• Katrin Schwameis, Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah, Fritz Wrba, Peter Birner, Gerhard Prager, Michael Hejna, Rainer Schmid, Reza Asari, Johannes Zacherl, and Sebastian Friedrich Schoppmann.
• Medical University of Vienna, Department of Surgery, Upper-GI Research, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Vienna, CCC-GET, University Clinic of Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
• Anticancer Res. 2013 May 1; 33 (5): 2085-91.

BackgroundEsophagectomy represents the gold standard in the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer. Despite significant improvements in perioperative care, postoperative morbidity and mortality rates remain high. Minimally-invasive surgical techniques introduced to the surgical treatment of esophageal malignancies have been shown to successfully diminish surgical trauma and postoperative morbidity.AimIn the present report we present the stepwise implementation of minimally-invasive techniques in the treatment of esophageal cancer at a high-volume center and its influence on overall patient outcome.Patients And MethodsA total of 165 consecutive patients with esophagectomy, in two 4-year periods, namely that before (period A) and that after (period B) the implementation of minimally-invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for cancer, were compared. Patients' characteristics, and perioperative, surgical, oncological and survival outcomes were compared.ResultsIn time period A, 73 patients were treated with open esophagectomy (OE), whereas in time period B 37 patients (40.2%) underwent an OE and 55 (59.8%) a minimally-invasive esophagectomy. Surgical and non-surgical complications did not differ significantly between groups (B: 44.6% vs. A: 54.8%; B: 38% vs. A: 35.6%; p>0.05). Duration of ventilation (B: 1.8 days vs. A: 6.7 days), ICU (B: 5.7 days vs. A: 12.2 days) and hospital stay (B: 20.5 days vs. A: 28.4 days) were significantly reduced in patients of time period B. The number of lymph nodes removed and complete resection rates were comparable (mean=18.1 ± 10.1 lymph nodes; B: 87% R0 vs. A: 93.2% R0). No significant differences between the groups were detectable regarding short-term disease-free or overall survival.ConclusionThe implementation of minimally-invasive esophagectomy is feasible, safe and has the potential to reduce perioperative morbidity without compromising oncological outcome.

32 keywords...

hide…