↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis with McKeown esophagectomy for middle esophageal cancer

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Surgical Oncology, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis with McKeown esophagectomy for middle esophageal cancer
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12957-015-0727-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hai-Tao Huang, Fei Wang, Liang Shen, Chun-Qiu Xia, Chen-Xi Lu, Chong-Jun Zhong

Abstract

In China, the middle esophageal squamous cell cancer is the most common tumor type, and Mckeown esophagectomy (ME) is preferably adopted by thoracic surgeon. But, the surgical trauma of ME is great. Thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy (TE) was developed to decrease the operative stress; however, the safety and efficacy were not defined. In this study, clinical outcomes were compared between patients who received ME and TE. The data of 113 patients who suffered from middle-thoracic esophageal cancer during the same period were collected. Sixty-two patients received ME (ME group), and 51 patients received TE (TE group). Patients' demographics and short-term clinicopathologic outcomes were comparable between the two groups. Survival rate was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and comparisons between groups were performed with log-rank test. Patients in TE group had lower body mass index (BMI). Preoperative tumor stage in TE group was much earlier. Both overall and thoracic operation time were longer in TE group. The blood loss during operation and postoperative day (POD) 1 was less in TE group, which contributed to the less blood transfusion. In TE group, postoperative incidence of pulmonary complications and atrial fibrillation (p = 0.035 and p = 0.033) was lower; the inflammatory response and incision pain were significantly alleviated; the ICU and in-hospital stay was shorter as well because of less surgical trauma. No statistically significant difference was found between two groups in terms of overall survival or disease-free survival. The efficacy and safety of TE were supported by the selected patients in this cohort study. Although it is lack of randomness in this research, some advantages of TE were gratifying such as lower postoperative complications and similar survival with ME. A multicenter prospective randomized study is now required.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Student > Postgraduate 9 15%
Student > Master 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Other 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 14 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 56%
Psychology 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 19 31%