Comparison between neck-first approach and thoracic approach during thoracoscopic esophagectomy

Purpose This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the prior cervical and thoracic approaches of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Methods We reviewed the records of 103 consecutive patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for e...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inLangenbeck's archives of surgery Vol. 402; no. 8; pp. 1159 - 1165
Main Authors Kitagawa, Hiroyuki, Namikawa, Tsutomu, Iwabu, Jun, Fujisawa, Kazune, Kobayashi, Michiya, Hanazaki, Kazuhiro
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Berlin/Heidelberg Springer Berlin Heidelberg 01.12.2017
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Purpose This study aimed to compare the outcomes of the prior cervical and thoracic approaches of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Methods We reviewed the records of 103 consecutive patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Seventy-four patients underwent the prior cervical approach (Cervical group); the other 29 underwent the thoracic approach (Thoracic group). The perioperative outcomes of the two groups were compared. Results Total operative time and volume of blood loss were not different between the two groups, but the median thoracoscopic time was significantly longer in the Thoracic group than in the Cervical group (296 vs. 210 min; P  < 0.001). The incidence of recurrent nerve palsy was not different; however, the incidence of the postoperative pneumonia tended to be higher in the Thoracic group than in the Cervical group (20.7 vs. 10.8%; P  = 0.188), and the duration of postoperative hospital stay was significantly longer in the Thoracic group than in the Cervical group (22 vs. 17 days; P  = 0.032). Conclusion Patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position via the prior cervical approach had better short-term outcomes than those who underwent the thoracic approach.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1435-2443
1435-2451
DOI:10.1007/s00423-017-1637-y