Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Osaka International Cancer Institute, 3-1-69, Otemae, Chuo-Ku, Osaka, 541-8567, Japan.
Department of Surgery, Kansai Rosai Hospital, 3-1-69, Inabaso, Amagasaki City, Hyogo, 660-8511, Japan.
J Gastrointest Surg. 2023 Jun;27(6):1055-1065. doi: 10.1007/s11605-023-05615-x. Epub 2023 Feb 7.
The use of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) as a treatment for patients with esophageal cancer has recently become more common worldwide. However, differences in the pattern of recurrence between MIE and open esophagectomy (OE) using the transthoracic approach have not been fully investigated, particularly in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
We searched the prospective databases of two institutes for patients with esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by esophagectomy between 2011 and 2018. Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to reduce bias from confounding patient-related variables. Operative outcomes, regionally harvested lymph nodes (LNs), recurrence pattern, and prognosis were investigated in two groups.
We identified 410 patients who underwent OE (n = 263) and MIE (n = 147). After propensity score matching, 131 pairs of patients were selected. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics after matching. The total number of harvested LNs in both groups was similar (55.1 vs. 58.9, P = 0.132). The incidence of LN recurrence in the MIE group was significantly lower than that in the OE group (27% vs. 15%, P = 0.010). In particular, the incidence of mediastinal LN recurrence in the MIE group was significantly lower than that in the OE group (16% vs. 6%, P = 0.017). There were no significant differences between the two groups in hematogenous (19% vs.12%, P = 0.173), dissemination (5% vs. 4%, P = 0.769), local (4% vs. 1%. P = 0.213), and other recurrence (3% vs. 3%, P = 1.000). The 3-year disease-free and overall survival of MIE were significantly better than OE (71.4% vs. 50.5%, P = 0.004 and 80.3% vs. 61.2%, P = 0.002, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that the thoracic approach (OE vs. MIE) (HR 1.93, P = 0.004) was an independent prognostic factor, along with the pathological N stage (HR 3.05, P < 0.001).
MIE has less intramediastinal LN recurrence than OE and may lead to a better long-term prognosis in patients with advanced esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
微创食管切除术(MIE)作为治疗食管癌的一种方法,最近在全球范围内越来越普遍。然而,MIE 与经胸开放食管切除术(OE)在复发模式方面的差异尚未得到充分研究,尤其是在接受新辅助化疗的患者中。
我们在两家机构的前瞻性数据库中检索了 2011 年至 2018 年间接受新辅助化疗后行食管切除术的食管癌患者。采用倾向评分匹配分析以减少与患者相关变量混杂的偏倚。在两组患者中比较手术结果、区域性采集的淋巴结(LNs)、复发模式和预后。
我们共纳入 410 例接受 OE(n=263)和 MIE(n=147)的患者。在进行倾向评分匹配后,共选择了 131 对患者。匹配后两组的基线特征无显著差异。两组采集的总淋巴结数量相似(55.1 个 vs. 58.9 个,P=0.132)。MIE 组的淋巴结复发发生率明显低于 OE 组(27% vs. 15%,P=0.010)。特别是 MIE 组纵隔淋巴结复发的发生率明显低于 OE 组(16% vs. 6%,P=0.017)。两组之间血行转移(19% vs. 12%,P=0.173)、播散转移(5% vs. 4%,P=0.769)、局部转移(4% vs. 1%,P=0.213)和其他部位转移(3% vs. 3%,P=1.000)的发生率无显著差异。MIE 组的 3 年无病生存率和总生存率明显优于 OE 组(71.4% vs. 50.5%,P=0.004 和 80.3% vs. 61.2%,P=0.002)。多因素分析显示,胸部入路(OE 与 MIE)(HR 1.93,P=0.004)是独立的预后因素,同时病理 N 分期(HR 3.05,P<0.001)也是。
MIE 纵隔内淋巴结复发较少,可能为接受新辅助化疗的晚期食管癌患者带来更好的长期预后。