3.8 Article

Hybrid laparoscopic thoracotomic esophagectomy with intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis

期刊

CHIRURG
卷 85, 期 7, 页码 628-635

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00104-014-2783-1

关键词

Esophagectomy; Esophageal cancer; Minimally invasive surgery; Esophagogastric anastomosis; Gastric pull-up

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the past decades various techniques of esophagectomy for the curative treatment of esophageal cancer have been described. Especially minimally invasive techniques of esophagectomy have been used increasingly in the last decade. Technical issues and results of hybrid laparoscopic-thoracotomic en bloc esophagectomy with intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis (HMIE) are presented and discussed in the article. Between May 2013 and April 2014 a total of 23 patients underwent esophagectomy for esophageal cancer at the University of Freiburg Medical Center. Of these patients 10 were treated by HMIE and the other 13 patients had open esophagectomy (OE). A detailed description of the operative technique of HMIE is given in a step-by-step fashion. Margin negative resection was achieved in all patients after HMIE and OE and the median lymph node yield of lymphadenectomy in HMIE and OE (29 vs. 27) was nearly the same. The medium duration of the operation (347 min vs. 412 min) and median length of stay on the intensive care unit (6 days vs. 9 days) and hospital (13 days vs. 17 days) were decreased in HMIE patients compared to OE, respectively. Overall postoperative morbidity (40 % vs. 69 %) and especially pulmonary morbidity (10 % vs. 46 %) were also favorable in HMIE. No anastomotic leakage and postoperative in-hospital mortality occurred after HMIE. The HMIE procedure combines the advantages of minimally invasive operative approaches on especially postoperative pulmonary morbidity after esophagectomy with the high safety of anastomosis and reconstruction achieved in OE. Further advantages are shorter duration of operation and shorter length of hospital stay in HMIE.

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

3.8
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