Suppr超能文献

对于患有食管癌和胃食管交界癌的患者,与开放或杂交食管切除术相比,微创食管切除术具有显著的生存优势。

Minimally invasive esophagectomy provides significant survival advantage compared with open or hybrid esophagectomy for patients with cancers of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

作者信息

Palazzo Francesco, Rosato Ernest L, Chaudhary Asadulla, Evans Nathaniel R, Sendecki Jocelyn A, Keith Scott, Chojnacki Karen A, Yeo Charles J, Berger Adam C

机构信息

The Jefferson Gastro-Esophageal Center, the Department of Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA.

The Jefferson Gastro-Esophageal Center, the Department of Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA.

出版信息

J Am Coll Surg. 2015 Apr;220(4):672-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.12.023. Epub 2014 Dec 27.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly being used to treat patients with cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. We previously reported that oncologic efficacy may be improved with MIE compared with open or hybrid esophagectomy (OHE). We compared survival of patients undergoing MIE and OHE.

STUDY DESIGN

Our contemporary series of patients who underwent MIE (2008 to 2013) was compared with a cohort undergoing OHE (3-hole [n = 39], Ivor Lewis [n = 16], hybrid [n = 13], 2000 to 2013). Summary statistics were calculated by operation type; Kaplan-Meier methods were used to compare survival. Cox regression was used to assess the impact of operation type (MIE vs OHE) on mortality, adjusting for age, sex, total lymph nodes, lymph node ratio (LNR), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), and stage.

RESULTS

The MIE (n = 104) and OHE (n = 68) groups were similar with respect to age and sex. The MIE group tended to have higher BMI, earlier stage disease, and was less likely to receive CRT. The MIE group experienced lower operative mortality (3.9% vs 8.8%, p = 0.35) and significantly fewer major complications. Five-year survival between groups was significantly different (MIE, 64%, OHE, 35%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients undergoing OHE had a significantly worse survival compared with MIE independent of age, LNR, CRT, and pathologic stage (hazard ratio 2.00, p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports MIE for EC as a superior procedure with respect to overall survival, perioperative mortality, and severity of postoperative complications. Several biases may have affected these results: earlier stage in the MIE group and disparity in timing of the procedures. These results will need to be confirmed in future prospective studies with longer follow-up.

摘要

背景

微创食管切除术(MIE)越来越多地用于治疗食管癌和胃食管交界癌患者。我们之前报道,与开放或杂交食管切除术(OHE)相比,MIE可能会提高肿瘤治疗效果。我们比较了接受MIE和OHE患者的生存率。

研究设计

将我们当代接受MIE(2008年至2013年)的患者系列与接受OHE的队列(3孔法[n = 39]、艾弗·刘易斯法[n = 16]、杂交法[n = 13],2000年至2013年)进行比较。按手术类型计算汇总统计数据;采用Kaplan-Meier方法比较生存率。使用Cox回归评估手术类型(MIE与OHE)对死亡率的影响,并对年龄、性别、总淋巴结数、淋巴结比率(LNR)、新辅助放化疗(CRT)和分期进行校正。

结果

MIE组(n = 104)和OHE组(n = 68)在年龄和性别方面相似。MIE组的BMI往往更高,疾病分期更早,接受CRT的可能性更小。MIE组的手术死亡率较低(3.9%对8.8%,p = 0.35),主要并发症明显更少。两组之间的5年生存率有显著差异(MIE为64%,OHE为35%,p < 0.001)。多变量分析表明,与MIE相比,接受OHE的患者生存率明显更差,与年龄、LNR、CRT和病理分期无关(风险比2.00,p = 0.019)。

结论

本研究支持将MIE用于食管癌治疗,因为在总生存率、围手术期死亡率和术后并发症严重程度方面,MIE是一种更优的手术方法。一些偏倚可能影响了这些结果:MIE组疾病分期更早以及手术时间存在差异。这些结果需要在未来更长随访时间的前瞻性研究中得到证实。

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