P=0.012; 1.8±1.1 vs. 4.2±2.7, P=0.003; 2.4±3.2 vs. 5.3±1.7, P=0.020).ConclusionThe clinical effect of single mediastinal drainage tube in thoracoscopic resection of esophageal carcinoma is similar to that of both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube, but it can significantly improve the comfort of the patients.
Objective To evaluate the security and outcomes of thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy (TLE) versus open approach (OA) for thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Methods From June 2014 to June 2015, 125 patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent esophagectomy through McKeown approach, including TLE (a TLE group, 107 patients, 77 males and 30 females) and OA (an OA group, 18 patients, 13 males and 5 females). The data of operation and postoperative complications of the two groups were analyzed retrospectively. Results There was no statistical difference in the duration of operation and ICU stay and resected lymph nodes around laryngeal recurrent nerve between the TLE group and the OA group (333.58±72.84 min vs. 369.17±91.24 min, P=0.067; 2.84±1.44 d vs. 6.44±13.46 d, P=0.272; 4.71±3.87 vs. 3.89±3.97, P=0.408) . There was a statistical difference in blood loss, total resected lymph nodes and resected lymph nodes groups between TLE group and OA group (222.62±139.77 ml vs. 427.78±276.65, P=0.006; 19.62±9.61 vs. 14.61±8.07, P=0.038; 3.70±0.99 vs. 3.11±1.13, P=0.024). The rate of postoperative complications was 32.7% in the TLE group and 38.9% in the OA group (P=0.608). There was a statistical difference (P=0.011) in incidence of pulmonary infection (2.8% in the TLE group and 16.7% in the OA group). Incidences of complications, such as anastomotic leakage, cardiac complications, left-side hydrothorax, right-side pneumothorax, voice hoarse and incision infection, showed no statistical difference between two groups. Conclusion For patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, TLE possesses advantages of more harvested lymph nodes, less blood loss and less pulmonary infection comparing with open approach, and is complied with the principles of security and oncological radicality of surgery.
目的探讨胸腹腔镜在食管癌手术中应用的可行性及近期疗效。 方法2012年6月至2013年10月四川省人民医院胸外科90例食管癌患者行胸腹腔镜联合食管癌切除术，其中男54例、女36例，年龄47～83岁，平均（63.15±11.10）岁。手术先行胸腔镜游离胸段食管并清扫淋巴结，再腹腔镜游离胃行食管胃左颈部吻合术。记录手术时间、术后胸腔引流管放置时间、平均住院时间、淋巴结清扫枚数、术后并发症等。 结果全部无围术期死亡。手术时间260～450 min。术后4～11 d（平均5 d）拔除胸腔闭式引流管，胸腔总引流量为530～4 260 ml。全组共清扫纵隔淋巴结（气管旁、右下肺韧带、食管旁、隆凸下及左右喉返神经链旁）、腹腔淋巴结（贲门旁、胃左动脉旁）及颈部淋巴结1 395枚，平均每例15.5枚，15例（16.7%）发现淋巴结转移。术后发生吻合口瘘7例（7.8%），声音嘶哑5例（5.6%），肺部感染5例（5.6%），乳糜胸2例（2.2%），均经保守治疗后痊愈。术后10～14 d出院。门诊及电话随访82例，随访率91.1%，随访时间1～16个月，患者全部生存，无复发。 结论胸腹腔镜联合行食管癌根治术在技术上是安全可行的，近期疗效可靠。
With the widespread application of minimally invasive esophagectomy, inflatable video-assisted mediastinoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy (IVMTE) has gradually become one of the alternative surgical methods for transthoracic esophagectomy due to less trama, fewer perioperative complications and better short-term efficacy. However, there is no uniform standard for surgical methods and lymph node dissection in medical centers that perform IVMTE, which affects the standardization and further promotion of IVMTE. Therefore, on the basis of fully consulting domestic and foreign literature, our team proposed an expert consensus focusing on IVMTE, in order to standardize the clinical practice, guarantee the quality of treatment and promote the development of IMVTE.
Objective To introduce a simple preoperative risk score for esophageal cancer (PRSEC) and its relationship with the prognosis of patients who underwent resection of esophageal carcinoma. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 498 patients receiving resection of esophageal carcinoma between 2005 and 2015 in our hospital. They were divided into three groups (PRSEC1, PRSEC2 and PRSEC3 groups) according to the results of PRSEC (revised cardiac risk index, model for end-stage liver disease score and pulmonary function test). Their overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were measured to find the relationship between the PRSEC and prognosis of patients. Results The mortality, morbidity, DFS and OS were correlative with the PRSEC. Therefore the PRSEC can be used to predict the short-term outcome. The patients with score 2 or 3 had higher risk of mortality and morbidity than those with score 1. In addition, the DFS and OS of patients with higher score were shorter (P<0.001). Conclusion The PRSEC is easy and efficient and can predict the morbidity, mortality, and long-term outcomes for the patients with resection of esophageal carcinoma.
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical efficacy of minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (MIILE) with reverse-puncture anastomosis. MethodsClinical data of the patients with lower esophageal carcinoma who underwent MIILE with reverse-puncture anastomosis in our department from May 2015 to December 2020 were collected. Modified MIILE consisted of several key steps: (1) pylorus fully dissociated; (2) making gastric tube under laparoscope; (3) dissection of esophagus and thoracic lymph nodes under artificial pneumothorax with single-lumen endotracheal tube intubation in semi-prone position; (4) left lung ventilation with bronchial blocker; (5) intrathoracic anastomosis with reverse-puncture anastomosis technique. Results Finally 248 patients were collected, including 206 males and 42 females, with a mean age of 63.3±7.4 years. All 248 patients underwent MIILE with reverse-puncture anastomosis successfully. The mean operation time was 176±35 min and estimated blood loss was 110±70 mL. The mean number of lymph nodes harvested from each patient was 24±8. The rate of lymph node metastasis was 43.1% (107/248). The pulmonary complication rate was 13.7% (34/248), including 6 patients of acute respiratory distress syndrome. Among the 6 patients, 2 patients needed endotracheal intubation-assisted respiration. Postoperative hemorrhage was observed in 5 patients and 2 of them needed hemostasis under thoracoscopy. Thoracoscopic thoracic duct ligation was performed in 1 patient due to the type Ⅲ chylothorax. TypeⅡ anastomotic leakage was found in 3 patients and 1 of them died of acute respiratory distress syndrome. One patient of delayed broncho-gastric fistula was cured after secondary operation. Ten patients with type Ⅰ recurrent laryngeal nerve injury were cured after conservative treatment. All patients were followed up for at least 16 months. The median follow-up time was 44 months. The 3-year survival rate was 71.8%, and the 5-year survival rate was 57.8%. ConclusionThe optimized MIILE with reverse-puncture anastomosis for the treatment of lower esophageal cancer is safe and feasible, and the long-term survival is satisfactory.
Objective To explore the causes of conversion to thoracotomy in patients with minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in a surgical team, and to obtain a deeper understanding of the timing of conversion in MIE. Methods The clinical data of patients who underwent MIE between September 9, 2011 and February 12, 2022 by a single surgical team in the Department of Thoracic Surgery of the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University were retrospectively analyzed. The main influencing factors and perioperative mortality of patients who converted to thoracotomy in this group were analyzed. Results In the cohort of 791 consecutive patients with MIE, there were 520 males and 271 females, including 29 patients of multiple esophageal cancer, 156 patients of upper thoracic cancer, 524 patients of middle thoracic cancer, and 82 patients of lower thoracic cancer. And 46 patients were converted to thoracotomy for different causes. The main causes for thoracotomy were advanced stage tumor (26 patients), anesthesia-related factors (5 patients), extensive thoracic adhesions (6 patients), and accidental injury of important structures (8 patients). There was a statistical difference in the distribution of tumor locations between patients who converted to thoracotomy and the MIE patients (P<0.05). The proportion of multiple and upper thoracic cancer in patients who converted to thoracotomy was higher than that in the MIE patients, while the proportion of lower thoracic cancer was lower than that in the MIE patients. The perioperative mortality of the thoracotomy patients was not significantly different from that of the MIE patients (P=1.000). Conclusion In MIE, advanced-stage tumor, anesthesia-related factors, extensive thoracic adhesions, and accidental injury of important structures are the main causes of conversion to thoracotomy. The rate varies at different tumor locations. Intraoperative conversion to thoracotomy does not affect the perioperative mortality of MIE.
Objective To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of thoraco-laparoscopy combined with Ivor Lewis surgery versus thoraco-laparoscopy combined with McKeown surgery in the treatment of esophageal carcinoma. MethodsPubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang database, VIP database and CNKI were searched by computer for the relevant literature comparing the efficacy and safety of Ivor Lewis surgery and McKeown surgery in the treatment of esophageal carcinoma from inception to January 2022. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of cohort studies, and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of randomized controlled studies. Review Manager 5.4 software was utilized to perform a meta-analysis of the literature. ResultsA total of 33 articles were included, which consisted of 26 retrospective cohort studies, 3 prospective cohort studies and 4 randomized controlled trials. There were 11 518 patients in total, including 5 454 patients receiving Ivor Lewis surgery and 6064 patients receiving McKeown surgery. NOS score was≥7 points. Meta-analysis showed that, in comparison to the McKeown surgery, the Ivor Lewis surgery had shorter operative time (MD=–19.61, 95%CI –30.20 to –9.02, P<0.001), shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD=–1.15, 95%CI –1.43 to –0.87, P<0.001), lower mortality rate during hospitalization or 30 days postoperatively (OR=0.37, 95%CI 0.20 to 0.71, P=0.003), and lower incidence of total postoperative complications (OR=0.36, 95%CI 0.27 to 0.49, P<0.001). The McKeown surgery had an advantage in terms of the number of lymph nodes dissected (MD=–1.25, 95%CI –2.03 to –0.47, P=0.002), postoperative extubation time (MD=0.78, 95%CI 0.37 to 1.19, P<0.001) and 6-month postoperative recurrence rate (OR=1.83, 95%CI 1.41 to 2.39, P<0.001). The differences between the two surgeries were not statistically significant in terms of intraoperative bleeding, postoperative 1 year-, 3 year- and 5 year-overall survival (OS), and impaired gastric emptying (P>0.05). ConclusionCompared with McKeown surgery, Ivor Lewis surgery has shorter operative time, shorter postoperative hospital stay, lower mortality rate during hospitalization or 30 days postoperatively and lower incidence of total postoperative complications. However, in terms of the number of lymph nodes dissected, postoperative extubation time and 6-month postoperative recurrence rate, McKeown surgery has advantages. Both surgeries have comparable results in terms of intraoperative bleeding, postoperative 1 year-, 3 year- and 5 year-OS, and impaired gastric emptying.