Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Optimal Surgical Approach to Esophagectomy for Distal Esophageal Adenocarcinoma

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Difficult Decisions in Thoracic Surgery

Part of the book series: Difficult Decisions in Surgery: An Evidence-Based Approach ((DDSURGERY,volume 1))

  • 1325 Accesses

Abstract

Esophagectomy can be performed using transthoracic, transhiatal, and minimally-invasive approaches, with reconstruction via intrathoracic or cervical anastomoses. The optimal surgical approach to esophagectomy for cancer has been a subject of debate for decades, with assumed trade-offs between lymph node retrieval and perioperative morbidity. This chapter reviews the literature comparing esophageal procedures, examining studies investigating how technical considerations influence perioperative morbidity, mortality, functional outcomes, and survival for distal esophageal cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Torek F. The first successful resection of the thoracic portion of the esophagus for carcinoma: preliminary report. JAMA. 1913;60:1533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kakegawa T, Fujita H. A history of esophageal surgery in the twentieth century. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;57:55–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sweet RH. Surgical management of carcinoma of the midthoracic esophagus: preliminary report. N Engl J Med. 1945;233:1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lewis I. The surgical treatment of carcinoma of the oesophagus with special reference to a new operation for growths of the middle third. Br J Surg. 1946;34:18–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Morris-Stiff G, Hughes LE. Ivor-Lewis (1895–1982) – Welsh pioneer of the right-sided approach to the oesophagus. Dig Surg. 2003;20:546–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Dubecz A, Kun L, Stadlhuber RJ, Peters JH, Schwartz SI. The origins of an operation: a brief history of transhiatal esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2009;249:535.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Akiyama H, Hiyama M, Miyazono H. Total esophageal reconstruction after extraction of the esophagus. Ann Surg. 1975;182:547–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. McKeown KC. Total three-stage oesophagectomy for cancer of the oesophagus. Br J Surg. 1976;63:259–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Orringer MB, Sloan H. Esophagectomy without thoracotomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1978;76:643–54.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Orringer MB, Marshall B, Chang AC, Lee J, Pickens A, Lau CL. Two thousand transhiatal esophagectomies: changing trends, lessons learned. Ann Surg. 2007;246:363–74.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Daly JM, Fry WA, Little AG, Winchester DP, McKee RF, Stewart AK, Fremgen AM. Esophageal cancer: results of an American College of Surgeons Patient Care Evaluation Study. J Am Coll Surg. 2000;190:562–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Goldminc M, Maddern G, Le Prise E, Meunier B, Campion JP, Launois B. Oesophagectomy by a transhiatal approach or thoracotomy: a prospective randomized trial. Br J Surg. 1993;80:367–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chu KM, Law SY, Fok M, Wong J. A prospective randomized comparison of transhiatal and transthoracic resection for lower-third esophageal carcinoma. Am J Surg. 1997;174:320–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Jacobi CA, Zieren HU, Muller JM, Pichlmaier H. Surgical therapy of esophageal carcinoma: the influence of surgical approach and esophageal resection on cardiopulmonary function. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1997;11:32–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hulscher JB, van Sandick JW, de Boer AG, Wijnhoven BP, Tijssen JG, Fockens P, Stalmeier PF, ten Kate FJ, van Dekken H, Obertop H, Tilanus HW, van Lanschot JJ. Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1662–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Omloo JM, Lagarde SM, Hulscher JB, Reitsma JB, Fockens P, van Dekken H, ten Kate FJ, Obertop H, Tilanus HW, van Lanschot JJ. Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the mid/distal esophagus: five-year survival of a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg. 2007;246:992–1001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Boshier PR, Anderson O, Hanna GB. Transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy for the treatment of esophagogastric cancer: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2011;254:894–906.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Chang AC, Ji H, Birkmeyer NJ, Orringer MB, Birkmeyer JD. Outcomes after transhiatal and transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85:424–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Beitler AL, Urschel JD. Comparison of stapled and hand-sewn esophagogastric anastomoses. Am J Surg. 1998;175:337–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Honda M, Kuriyama A, Noma H, Nunobe S, Furukawa TA. Hand-sewn versus mechanical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg. 2013;257:238–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Walther B, Johansson J, Johnsson F, von Holstein CS, Zilling T. Cervical of thoracic anastomosis after esophageal resection and gastric tube reconstruction: a prospective randomized trial comparing sutured neck anastomosis with stapled intrathoracic anastomosis. Ann Surg. 2003;238:803–12.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hsu HH, Chen JS, Huang PM, Lee JM, Lee YC. Comparison of manual and mechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis after esophageal resection for squamous cell carcinoma: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004;25:1097–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Okuyama M, Motoyama S, Suzuki H, Saito R, Maruyama K, Ogawa J. Hand-sewn cervical anastomosis versus stapled intrathoracic anastomosis after esophagectomy for middle or lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a prospective randomized controlled study. Surg Today. 2007;37:947–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bartels H, Thorban S, Siewert JR. Anterior versus posterior reconstruction after transhiatal oesophagectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Surg. 1993;80:1141–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Khiria LS, Pal S, Peush S, Chattopadhyay TK, Deval M. Impact on outcome of the route of conduit transposition after transhiatal oesophagectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Dig Liver Dis. 2009;41:711–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Urschel JD, Urschel DM, Miller JD, Bennett WF, Young JE. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of route of reconstruction after esophagectomy for cancer. Am J Surg. 2001;182:470–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, Bonavina L, Rosman C, Garcia JR, Gisbertz SS, Klinkenbikl JH, Hollmann MW, de Lange ES, Jaap Bonjer H, van der Peet DL, Cuesa MA. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379:1887–92.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, Levy RM, Keeley S, Shende M, Christie NA, Weksler B, Landreneau RJ, Abbas G, Schuchert MJ, Nason KS. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg. 2012;256:95–103.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Verhage RJ, Hazebroek EJ, Boone J, Van Hillegersberg R. Minimally invasive surgery compared to open procedures in esophagectomy for cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Minerva Chir. 2009;64:135–46.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Dantoc MM, Cox MR, Esllick GD. Does minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) provide for comparable oncologic outcomes to open techniques? A systematic review. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:486–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med. 1979;301:1364–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, Stukel TA, Lucas FL, Batista I, Welch HG, Wennberg DE. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1128–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, Goodney PP, Wennberg DE, Lucas FL. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2117–27.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Finks JF, Osborne NH, Birkmeyer JD. Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2128–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Stitzenberg KB, Meropol NJ. Trends in centralization of cancer surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:2824–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Funk LM, Gawande AA, Semel ME, Lipsitz SR, Berry WR, Zinner MJ, Jha AK. Esophagectomy outcomes at low-volume hospitals: the association between systems characteristics and mortality. Ann Surg. 2011;253:912–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Wright CD, Kucharczuk JC, O’Brien SM, Grab JD, Allen MS. Predictors of major morbidity and mortality after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database risk adjustment model. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2009;137:587–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. LaPar DJ, Kron IL, Jones DR, Stukenborg GJ, Kozower BD. Hospital procedure volume should not be used as a measure of quality. Ann Surg. 2012;256:606–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Thrumurthy S, Low DE. Volume-outcome relationship in surgery for esophageal malignancy: systematic review and meta-analysis 2000–2011. J Gastrointest Surg. 2012;16:1055–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Simmons Cancer Institute, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, 315 West Carpenter Street, Springfield, IL, 62702, USA

    Sabha Ganai MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Sabha Ganai MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sabha Ganai MD, PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Surgery, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA

    Mark K. Ferguson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Ganai, S. (2014). Optimal Surgical Approach to Esophagectomy for Distal Esophageal Adenocarcinoma. In: Ferguson, M. (eds) Difficult Decisions in Thoracic Surgery. Difficult Decisions in Surgery: An Evidence-Based Approach, vol 1. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6404-3_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6404-3_25

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-6403-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-6404-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation