Objective To introduce the procedure of thoracic outlet tumors removal through posterior thoracotomy and its efficacy. Methods Ten patients with thoracic outlet tumors underwent surgical treatment via posterior approach from June 2004 to June 2007. Five patients suffered from neurogenic tumors, 4 patients apical lung carcinomas, and 1 patient apicoposterior lung tumor. The skin incision was started superiorly lateral to the transverse process of 6th cervical vertebrae, carried downward a way between the medial border of the scapula and the posterior midline and was extended in a gentle arc below the inferior angle of the scapula to the posterior axillary line. The chest was entered and the tumor is removed through resecting the rib(2nd or 3rd rib) located at the lower edge of the tumor after the scapula had been pushed forward. Results There was no death in this group. Tumors in 9 patients were resected completely. Thoracotomy only was done in another patients as a result of tumor invading neighboring major organs. Shoulder and back pain in 3 of 4 patients was remitted postoperatively. Two patients with “dumbell” neurogenic tumors improved strength of lower limbs. Pain and abdominal wall reflex resumed in one patient and muscle strength of lower limbs increased to 4th grade from 2nd grade in another one. Two patients required thoracentesis because of complicating with pleural effusion. The mean followup period was 18 months (range 336). Seven of 10 patients still lead a normal life. Conclusion Posterior thoracotomy can provide an excellent approach to remove the thoracic outlet tumors safely and completely.
Objective To introduce the technique of esophageal intraluminal stenting and assess its effect on the prevention of development of stenosis in patients with esophageal burns. Methods Thirty-three patients were admitted less than 3 weeks after ingestion of caustic agents. The second-or third-degree injuries were confirmed by esophogoscopy in all cases, but one with esophageal perforation at admission. Esophageal stenting was performed in all patients and these stents were kept in place for 4 to 6 months. Results There was no death in the series. All patients had a normal intake of food after removal of the stents, and stricture was not found on barium swallow test. Follow-up from 1 to 60 months five cases developed esophageal stenosis from 2 to 3 months after extracting the stents. One of them responded to esophageal bougienage, the remaining 4 patients required esophageal reconstruction and took a normal diet postoperatively. The other 28 patients have a normal diet after the stent removal. Conclusion The esophageal intraluminal stenting is able to prevent the formation of stricture in the aftermath of esophageal burns and its effect will be enhanced plus administering isoniazid.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the timing of chest tube removal after resection of lung or esophageal cancer.MethodsA prospective randomized controlled study was performed. From June 2014 to February 2016, 150 patients suspected with the cancer of lung or esophagus undergoing neoplasm resection and lymph node dissection in our single medical unit were classified into 3 groups according to the random number generated by SPSS17.0 with 50 patients in the each group. The drainage volume for chest tube removal was ≤100 mL/d in the group Ⅰ, 101–200 mL/d in the group Ⅱ, and 201–300 mL/d in the group Ⅲ. Chest radiography was performed 48 hours following chest tube removal. ResultsThe 127 patients (108 males and 19 females, with an average age of 59.0±8.7 years) eligible for analysis consisted of 45 patients in the group Ⅰ, 41 in the group Ⅱ, and 41 in the group Ⅲ respectively after the 23 patients were excluded from this study who were diagnosed as benign lesions through intraoperative frozen pathology (n=20) and postoperative complications (empyema in 2 patients and chylothorax in 1 patient). Age, sex, types of neoplasm, and comorbidities except procedures via video-assisted thoracic surgery (and laparoscopy) showed no significant difference among the three groups (P>0.05). No mortality was observed in this study. There were postoperative complications in 6 patients and its distribution had no statistical differences among the three groups (P>0.05). The mean postoperative duration of chest tube was 181.0±68.2 h, 111.0±63.1 h, 76.0±37.2 h, the mean drainage volume was 1 413.0±500.9 mL, 1 005.0±686.4 mL, 776.0±505.8 mL, and the mean hospital stay time following chest tube removal was 19.0±9.7 d, 14.0±8.0 d, 9.0±4.8 d in the group Ⅰ,Ⅱ and Ⅲ, respectively; there was a significant difference among the three groups (P=0.000). The 13 patients required reintervention after chest tube removal due to pleural effusion accumulation and there was no difference among the three groups (P>0.05). Chest pain relieved essentially after chest tube removal in all patients.ConclusionA drainage volume of ≤300 mL/d as a threshold for chest tube removal after resection of lung or esophageal cancer can shorten postoperative hospital stay and accelerate early recovery of the patients.