[Comparison of short-term outcomes between minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy and Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer].

X. Peng,Yun Chen,Abdillah Nassor Juma,Yanqing Wang,Yuanquan Zhou,Yang Jiao,Weixing Zhang,W. Zhuang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.11817/j.issn.1672-7347.2017.05.011
2017-05-28
Abstract:OBJECTIVE To summarize the outcomes of 74 patients with minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (MIE-McKeown), and to discuss the short-term outcomes by comparing with Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (ILE) procedure.
 Methods: A total of 74 patients with esophageal carcinoma underwent MIE-McKeown in Xiangya Hospital from November 2014 to July 2016 were retrospectively reviewed, and 85 patients underwent ILE procedure were selected as a control group. Perioperative and short-term outcomes were analyzed.
 Results: Compared with the ILE group, patients underwent MIE-McKeown had less blood loss, less pulmonary infection, longer resection length and more harvested lymph nodes (P<0.05), but they had more anastomotic leakage and stricture rate, longer operation time and hospital stay as well (P<0.05). The total rate of lymph node metastatic in all patients was 52.8%, and the rate of cervical lymph node metastases was 9.5% in the MIE-McKeown group. Multiple carcinomas were found in 16 cases, and 7 were proximally located. The distance from the distal margin of the second lesion to the center of the main lesion was 20-85 (50.7±23.0) mm, while the distance in 9 second carcinomas distally located was 30-90 (57.8±20.5) mm.
 Conclusion: Compared with Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy procedure, MIE-McKeown procedure has a more complete lesion dissection and more harvested lymph nodes with smaller incisions, better short-term outcomes and more safety. It is an appropriate procedure for esophagectomy. However, it should be optimized for its high rate of anastomotic leakage and stricture.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?