Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy: a meta-analysis of outcomes.
Guo, Wei; Ma, Xiao; Yang, Su; Zhu, Xiaoli; Qin, Wei; Xiang, Jiaqing; Lerut, Toni; Li, Hecheng.
Affiliation
  • Guo W; Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC), Shanghai, 200032, China.
  • Ma X; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China.
  • Yang S; Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC), Shanghai, 200032, China.
  • Zhu X; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China.
  • Qin W; Department of Thoracic Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, 200025, China.
  • Xiang J; Department of Oncology, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200032, China.
  • Lerut T; Department of Pathology, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC), Shanghai, 200032, China.
  • Li H; School of Statistic, Renmin University of China, Beijing, 100086, China.
Surg Endosc ; 30(9): 3873-81, 2016 09.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26659248
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

At present there is controversy regarding the optimal surgical method for esophageal cancer. Specifically, whether combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy is superior to open esophagectomy with respect to the surgical wound, perioperative morbidities and mortality, and the overall survival rate is of great concern. This article aimed to compare thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy on the perioperative morbidities and long-term survival.

METHODS:

PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched for relevant studies comparing combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy with open esophagectomy using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards. Odds ratios were extracted to give pooled estimates of the perioperative effect of the two surgical procedures. Hazard ratios were extracted to compare overall survival between the two surgical procedures.

RESULTS:

Thirteen studies involving 1549 patients were included in this meta-analysis. We found that patients that underwent combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy had lower total complication rates (relative risk 1.20; 95 % CI 1.08-1.34; p = 0.0009), wound infection rates, pulmonary complications, and less intraoperative blood loss. Moreover, our study also showed combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy did not compromise the 5-year survival rate (hazard risk 0.920; 95 % CI 0.720-1.176; p = 0.505) and even improved 2-year survival rate. The 30-day mortality and other common morbidities, including anastomotic leakage, anastomotic stricture, pulmonary infection, chylothorax, arrhythmia, or recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, were not significantly different between combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy and traditional open esophagectomy (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS:

Combined thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy is a feasible and reliable surgical procedure that can achieve uncompromising long-term survival rates and reduce perioperative complications.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Thoracoscopy / Esophageal Neoplasms / Esophagectomy / Laparoscopy Type of study: Etiology_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Year: 2016 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Thoracoscopy / Esophageal Neoplasms / Esophagectomy / Laparoscopy Type of study: Etiology_studies / Systematic_reviews Limits: Humans Language: En Year: 2016 Type: Article