Division of Thoracic Surgery, Albany Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Albany Medical College, Albany, New York 12208, USA.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2012 Jan;93(1):221-6; discussion 226-7. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.07.030. Epub 2011 Oct 10.
Pulmonary complications occur frequently after esophagectomy. Although multifactorial, these complications could be influenced by surgical technique. We sought to compare the respiratory complications of patients undergoing esophagectomy through different approaches, and identify technical risk factors.
We conducted a retrospective analysis of consecutive esophagectomies performed at 2 institutions from January 2002 to January 2009. Primary outcome measures included postoperative ventilatory requirements, pneumonia, effusion requiring intervention, length of stay, and mortality.
A total of 220 esophagectomies were performed through 6 different approaches: 79 minimally invasive (MIE) with neck anastomosis, 20 MIE with chest anastomosis, 37 transhiatal, 33 McKeown, 36 Ivor Lewis, and 15 left thoracoabdominal. Patients who underwent MIE were more likely to be extubated in the operating room (p<0.01) and had fewer pleural effusions (p<0.01). A thoracotomy was associated with a higher incidence of tracheostomy (p=0.02) and pleural effusions (p=0.02). Neck anastomoses were negatively associated with early extubation (p=0.04) and predicted recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (p=0.04), but were not associated with pneumonia or other pulmonary complications. Multivariate analysis showed that pneumonia was independently associated with advancing age (p=0.02), lack of a pyloric drainage procedure (p=0.03), and less significantly with MIE (p=0.06, fewer events). Surgical approach was not a significant predictor of length of stay or mortality.
Patients undergoing MIE are less likely to remain intubated. Omission of a pyloric drainage procedure or performance of thoracic or neck incisions appear to be important determinants of respiratory complications. Technical aspects of the procedure in addition to the surgical approach influence important respiratory outcomes.
食管切除术后常发生肺部并发症。尽管这些并发症是多因素的,但它们可能受到手术技术的影响。我们试图比较通过不同方法进行食管切除术的患者的呼吸并发症,并确定技术危险因素。
我们对 2002 年 1 月至 2009 年 1 月在 2 个机构进行的连续食管切除术进行了回顾性分析。主要观察指标包括术后通气需求、肺炎、需要干预的胸腔积液、住院时间和死亡率。
共进行了 220 例食管切除术,采用 6 种不同方法:79 例微创(MIE)颈部吻合术、20 例 MIE 胸部吻合术、37 例经胸、33 例 McKeown、36 例 Ivor Lewis 和 15 例左胸腹联合。MIE 组患者更有可能在手术室拔管(p<0.01),胸腔积液较少(p<0.01)。开胸术与气管切开术(p=0.02)和胸腔积液(p=0.02)的发生率较高相关。颈部吻合术与早期拔管(p=0.04)和喉返神经损伤(p=0.04)呈负相关,但与肺炎或其他肺部并发症无关。多变量分析显示,肺炎与年龄增长(p=0.02)、缺乏幽门引流术(p=0.03)独立相关,与微创(p=0.06,事件较少)的相关性较弱。手术方法不是住院时间或死亡率的显著预测因素。
MIE 组患者更不容易保持插管状态。省略幽门引流术或进行胸或颈部切口似乎是呼吸并发症的重要决定因素。手术方法以外的手术技术方面会影响重要的呼吸结果。