Abstract:Background and purpose:For esophageal cancer, the tumor cells frequently spread to upper mediastinal and cervical lymph nodes, and the lymphatic recurrence was the most important death cause after surgical treatment, which made the extent of lymphadenectomy controversial in esophageal cancers, especially in middle third thoracic esophageal carcinomas. The controversy mainly focused on which of 2-field or 3-field lymphadenectomy was better. We described the distribution of lymph node metastases using 2-field or 3-field lymphadenectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinomas and evaluated the impact of these two types of lymphadenectomy based on N classification. Methods:We retrospectively reviewed 96 patients who were treated surgically with middle third thoracic esophageal carcinoma from January 2005 to June 2006. The tumor length ranged from 3 to 5 cm. 55 patients were treated by 2-fi eld lymphadenectomy combined with Ivor Lewis’ esophagectomy, and the remain 41 patients were treated by 3-fi eld lymphadenectomy combined with Akiyama’s esophagectomy. The metastases rates of each station lymph node were calculated, the numbers of each station lymph nodes dissected were analyzed. The difference of metastases rate was tested with two-tailed χ2 test, and difference of mean was tested with independent t test. Results: The lymph node metastases (LNM) of different stations occurred concurrently or solitarily in many patients. The highestlymph node metastasis sites were superaclavicular nodes, midddle paraesophagus nodes, paracardiac nodes, and recurrent nerve lymphatic chains. The number of dissected nodes in 3-fi eld group was much higher than that in 2-fi eld group. The LNM rate was 49.1% in 2-fi eld group, and 70.7% in 3-fi eld group(χ2=4.526,P=0.033), respectively. The LNM rate limited to the cervical area in 3-fi eld group was 24.3%. The upper mediastinal LNM rate in 3-fi eld group was much higher than that in 2-fi eld group; it was 26.8% to 10.9%(χ2=4.085,P=0.043). The number of dissected nodes accompanying left recurrent laryngeal nerve in thoracic cavity in 3-f ield group was much more higher than that in 2-f ield group, it was 1 to 0.5(F=5.771,P=0.04). Conclusions:For middle third thoracic esophageal carcinomas, patients verifi ed as N1 classifi caton after 2-fi eld lymphadenectomy cannot be included into M classifi cation because of positive cervical nodes. It also cannot be determined whether the cervical and upper mediastinal nodes were metastases in N0 patients after 2-fi eld lymphadenectomy. 3-fi eld lymphadenectomy was recommended if there is no evidence excluding metastases of cervical or upper mediastinal nodes.

Comparison analysis of characteristics and efficacy of different surgical approaches for middle-lower esophageal carcinoma

A Comparison of Different Surgical Approaches for the Treatment of Thoracic Middle/lower Segment Esophageal Cancer

Comparison of Influence of Esophageal Carcinoma Operations on Pulmonary Function.

Clinical Analysis of Lymphadenectomy in Patients with Esophageal Carcinoma Underwent Single Left Thoracal Incision and Cervico-Right Thoracic-Abdominal Triple Incision

Comparison of the Clinical and Prognosis Risk Factors Between Endoscopic Resection and Radical Gastrectomy for Early-Stage Gastric Cancer

Analysis of Clinical Efficacy of Thoracoscopic Resection of Esophageal Carcinoma

Comparison of Clinical Outcome and Safety after Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Ivor Lewis Versus McKeown—A Real-World Multicenter Observational Study from China.

Left Versus Right Approach for Middle and Lower Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

254 lymph node dissection in t1 and t2 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open surgery

Application of the Anastomosis above Chest Top in Upper or Middle Esophagectomy

Extended Right Thoracic Approach Compared with Limited Left Thoracic Approach for Patients with Middle and Lower Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Three-year Survival of a Prospective, Randomized, Open-label Trial

Analysis on 1015 Cases with Esophageal Resection for Cancer and Cervical Esophagogastrostomy

Thoracoscopic and Laparoscopic Esophagectomy Versus Open Procedure for Early Stage Esophageal Carcinoma:Comparison of Clinical Outcomes

Comparison of 2-field lymphadenectomy with 3-field lymphadenectomy for middle third thoracic esophageal carcinomas

Surgical Quality Determines the Long-Term Survival Superiority of Right over Left Thoracic Esophagectomy for Localized Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients: a Real-World Multicenter Study.

Efficacy and Safety of Esophagectomy Via Left Thoracic Approach Versus Via Right Thoracic Approach for Middle and Lower Thoracic Esophageal Cancer: a Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial (NST1501)

Comparisons between minimally invasive and open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with cervical anastomosis: a retrospective study

Ten-Year Survivals of Right Thoracic vs Left Thoracic Approach for Esophageal Cancer

Comparison of Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy and Sweet Esophagectomy for the Treatment of Middle-Lower Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Short-term Clinical Efficacies of Esophageal Carcinoma Treated Surgically by Ivor-Lewis Approach

Ten-year Survivals of Right Thoracic Versus Left Thoracic Approach for Esophageal Cancer