ObjectiveTo explore the differences and similarities of the featurs of lymph node metatasis of abdominal esophageal carcinoma and cardiac cancer. MethodsPreoperative CT images of abdominal esophageal carcinomas and cardiac cancers were reviewed and analysed on lymph node size and preponderant distribution. ResultsShort diameter ≥10 mm of lymph node at CT was adopted as metastasis criterion. The detection rates of abdominal esophageal carcinomas and cardiac cancers were 73.5%（144/196） and 83.7% （170/203）, respectively. Thoracic lymph node metastasis rate of abdominal esophageal carcinomas was 11.1% （4/36） in 7 area, 27.8% （10/36） in 8 area, 8.3% （3/36） in 9 area, while celiac lymph node metastasis rate was 36.1% (13/36 ） in No.7 group, 19.4% （7/36） in No.1 group, and 11.1% （4/36） in No.2 group primarily. Lymph node metastasis rate of cardiac cancers was 17.9% （5/28） in No.1 group, 28.6% （8/28） in No.2 group, 39.3% （11/28 ） in No.3 group, and 25.0% （7/28） in No.4 group for the first stop lymph nodes, and 35.7% （10/28 ） in No.7 group for the second stop primarily. ConclusionAs metastasis criterion, short diameter ≥10 mm of lymph node at CT is feasible, but there exist certain falsepositive rate. Thoracic lymph node metastasis of abdominal esophageal carcinomas is mainly in the 7, 8, and 9 area, while celiac metastasis is mainly in No.7, No.1, and No.2 groups. Lymph node metastasis of cardiac cancers is in No.1, No.2, No.3, No.4, and No.7 group primarily.
ObjectiveTo compare the short-term outcomes between Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and McKeown esophagectomy under thoracoscopy and laparoscopy for thoracic middle-lower esophageal carcinoma and to investigate the optimal approach.MethodsThe relevant literatures (from database foundation to March 2016) comparing minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy were searched through PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, Wanfang Data and VIP. RevMan 5.3 software was used for data analysis.ResultsA total of 870 patients in 5 studies were reviewed and data were pooled for analysis. The score of Newcastle Ottawa for the literatures was 7-8 points. The results showed that compared with the McKeown group, Ivor Lewis group had shorter operation time (WMD=–34.67, 95% CI –53.70 to –15.65, P=0.000 4), less recurrent laryngeal nerve injuries (OR=0.23, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.44, P<0.000 01), anastomotic leakage (OR=0.24, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.41, P<0.000 01), anastomotic stenosis (OR=0.30, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.55, P=0.000 01), and pulmonary complications ( OR=0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.43, P<0.000 01). There was no significant difference between the two groups in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative stay, hospitalization cost and chylothorax incidence. The McKeown group was associated with much more lymph nodes dissection (WMD=–1.16, 95% CI –2.00 to –0.31,P=0.007) than the Ivor Lewis group.ConclusionCompared with McKeown esophagectomy combined with thoracoscopy and laparoscopy, Ivor Lewis esophagectomy combined with thoracoscopy and laparoscopy has some advantages for thoracic middle-lower esophageal carcinoma, but a greater number of lymph nodes are dissected in McKeown procedure.
Objective To evaluate the accuracy and investigate the influence factors of preoperative T staging by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in patients with postoperative pathological stage of T2 esophageal carcinoma (EC). Methods A total of 206 patients with EC underwent EUS and curative operation in Henan Tumor Hospital from March 2015 to January 2016 were enrolled, among whom 81 patients were identified with pathological stage of T2 EC followed by esophageal resection without induction therapy. There were 59 males and 22 females, with a mean age of 63.9 years and meadian age of 63.0 years. We reviewed the medical records of the 81 patients and compared EUS findings with histopathologic results according to clinicopathologic factors. Results The overall accuracy of EUS for evaluating staging of T2 EC was 61.7% (50/81), while 38.3% (31/81) were overstaged by EUS. Accuracy differed between the accurate staging group and over staging group (P=0.023). There was no significant difference in sex, age, tumor location and shape, histologic type, tumor differentiation or lymph node metastasis between two groups. Conclusion EUS is highly overstaged in the diagnosis of postoperative pathological stage of T2 EC. Higher postoperative pathological TNM stage appears to be a factor of EUS overstaging in patients with postoperative pathological stage of T2 EC.
Esophageal carcinoma is one of the most common malignant tumor, a serious threat to human health. In the early and middle esophageal carcinoma patients, surgery is the only expected treatment to cure esophageal carcinoma. Traditional surgery of esophageal cancer needs thoracotomy and laparotomy, which has great trauma and high incidence of complications. So surgeons are looking for a minimally invasive surgical methods alternative to traditional esophagectomy. Video-mediastinoscopy is used to free middle and upper esophagus, as a minimally invasive surgical method, it is used in radical resection of esophageal cancer gradually. This article reviews the recent progress and the related research results in the application of mediastinoscopy in the radical resection of esophageal cancer. It is found that mediastinoscopy assisted the radical resection of esophageal cancer is a safe and feasible operation. It provides a feasible treatment option for early and middle stage esophageal cancer patients with pulmonary insufficiency who can not be resected by thoracoscopy.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effect of single mediastinal drainage tube and both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube for the patients who received thoracoscopic radical resection of esophageal carcinoma.MethodsWe enrolled 96 esophageal carcinoma patients who received thoracoscopic radical resection from June 2016 to October 2018. Of them, 49 patients were indwelt with both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube (a chest & mediastinal drainage group, a CMD group) while the other 47 patients were indwelt with single mediastinal drainage tube (a single mediastinal drainage group, a SMD group). The total drainage volume, intubation time and incidence of postoperative complications (postoperative atelectasis, pulmonary infection, pleural effusion and anastomotic leakage) between the two groups were compared. The pain score and comfort score were also compared between the two groups.ResultsThe total drainage volume and intubation time in the SMD group were not significantly different from those in the CMD group (1 321±421 mL vs. 1 204±545 mL, P=0.541; 6.1±3.7 d vs. 6.4 ±5.1 d, P=0.321). The incidence of postoperative complications (postoperative atelectasis, pulmonary infection, pleural effusion and anastomotic leakage) in the SMD group was not significantly different from that in the CMD group (10.6% vs. 6.1%, P=0.712; 4.3% vs. 10.2%, P=0.656; 6.4% vs. 12.2%, P=0.121; 2.1% vs. 4.1%, P=0.526). The numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores on the first to the fifth day after surgery and during extubation in the SMD group were significantly lower than those in the CMD group (3.2±2.1 vs. 5.1±2.4, P=0.041; 2.8±0.6 vs. 4.8±1.4, P=0.015; 2.1±0.4 vs. 4.5±0.4, P=0.019; 1.7±0.7 vs. 4.0±0.8, P=0.004; 1.8±0.7 vs. 3.2±1.2, P=0.006; 1.4±0.2 vs. 2.5±3.4, P=0.012). The VAS comfort scores in the SMD group were significantly lower than those in the CMD group (3.6±1.7 vs. 6.6±3.7, P=0.018; 2.9±2.0 vs. 5.1±3.4, P=0.007; 2.1±1.4 vs. 5.5±2.4, P=0.004; 3.0±0.9 vs. 4.6±3.8, P=0.012; 1.8±1.1 vs. 4.2±2.7, P=0.003; 2.4±3.2 vs. 5.3±1.7, P=0.020).ConclusionThe clinical effect of single mediastinal drainage tube in thoracoscopic resection of esophageal carcinoma is similar to that of both mediastinal drainage tube and closed thoracic drainage tube, but it can significantly improve the comfort of the patients.
ObjectiveTo investigate the safety and efficacy of naked eye 3D thoracoscopic surgery in minimally invasive esophagectomy.MethodsClinical data of 65 patients, including 50 males and 15 females aged 47-72 years, with esophageal cancer who underwent minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy from October 2018 to April 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to different surgical methods including a naked eye 3D thoracoscopic group (group A: 30 patients) and a traditional 2D thoracoscopic group (group B: 35 patients). The effects of the two groups were compared.ResultsThe operation time in the group A was significantly shorter than that in the group B (P<0.05). The number of dissected lymph nodes in the group A was more than that in the group B (P<0.05). The thoracic drainage volumes on the 1th-3th days after operation in the group A were significantly larger than those in the group B (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups on the 4th-5th days after operation (P>0.05). The indwelling time in the group A was longer than that in the group B (P<0.05). Postoperative hospital stay, pulmonary infection, arrhythmia, anastomotic leakage, and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury were not significantly different between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionNaked eye 3D thoracoscopic surgery for minimally invasive esophagectomy is a safe and effective surgical procedure. Compared with traditional 2D minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgery, it is safer in operation and more thorough in clearing lymph nodes. The operation is more efficient and can be promoted.
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 compare the surgical efficacy of Da Vinci robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE) on esophageal cancer.MethodsOnline databases including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Medline, EMbase and CNKI from inception to 31, December 2019 were searched by two researchers independently to collect the literature comparing the clinical efficacy of RAMIE and VAMIE on esophageal cancer. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess quality of the literature. The meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3.ResultsA total of 14 studies with 1 160 patients were enrolled in the final study, and 12 studies were of high quality. RAMIE did not significantly prolong total operative time (P=0.20). No statistical difference was observed in the thoracic surgical time through the McKeown surgical approach (MD=3.35, 95%CI –3.93 to 10.62, P=0.37) or in surgical blood loss between RAMIE and VAMIE (MD=–9.48, 95%CI –27.91 to 8.95, P=0.31). While the RAMIE could dissect more lymph nodes in total and more lymph nodes along the left recurrent laryngeal recurrent nerve (MD=2.24, 95%CI 1.09 to 3.39, P=0.000 1; MD=0.89, 95%CI 0.13 to 1.65, P=0.02) and had a lower incidence of vocal cord paralysis (RR=0.70, 95%CI 0.53 to 0.92, P=0.009).ConclusionThere is no statistical difference observed between RAMIE and VAMIE in surgical time and blood loss. RAMIE can harvest more lymph nodes than VAMIE, especially left laryngeal nerve lymph nodes. RAMIE shows a better performance in reducing the left laryngeal nerve injury and a lower rate of vocal cord paralysis compared with VAMIE.
Surgery is the preferred treatment for resectable esophageal cancer, but in locally advanced esophageal cancer, the effect of surgery alone is not ideal, so surgery-based comprehensive treatment is the best option. Neoadjuvant therapy has become a standard treatment in the treatment of locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer. Neoadjuvant therapy includes neoadjuvant chemotherapy, radiochemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, etc. With the significant efficacy and acceptable toxicity of immunotherapy in the first-line and second-line treatment of advanced esophageal cancer, neoadjuvant immunotherapy has become a research hotspot of locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer. This article reviews the latest research progress and some limitations of neoadjuvant immunotherapy in locally advanced resectable esophageal cancer.