Suppr超能文献

胸腹腔镜联合与经胸经食管裂孔食管癌切除术治疗食管胃交界部癌的荟萃分析。

Transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy for the treatment of esophagogastric cancer: a meta-analysis.

机构信息

Division of Surgery, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, UK.

出版信息

Ann Surg. 2011 Dec;254(6):894-906. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182263781.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To study the differences in short and long-term outcomes of transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND

Studies have compared transthoracic with transhiatal esophagectomy with varying results. Previous systematic reviews (1999, 2001) do not include the latest randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Systematic review of English-language studies comparing transthoracic with transhiatal esophagectomy up to January 31, 2010. Meta-analysis was used to summate the study outcomes. Methodological and surgical quality of included studies was assessed.

RESULTS

Fifty-two studies, comprising 5905 patients (3389 transthoracic and 2516 transhiatal) were included in the analysis. No study met all minimum surgical quality standards. Transthoracic operations took longer and were associated with a significantly longer length of stay. There was no difference in blood loss. The transthoracic group had significantly more respiratory complications, wound infections, and early postoperative mortality, whereas anastomotic leak, anastomotic stricture, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy rate was significantly higher in the transhiatal group. Lymph node retrieval was reported in 4 studies and was significantly greater in the transthoracic group by on average 8 lymph nodes. Analysis of 5-year survival showed no significant difference between the groups and was subject to significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of studies comparing transthoracic with transhiatal esophagectomy for cancer demonstrates no difference in 5-year survival, however lymphadenectomy and reported surgical quality was suboptimal in both groups and the transthoracic group had significantly more advanced cancer. The finding of equivalent survival should therefore be viewed with caution.

摘要

目的

研究经胸与经食管裂孔根治性切除术治疗癌症的短期和长期疗效差异。

背景

已有研究比较了经胸与经食管裂孔根治性切除术,但结果不一。既往的系统评价(1999 年、2001 年)未纳入最新的随机对照试验。

方法

系统检索截至 2010 年 1 月 31 日发表的比较经胸与经食管裂孔根治性切除术治疗癌症的英文文献,采用 Meta 分析汇总研究结果,评价纳入研究的方法学和手术质量。

结果

共纳入 52 项研究,包括 5905 例患者(经胸手术 3389 例,经食管裂孔手术 2516 例)。没有研究完全符合所有的最低手术质量标准。经胸手术时间更长,术后住院时间也较长。术中出血量无差异。经胸组的呼吸系统并发症、伤口感染和早期术后死亡率显著高于经食管裂孔组,而吻合口漏、吻合口狭窄和喉返神经麻痹发生率则显著高于经胸组。4 项研究报告了淋巴结清扫数目,经胸组平均多清扫 8 枚淋巴结。5 年生存率的分析结果显示两组间无显著差异,但存在显著的异质性,且两组的淋巴结清扫和报告的手术质量均不理想,经胸组的癌症分期更为晚期。因此,应谨慎看待两组生存结局相当的这一发现。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验