Definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT) is the general recommendation for the treatment of cervical esophageal cancer for organ preservation. However, the long-term survival of dCRT is not satisfactory. Surgical resection alone is not superior to dCRT in the treatment of cervical esophageal cancer. Surgical resection is often combined with laryngectomy, which will affect the quality of life. Recent evidence suggests that neoadjuvant therapy combined with surgery improves the long-term survival of cervical esophageal cancer. On the other hand, the development of technologies such as laryngeal preservation surgery and minimally invasive esophagectomy has reduced the risk of operation and improved the quality of life. This article will review the new progress in the comprehensive treatment of cervical esophageal cancer from the perspective of surgery.
ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility of thoracolapascopic esophagectomy (TLE) without routine nasogastric (NG) intubation for patients with esophageal cancer (EC). MethodsClinical data of 78 EC patients under-going TLE without perioperative NG intubation in Affiliated Cancer Hospital of Zhengzhou University from January to September 2013 were analyzed (non-NG intubation group, including 48 male and 30 female patients with their age of 61.1± 8.5 years). Seventy-eight EC patients undergoing TLE with routine NG intubation for 7 days in 2012 were chosen as the control group (NG intubation group, including 50 male and 28 female patients with their age of 60.3±7.0 years). Operation time, postoperative morbidity, gastrointestinal functional recovery and patient discomfort were compared between the 2 groups. ResultsThere was no in-hospital death in either groups. There was no statistic difference in the incidences of pulmonary infection (16.7% vs. 19.2%, P=0.676), anastomotic leakage (1.3% vs. 2.6%, P=0.560) or NG tube replacement (3.8% vs. 2.6%, P=0.649) between non-NG intubation group and NG intubation group. Time for recovery of intestinal motility (2.5± 1.1 days vs. 4.3±1.2 days, P < 0.05) and time for air evacuation (3.6±1.7 days vs. 5.8±2.1 days, P < 0.05) of non-NG intubation group were significantly shorter than those of NG intubation group. Ninety-seven percent of the patients (76/78)in NG intubation group had uncomfortable feeling including dry mouth and sore throat, and only 6% of the patients (5/78) in non-NG intubation group had nausea. All the patients were followed up for 3 months after discharge. There was no intestinal obstruction, pneumonia or late anastomotic leakage during follow-up. ConclusionTLE without routine NG intubation is safe and feasible for EC patients, which can not only reduce patients' discomfort but also improve early recovery of gastrointestinal function.