ObjectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy of cone-shaped gastric tube combined with cervical end-to-end stratified manual anastomosis and conventional tubular stomach combined with neck end-to-end mechanical side-to-side anastomosis in thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. MethodsThe clinical data of consecutive patients treated by thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery of the First People's Hospital of Neijiang from January 1, 2018 to March 25, 2021 were analyzed. The patients were divided into a cone-shaped gastric tube manual group (treated with cone-shaped gastric tube combined with cervical end-to-end stratified manual anastomosis) and a conventional tubular stomach mechanical group (treated with conventional tubular stomach+end-to-end mechanical side-to-side anastomosis). The anastomotic time, intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph node dissection, anastomotic fistula, anastomotic stenosis, anastomotic cost, sternogastric dilatation, gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, and postoperative complications were compared and analyzed between the two groups. ResultsA total of 161 patients were enrolled, including 112 males and 49 females aged 40-82 years. There were 80 patients in the cone-shaped gastric tube manual group, and 81 patients in the conventional tubular stomach mechanical group. There was no statistical difference in the intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph nodes dissected, hoarseness, pulmonary infection, arrhythmia, respiratory failure or chylothorax between the two groups (P>0.05). The anastomosis time of the cone-shaped gastric tube manual group was longer than that of the conventional tubular stomach mechanical group (28.35±3.20 min vs. 14.30±1.26 min, P<0.001), but the anastomotic cost and incidence of thoracogastric dilatation in the cone-shaped gastric tube manual group were significantly lower than those of the conventional tubular stomach mechanical group [948.48±70.55 yuan vs. 4 978.76±650.29 yuan, P<0.001; 3 (3.8%) vs. 14 (17.3%), P=0.005]. The incidences of anastomotic fistula and anastomotic stenosis in the cone-shaped gastric tube manual group were lower than those in the conventional tubular gastric mechanical group, but the differences were not statistically significant (P>0.05). The gastroesophageal reflux scores in the cone-shaped gastric tube manual group were lower than those in the conventional tubular gastric mechanical group at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after the operation (P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that digestive tract reconstruction method was the influencing factor for postoperative thoracogastric dilation, which was reduced in the cone-shaped gastric tube manual group. ConclusionCone-shaped gastric tube combined with cervical end-to-end stratified manual anastomosis can significantly reduce the incidence of thoracogastric dilatation after thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer and save hospitalization costs, with mild gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, and it still has certain advantages in reducing postoperative anastomotic fistula and anastomotic stenosis, which is worthy of clinical promotion.
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.
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.
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 evaluate the effect of intraoperative fluid infusion volume on postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in patients after minimally invasive endoscopic esophageal carcinoma resection. Methods From June 2019 to August 2021, 486 patients undergoing elective minimally invasive endoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were retrospectively screened from the electronic medical record information management system and anesthesia surgery clinical information system of West China Hospital of Sichuan University. There were 381 males and 105 females, with a median age of 64.0 years. Taking the incidence of pulmonary complications within 7 days after operation as the primary outcome, the correlation between intraoperative fluid infusion volume and the occurrence of PPCs within 7 days was clearly analyzed by regression analysis. ResultsThe incidence of pulmonary complications within 7 days after surgery was 33.5% (163/486). Regression analysis showed that intraoperative fluid infusion volume was correlated with the occurrence of PPCs [adjusted OR=1.089, 95%CI (1.012, 1.172), P=0.023], especially pulmonary infection [adjusted OR=1.093, 95%CI (1.014, 1.178), P=0.020], and pleural effusion [adjusted OR=1.147, 95%CI (1.007, 1.306), P=0.039]. Pulmonary infection was significantly less in the low intraoperative fluid infusion group [<6.49 mL/(kg·h), n=115] compared with the high intraoperative fluid infusion group [≥6.49 mL/(kg·h), n=371] (18.3% vs. 34.5%, P=0.023). Intraoperative fluid infusion volume was positively associated with death within 30 days after surgery [adjusted OR=1.442, 95%CI (1.056, 1.968), P=0.021]. Conclusion Among patients undergoing elective minimally invasive endoscopic esophageal cancer resection, intraoperative fluid infusion volume is related with the occurrence of PPCs within 7 days after the surgery, especially pulmonary infection and pleural effusion, and may affect death within 30 days after the surgery.
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 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.
