4.5 Article

Continuous Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve Monitoring During Single-Port Mediastinoscopic Radical Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

期刊

JOURNAL OF GASTROINTESTINAL SURGERY
卷 26, 期 12, 页码 2444-2450

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11605-022-05472-0

关键词

Intraoperative nerve monitoring; Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy; Mediastinoscopic esophagectomy; Esophageal cancer; Pneumonia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Continuous nerve monitoring during single-port mediastinoscopic radical esophagectomy shows significant clinical benefits in preventing postoperative recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy.
Background Although single-port mediastinoscopic radical esophagectomy is ultimate minimally invasive surgery for esophageal cancer without thoracotomy or the thoracoscopic approach, the high incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) palsy remains a pivotal clinical issue. Methods This study included 41 patients who underwent single-port mediastinoscopic radical esophagectomy with mediastinal lymphadenectomy between September 2014 and March 2022. Among these, continuous nerve monitoring (CNM) for RLN was done in 25 patients (CNM group), while the remaining 16 patients underwent without CNM (non-CNM group). Clinical benefits of CNM for RLN were evaluated. Results The overall incidence of postoperative RLN palsy was 14.6% (6/41). The CNM group showed a significantly lower incidence of postoperative RLN palsy as compared to the non-CNM group (P = 0.026: CNM vs. non-CRNM: 4.0% (1/25) vs. 31.2% (5/16)). The CNM group had a lower incidence of postoperative pneumoniae (CNM vs. non-CNM: 4.0% (1/25) vs. 18.8% (3/16)) and shorter days of postoperative hospital stay (CNM vs. non-CNM: 13 days vs. 41 days). Multivariate analysis revealed that the CNM use (odds ratio 0.07; 95% CI 0.05-0.98) was an independent factor avoiding postoperative RLN palsy. Conclusion The CNM for RLN contributes to a remarkable reduction in the risk of postoperative RLN palsy and improvement in outcomes in single-port mediastinoscopic radical esophagectomy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据