Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (NST 1502): a multicenter prospective cohort study.

IF 7.6 Q1 ONCOLOGY Journal of the National Cancer Center Pub Date : 2023-02-10 eCollection Date: 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jncc.2023.02.002
Yousheng Mao, Shugeng Gao, Yin Li, Chun Chen, Anlin Hao, Qun Wang, Lijie Tan, Jianqun Ma, Gaoming Xiao, Xiangning Fu, Wentao Fang, Zhigang Li, Yongtao Han, Keneng Chen, Renquan Zhang, Xiaofei Li, Tiehua Rong, Jianhua Fu, Yongyu Liu, Weimin Mao, Meiqing Xu, Shuoyan Liu, Zhentao Yu, Zhirong Zhang, Yan Fang, Donghong Fu, Xudong Wei, Ligong Yuan, Shan Muhammad, Jie He
{"title":"Minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (NST 1502): a multicenter prospective cohort study.","authors":"Yousheng Mao, Shugeng Gao, Yin Li, Chun Chen, Anlin Hao, Qun Wang, Lijie Tan, Jianqun Ma, Gaoming Xiao, Xiangning Fu, Wentao Fang, Zhigang Li, Yongtao Han, Keneng Chen, Renquan Zhang, Xiaofei Li, Tiehua Rong, Jianhua Fu, Yongyu Liu, Weimin Mao, Meiqing Xu, Shuoyan Liu, Zhentao Yu, Zhirong Zhang, Yan Fang, Donghong Fu, Xudong Wei, Ligong Yuan, Shan Muhammad, Jie He","doi":"10.1016/j.jncc.2023.02.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Whether minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is superior to open esophagectomy (OE) in the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is still uncertain. Therefore, this multicenter prospective study aimed to compare MIE with OE in postoperative parameters and long-term survival.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All hospitalized patients with cT1b-3N0-1M0 thoracic ESCC treated by MIE or OE were enrolled from 19 selected centers from April 1, 2015 to December 31, 2018. The propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimize the selection bias. The basic clinicopathological characteristics and 3-year overall survival (OS) as well as disease-free survival (DFS) of two groups were compared by R version 3.6.2.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MIE were performed in 1,387 patients and OE in 335 patients. 335 cases in each group were finally matched by PSM, and no significant differences in the essential demographic characteristics were observed between the MIE and OE groups after PSM. Compared with OE, MIE had significantly less intraoperative bleeding, less total drainage volume, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and harvested significantly more lymph nodes (LNs) (all <i>P</i> < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the major postoperative complications and death rates between MIE and OE. The 3-year OS and DFS were 77.0% and 68.1% in the MIE group versus 69.3% and 60.9% in the OE group (OS: <i>P</i> = 0.03; DFS: <i>P</i> = 0.09), and the rates were 75.1% and 66.5% in the MIE group versus 66.9% and 58.6% in the OE group for stage cII patients (OS: <i>P</i> = 0.04, DFS: <i>P</i> = 0.09), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared with OE, MIE is a safe and effective treatment approach with similar mortality and morbidity. It has the advantages in harvesting more LNs, improving postoperative recovery and survival of stage cII ESCC patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":73987,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the National Cancer Center","volume":"1 1","pages":"106-114"},"PeriodicalIF":7.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11256603/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the National Cancer Center","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jncc.2023.02.002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Whether minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is superior to open esophagectomy (OE) in the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is still uncertain. Therefore, this multicenter prospective study aimed to compare MIE with OE in postoperative parameters and long-term survival.

Methods: All hospitalized patients with cT1b-3N0-1M0 thoracic ESCC treated by MIE or OE were enrolled from 19 selected centers from April 1, 2015 to December 31, 2018. The propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to minimize the selection bias. The basic clinicopathological characteristics and 3-year overall survival (OS) as well as disease-free survival (DFS) of two groups were compared by R version 3.6.2.

Results: MIE were performed in 1,387 patients and OE in 335 patients. 335 cases in each group were finally matched by PSM, and no significant differences in the essential demographic characteristics were observed between the MIE and OE groups after PSM. Compared with OE, MIE had significantly less intraoperative bleeding, less total drainage volume, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and harvested significantly more lymph nodes (LNs) (all P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the major postoperative complications and death rates between MIE and OE. The 3-year OS and DFS were 77.0% and 68.1% in the MIE group versus 69.3% and 60.9% in the OE group (OS: P = 0.03; DFS: P = 0.09), and the rates were 75.1% and 66.5% in the MIE group versus 66.9% and 58.6% in the OE group for stage cII patients (OS: P = 0.04, DFS: P = 0.09), respectively.

Conclusions: Compared with OE, MIE is a safe and effective treatment approach with similar mortality and morbidity. It has the advantages in harvesting more LNs, improving postoperative recovery and survival of stage cII ESCC patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
针对可切除胸腔食管癌的微创与开腹食管切除术(NST 1502):一项多中心前瞻性队列研究。
背景:在食管鳞状细胞癌(ESCC)的治疗中,微创食管切除术(MIE)是否优于开放食管切除术(OE)仍不确定。因此,这项多中心前瞻性研究旨在比较MIE与OE在术后指标和长期生存率方面的差异:2015年4月1日至2018年12月31日期间,19个选定中心入选了所有接受MIE或OE治疗的cT1b-3N0-1M0胸部ESCC住院患者。为尽量减少选择偏倚,进行了倾向得分匹配(PSM)。两组患者的基本临床病理特征、3年总生存期(OS)和无病生存期(DFS)用R 3.6.2版进行比较:对1 387名患者进行了MIE,对335名患者进行了OE。两组各有 335 例经 PSM 最终匹配,经 PSM 后,MIE 组和 OE 组在基本人口学特征方面无明显差异。与 OE 相比,MIE 术中出血量显著减少,引流总量显著减少,术后住院时间显著缩短,收获的淋巴结(LN)显著增多(均 P < 0.001)。MIE和OE在术后主要并发症和死亡率方面无明显差异。MIE组的3年OS和DFS分别为77.0%和68.1%,而OE组分别为69.3%和60.9%(OS:P = 0.03;DFS:P = 0.09);对于cII期患者,MIE组的3年OS和DFS分别为75.1%和66.5%,而OE组分别为66.9%和58.6%(OS:P = 0.04;DFS:P = 0.09):与OE相比,MIE是一种安全有效的治疗方法,死亡率和发病率相似。结论:与OE相比,MIE是一种安全有效的治疗方法,死亡率和发病率相似,其优势在于能收获更多的LN,改善cII期ESCC患者的术后恢复和生存率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
70 days
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board The burden and long-term trends of breast cancer by different menopausal status in China Helicobacter pylori eradication for primary prevention of gastric cancer: progresses and challenges S100A8 promotes tumor progression by inducing phenotypic polarization of microglia through the TLR4/IL-10 signaling pathway in glioma Osteoimmunology in bone malignancies: a symphony with evil
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1