261. CONVERSION ESOPHAGECTOMY FOR CT4B ESOPHAGEAL CANCER - MIE VS OPEN -

Abstract Background and Aims The standard treatment for locally advanced unresectable esophageal cancer is definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT), however, after induction chemotherapy with a triplet chemotherapy regimen (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-FU: DCF) or dCRT, conversion surgery could be performed if esophageal cancer is considered resectable. Furthermore, minimally invasive surgery such as robot-assisted or thoracoscopic procedures are expected to improve the outcome of patients with advanced esophageal cancer. We investigated the feasibility of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in conversion surgery. Materials and Methods Sixty-six patients who underwent conversion thoracic esophagectomy for cT4b esophageal cancer from 2007 to 2023 were included. The short-term outcomes of 25 open esophagectomy group and 41 MIE group (8 robot-assisted and 33 thoracoscopic) were compared. Results No differences in age, gender, PS, tumor location, histology, cN, or cM were observed between the two groups. cT4b organs tended to be in the airway in the MIE group (airway 70.7% vs 44%, major vessels 19.5% vs 24%, both 9.7% vs 32%, p=0.04) and DCF therapy was significantly performed in the MIE group for induction therapy (DCF 87.8% vs 56%, dCRT 12.2% vs 44%, p<0.001). On the other hand, salvage surgery was significantly associated with open esophagectomy (24.3% vs. 52%, p=0.003). There was no difference in surgical outcomes regarding thoracic operation time (157 min vs. 180 min, p=0.09), whereas the total operation time was significantly shorter in the MIE group (392 min vs. 439 min, p=0.02). Blood loss was significantly lower in the MIE group (79 ml vs. 470 ml, p<0.001), and R0 resection rate did not differ (82.9% vs. 72%, p=0.357). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications including pneumonia (26.8% vs. 44%, p=0.183) and recurrent nerve palsy (21.9% vs. 36%, p=0.260), but anastomotic leakage was significantly lower in the MIE group (4.8% vs. 24%, p=0.04). There was no difference in median postoperative hospital stay (16 [11-20] vs. 16 [14-29] days), however, median ICU stay (3 [3-4] vs. 4 [3-4] days, p=0.03) and readmission within 1 month after discharge (2.4% vs. 16%, p=0.04) were significantly lower in the MIE group. In-hospital mortality was observed in 1 case in the MIE group and 3 in the open esophagectomy group. Conclusion Despite the bias associated with the transition of treatment modalities and surgical techniques, MIE may contribute to improved short-term outcomes in conversion surgery.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Diseases of the Esophagus
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/dote/doae057.040
Primary Topic
Esophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

261. CONVERSION ESOPHAGECTOMY FOR CT4B ESOPHAGEAL CANCER - MIE VS OPEN -

Daisuke Kurita, Jyunya Oguma, Koshiro Ishiyama, Hiroyuki Daiko
Diseases of the Esophagus
Esophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
article

261. CONVERSION ESOPHAGECTOMY FOR CT4B ESOPHAGEAL CANCER - MIE VS OPEN -

Daisuke Kurita, Jyunya Oguma, Koshiro Ishiyama, Hiroyuki Daiko
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background and Aims The standard treatment for locally advanced unresectable esophageal cancer is definitive chemoradiotherapy (dCRT), however, after induction chemotherapy with a triplet chemotherapy regimen (docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-FU: DCF) or dCRT, conversion surgery could be performed if esophageal cancer is considered resectable. Furthermore, minimally invasive surgery such as robot-assisted or thoracoscopic procedures are expected to improve the outcome of patients with advanced esophageal cancer. We investigated the feasibility of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in conversion surgery. Materials and Methods Sixty-six patients who underwent conversion thoracic esophagectomy for cT4b esophageal cancer from 2007 to 2023 were included. The short-term outcomes of 25 open esophagectomy group and 41 MIE group (8 robot-assisted and 33 thoracoscopic) were compared. Results No differences in age, gender, PS, tumor location, histology, cN, or cM were observed between the two groups. cT4b organs tended to be in the airway in the MIE group (airway 70.7% vs 44%, major vessels 19.5% vs 24%, both 9.7% vs 32%, p=0.04) and DCF therapy was significantly performed in the MIE group for induction therapy (DCF 87.8% vs 56%, dCRT 12.2% vs 44%, p<0.001). On the other hand, salvage surgery was significantly associated with open esophagectomy (24.3% vs. 52%, p=0.003). There was no difference in surgical outcomes regarding thoracic operation time (157 min vs. 180 min, p=0.09), whereas the total operation time was significantly shorter in the MIE group (392 min vs. 439 min, p=0.02). Blood loss was significantly lower in the MIE group (79 ml vs. 470 ml, p<0.001), and R0 resection rate did not differ (82.9% vs. 72%, p=0.357). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications including pneumonia (26.8% vs. 44%, p=0.183) and recurrent nerve palsy (21.9% vs. 36%, p=0.260), but anastomotic leakage was significantly lower in the MIE group (4.8% vs. 24%, p=0.04). There was no difference in median postoperative hospital stay (16 [11-20] vs. 16 [14-29] days), however, median ICU stay (3 [3-4] vs. 4 [3-4] days, p=0.03) and readmission within 1 month after discharge (2.4% vs. 16%, p=0.04) were significantly lower in the MIE group. In-hospital mortality was observed in 1 case in the MIE group and 3 in the open esophagectomy group. Conclusion Despite the bias associated with the transition of treatment modalities and surgical techniques, MIE may contribute to improved short-term outcomes in conversion surgery.

Diseases of the EsophagusVol. 37(Supplement_1)
Tokyo National Hospital (JP)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
Esophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.