腹腔镜与开腹微创胸腔镜食管切除术术后肺部并发症发生率无差异:一项使用日本全国数据库的回顾性队列研究。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Esophagus Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1007/s10388-023-01032-w
Masashi Takeuchi, Hideki Endo, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Satoru Matsuda, Hirotoshi Kikuchi, Shingo Kanaji, Hiraku Kumamaru, Hiroaki Miyata, Hideki Ueno, Yasuyuki Seto, Masayuki Watanabe, Yuichiro Doki, Yuko Kitagawa
{"title":"腹腔镜与开腹微创胸腔镜食管切除术术后肺部并发症发生率无差异:一项使用日本全国数据库的回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Masashi Takeuchi, Hideki Endo, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Satoru Matsuda, Hirotoshi Kikuchi, Shingo Kanaji, Hiraku Kumamaru, Hiroaki Miyata, Hideki Ueno, Yasuyuki Seto, Masayuki Watanabe, Yuichiro Doki, Yuko Kitagawa","doi":"10.1007/s10388-023-01032-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There remains a lack of evidence regarding the optimal abdominal approach, including laparoscopy, hand-assisted, and open laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative complications, particularly pulmonary complications, between laparoscopy and open laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy using nationwide Japanese databases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from patients in the National Clinical Database (NCD) who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were analyzed. The incidence of pulmonary complications was compared between abdominal laparoscopy and laparotomy after matching the propensity scores (PS) from preoperative factors to account for confounding bias. Laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAS) was also compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 24,790 patients who underwent esophagectomy between 2018 and 2021, data from 12,633 underwent thoracoscopic procedure. The proportion of patients who experienced pulmonary complications did not significantly differ between the laparoscopy group and the laparotomy group after matching (664/3195 patients, 20.8% versus 702/3195 patients, 22.0%; P = 0.25). No difference in the incidence of pulmonary complications was observed among patients treated using the laparoscopic approach (508/2439 patients, 20.8% in the LAS group versus 498/2439 patients, 20.4% in the HALS group; P = 0.72).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We observed no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications between laparoscopy and laparotomy for thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Short-term outcomes were similar between the laparoscopic-assisted approach and the hand-assisted approach. This study provides valuable insights into the optimal abdominal approach for thoracoscopic esophagectomy using data from a nationwide database that reflect real-world clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":11918,"journal":{"name":"Esophagus","volume":" ","pages":"11-21"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"No difference in the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications between abdominal laparoscopy and laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study using a nationwide Japanese database.\",\"authors\":\"Masashi Takeuchi, Hideki Endo, Hirofumi Kawakubo, Satoru Matsuda, Hirotoshi Kikuchi, Shingo Kanaji, Hiraku Kumamaru, Hiroaki Miyata, Hideki Ueno, Yasuyuki Seto, Masayuki Watanabe, Yuichiro Doki, Yuko Kitagawa\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10388-023-01032-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There remains a lack of evidence regarding the optimal abdominal approach, including laparoscopy, hand-assisted, and open laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative complications, particularly pulmonary complications, between laparoscopy and open laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy using nationwide Japanese databases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from patients in the National Clinical Database (NCD) who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were analyzed. The incidence of pulmonary complications was compared between abdominal laparoscopy and laparotomy after matching the propensity scores (PS) from preoperative factors to account for confounding bias. Laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAS) was also compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 24,790 patients who underwent esophagectomy between 2018 and 2021, data from 12,633 underwent thoracoscopic procedure. The proportion of patients who experienced pulmonary complications did not significantly differ between the laparoscopy group and the laparotomy group after matching (664/3195 patients, 20.8% versus 702/3195 patients, 22.0%; P = 0.25). No difference in the incidence of pulmonary complications was observed among patients treated using the laparoscopic approach (508/2439 patients, 20.8% in the LAS group versus 498/2439 patients, 20.4% in the HALS group; P = 0.72).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We observed no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications between laparoscopy and laparotomy for thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Short-term outcomes were similar between the laparoscopic-assisted approach and the hand-assisted approach. This study provides valuable insights into the optimal abdominal approach for thoracoscopic esophagectomy using data from a nationwide database that reflect real-world clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11918,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Esophagus\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"11-21\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Esophagus\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10388-023-01032-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Esophagus","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10388-023-01032-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关于微创胸腔镜食管切除术的最佳腹部入路,包括腹腔镜、手辅助和开腹手术,仍然缺乏证据。我们的目的是比较腹腔镜和开腹微创胸腔镜食管切除术术后并发症的发生率,特别是肺部并发症。方法:对国家临床数据库(NCD)中食管癌胸腔镜食管切除术患者的资料进行分析。在匹配术前因素的倾向评分(PS)以解释混杂偏倚后,比较腹部腹腔镜和剖腹手术的肺部并发症发生率。腹腔镜辅助手术(LAS)也与手辅助腹腔镜手术(HALS)进行了比较。结果:在2018年至2021年期间接受食管切除术的24790名患者中,有12633名患者接受了胸腔镜手术。匹配后,腹腔镜组和开腹组发生肺部并发症的患者比例无显著差异(664/3195例,20.8% vs 702/3195例,22.0%;p = 0.25)。采用腹腔镜入路治疗的患者肺部并发症发生率无差异(508/2439例,LAS组20.8%;498/2439例,HALS组20.4%;p = 0.72)。结论:我们观察到腹腔镜与开腹进行胸腔镜食管切除术后肺部并发症的发生率无显著差异。腹腔镜辅助入路和手辅助入路的短期结果相似。本研究利用反映现实世界临床实践的全国数据库数据,为胸腔镜食管切除术的最佳腹部入路提供了有价值的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
No difference in the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications between abdominal laparoscopy and laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study using a nationwide Japanese database.

Introduction: There remains a lack of evidence regarding the optimal abdominal approach, including laparoscopy, hand-assisted, and open laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the incidence of postoperative complications, particularly pulmonary complications, between laparoscopy and open laparotomy for minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy using nationwide Japanese databases.

Methods: Data from patients in the National Clinical Database (NCD) who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were analyzed. The incidence of pulmonary complications was compared between abdominal laparoscopy and laparotomy after matching the propensity scores (PS) from preoperative factors to account for confounding bias. Laparoscopic-assisted surgery (LAS) was also compared to hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS).

Results: Of the 24,790 patients who underwent esophagectomy between 2018 and 2021, data from 12,633 underwent thoracoscopic procedure. The proportion of patients who experienced pulmonary complications did not significantly differ between the laparoscopy group and the laparotomy group after matching (664/3195 patients, 20.8% versus 702/3195 patients, 22.0%; P = 0.25). No difference in the incidence of pulmonary complications was observed among patients treated using the laparoscopic approach (508/2439 patients, 20.8% in the LAS group versus 498/2439 patients, 20.4% in the HALS group; P = 0.72).

Conclusions: We observed no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications between laparoscopy and laparotomy for thoracoscopic esophagectomy. Short-term outcomes were similar between the laparoscopic-assisted approach and the hand-assisted approach. This study provides valuable insights into the optimal abdominal approach for thoracoscopic esophagectomy using data from a nationwide database that reflect real-world clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Esophagus
Esophagus GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
78
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Esophagus, the official journal of the Japan Esophageal Society, introduces practitioners and researchers to significant studies in the fields of benign and malignant diseases of the esophagus. The journal welcomes original articles, review articles, and short articles including technical notes ( How I do it ), which will be peer-reviewed by the editorial board. Letters to the editor are also welcome. Special articles on esophageal diseases will be provided by the editorial board, and proceedings of symposia and workshops will be included in special issues for the Annual Congress of the Society.
期刊最新文献
Circ_DLG1 facilitates cell proliferation and metastasis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma via upregulating MAP3K9. Investigating the synergistic effects of immunochemotherapy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Activation of the tumor cell-intrinsic STING pathway induced by Fusobacterium nucleatum is associated with poor prognosis in esophageal cancer patients. A purely laparoscopic approach can reduce the incidence of postoperative pneumonia in esophageal cancer patients undergoing esophagectomy. Comparison and validation of the Japanese classification 12th edition and American joint committee on cancer 8th edition on intrathoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.
×
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