Suppr超能文献

经胸与经食管裂孔食管癌切除术:2005-2011 年 NSQIP 多中心现代结果比较。

Transhiatal versus transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a 2005-2011 NSQIP comparison of modern multicenter results.

机构信息

Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, New York.

出版信息

J Surg Oncol. 2014 Sep;110(3):298-301. doi: 10.1002/jso.23637. Epub 2014 May 29.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The surgical approach to esophageal cancer continues to be controversial. A transthoracic approach is often advocated for better oncologic staging and improved survival. A transhiatal approach is often preferred due to a perceived decreased operative morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) participant-use file, patients were identified who underwent either a transhiatal or transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer at participating hospitals from 2005 to 2011. Demographic, clinical, intra-operative variables, and 30-day morbidity and mortality were collected.

RESULTS

Of the 1,428 patients that had esophagectomy, 750 (52.5%) had a transhiatal (TH) resection and 678 (47.5%) had a transthoracic (TT) resection. The transhiatal group was older (66 vs. 63 years, P = 0.003) with a lower ASA class (2.84 vs. 2.91, P = 0.025). Operative time was greater in the TT group (364 vs. 298 min, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in 30 day overall mortality (TH = 2.9%, TT = 4.7%, P = 0.095) however a trend favored the TH group. Serious morbidity remains clinically significant in both groups (TH = 39.6%, TT = 43.5%, P = 0.146). The TH group had a significantly higher superficial wound infection rate (11.6% vs. 6.2%, P < 0.001) while the TT group required more perioperative blood transfusions (12.5% vs. 8.9%, P = 0.032) and returns to operating room (14.5% vs. 10.9%, P = 0.046).

CONCLUSION

Serious morbidity continues to be high for both types of esophagectomy. There needs to be continued efforts to diminish these complications.

摘要

背景

食管癌的手术方法仍存在争议。经胸入路常被提倡用于更好的肿瘤分期和提高生存率。经食管裂孔入路常因手术发病率和死亡率降低而被优先考虑。

方法

使用美国外科医师学会-国家外科质量改进计划(ACS-NSQIP)参与者使用文件,确定了 2005 年至 2011 年期间在参与医院接受经胸或经食管裂孔食管癌切除术的患者。收集了人口统计学、临床、术中变量以及 30 天发病率和死亡率。

结果

在 1428 例接受食管切除术的患者中,750 例(52.5%)行经食管裂孔(TH)切除术,678 例(47.5%)行经胸(TT)切除术。TH 组年龄较大(66 岁比 63 岁,P = 0.003),ASA 分级较低(2.84 比 2.91,P = 0.025)。TT 组手术时间较长(364 分钟比 298 分钟,P < 0.001)。30 天总死亡率无显著差异(TH = 2.9%,TT = 4.7%,P = 0.095),但 TH 组有倾向于低死亡率的趋势。两组均有严重发病率(TH = 39.6%,TT = 43.5%,P = 0.146),但仍有临床意义。TH 组浅表伤口感染率明显较高(11.6%比 6.2%,P < 0.001),而 TT 组围手术期输血需求较高(12.5%比 8.9%,P = 0.032)和重返手术室(14.5%比 10.9%,P = 0.046)。

结论

两种类型的食管癌切除术严重发病率仍然很高。需要继续努力减少这些并发症。

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