We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes Between Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Using a Nationwide Database in Japan.
Annals of Surgical Oncology 2017 July
PURPOSE: This study aimed to compare short-term outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) with those of open esophagectomy (OE) for thoracic esophageal cancer using a nationwide Japanese database.
METHODS: Overall, 9584 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at 864 hospitals in 2011-2012 were evaluated. We performed one-to-one matching between the MIE and OE groups on the basis of estimated propensity scores for each patient.
RESULTS: After propensity score matching, operative time was significantly longer in the MIE group (n = 3515) than in the OE group (n = 3515) [526 ± 149 vs. 461 ± 156 min, p < 0.001], whereas blood loss was markedly less in the MIE group than in the OE group (442 ± 612l vs. 608 ± 591 ml, p < 0.001). The populations of patients who required more than 48 h of postoperative respiratory ventilation was significantly less in the MIE group than in the OE group (8.9 vs. 10.9%, p = 0.006); however, reoperation rate within 30 days was significantly higher in the MIE group than in the OE group (7.0 vs. 5.3%, p = 0.004). There were no significant differences between the MIE and OE groups in 30-day mortality rates (0.9 vs. 1.1%) and operative mortality rates (2.5 vs. 2.8%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: MIE was comparable with conventional OE in terms of short-term outcome after esophagectomy. It was particularly beneficial in reducing postoperative respiratory complications, but may be associated with higher reoperation rates.
METHODS: Overall, 9584 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at 864 hospitals in 2011-2012 were evaluated. We performed one-to-one matching between the MIE and OE groups on the basis of estimated propensity scores for each patient.
RESULTS: After propensity score matching, operative time was significantly longer in the MIE group (n = 3515) than in the OE group (n = 3515) [526 ± 149 vs. 461 ± 156 min, p < 0.001], whereas blood loss was markedly less in the MIE group than in the OE group (442 ± 612l vs. 608 ± 591 ml, p < 0.001). The populations of patients who required more than 48 h of postoperative respiratory ventilation was significantly less in the MIE group than in the OE group (8.9 vs. 10.9%, p = 0.006); however, reoperation rate within 30 days was significantly higher in the MIE group than in the OE group (7.0 vs. 5.3%, p = 0.004). There were no significant differences between the MIE and OE groups in 30-day mortality rates (0.9 vs. 1.1%) and operative mortality rates (2.5 vs. 2.8%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: MIE was comparable with conventional OE in terms of short-term outcome after esophagectomy. It was particularly beneficial in reducing postoperative respiratory complications, but may be associated with higher reoperation rates.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app