Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes Between Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer Using a Nationwide Database in Japan.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare short-term outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) with those of open esophagectomy (OE) for thoracic esophageal cancer using a nationwide Japanese database.

METHODS

Overall, 9584 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at 864 hospitals in 2011-2012 were evaluated. We performed one-to-one matching between the MIE and OE groups on the basis of estimated propensity scores for each patient.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, operative time was significantly longer in the MIE group (n = 3515) than in the OE group (n = 3515) [526 ± 149 vs. 461 ± 156 min, p < 0.001], whereas blood loss was markedly less in the MIE group than in the OE group (442 ± 612l vs. 608 ± 591 ml, p < 0.001). The populations of patients who required more than 48 h of postoperative respiratory ventilation was significantly less in the MIE group than in the OE group (8.9 vs. 10.9%, p = 0.006); however, reoperation rate within 30 days was significantly higher in the MIE group than in the OE group (7.0 vs. 5.3%, p = 0.004). There were no significant differences between the MIE and OE groups in 30-day mortality rates (0.9 vs. 1.1%) and operative mortality rates (2.5 vs. 2.8%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

MIE was comparable with conventional OE in terms of short-term outcome after esophagectomy. It was particularly beneficial in reducing postoperative respiratory complications, but may be associated with higher reoperation rates.