KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Laparoscopic Endoscopic Surgical Science / 2020 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 3

Robotic thoracic esophagectomy with radical lymphadenectomy: A preliminary study

Afag AGHAYEVA
İsmail Ahmet BİLGİN
Ebru KIRBIYIK
Ahmet DEMİRKAYA
Erman AYTAÇ
İsmail HAMZAOĞLU
Tayfun KARAHASANOĞLU
Bilgi BACA
Sayfa
180–186
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Comparative studies with the robotic approach are needed.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Introduction: Esophagectomy with the maximal number of harvested lymph nodes remains the mainstay for esophagus cancer (EC) treatment.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The present study aims to evaluate the short and long-term outcomes of patients with EC who underwent robotic esophagectomy (RE) with thoracic radical lymphadenectomy.Materials and Methods: Between April 2015 and April 2018, consecutive patients who underwent RE were retrieved from a prospectively maintained registry.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Comparative studies with the robotic approach are needed.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2015 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Introduction: Esophagectomy with the maximal number of harvested lymph nodes remains the mainstay for esophagus cancer (EC) treatment. The present study aims to evaluate the short and long-term outcomes of patients with EC who underwent robotic esophagectomy (RE) with thoracic radical lymphadenectomy.Materials and Methods: Between April 2015 and April 2018, consecutive patients who underwent RE were retrieved from a prospectively maintained registry. Patient demographics, operative variables and postoperative outcomes were assessed.Results: In this study, there were 22 (10 females) patients (mean age was 60.3±8.9 years). The mean operative time and estimated blood loss was 456±71.85 minutes and 213±157 mL, respectively. The mean number of harvested lymph nodes was 24.5±9.96. The overall 30-day complication rate was 36% (n=8). OS was calculated as 87% during 25.6 (range, 12-51) months of mean follow-up time.Conclusion: According to our limited number of patients, robotic technology was safe and feasible in esophageal cancer surgery. Comparative studies with the robotic approach are needed.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

AGHAYEVA, A., BİLGİN, İ. A., KIRBIYIK, E., DEMİRKAYA, A., AYTAÇ, E., HAMZAOĞLU, İ., KARAHASANOĞLU, T., BACA, B. (2020). Robotic thoracic esophagectomy with radical lymphadenectomy: A preliminary study. Laparoscopic Endoscopic Surgical Science, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 3, 180–186. https://ajindex.com/articles/345089

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (14)

  1. Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, Ferlay J, Lortet-Tieulent J, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2015;65:87108
  2. DeSantis CE, Lin CC, Mariotto AB, Rebecca L Siegel, Kevin D Stein, Joan L Kramer, et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2014. CA Cancer J Clin 2014;64:25271
  3. Wu PC, Posner MC. The role of surgery in the management of oesophageal cancer. Lancet Oncol 2003;4:4818
  4. Biere SSAY, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, Bonavina L, Rosman C, Garcia RJ et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2012;379:1887–92
  5. Yibulayin W, Abulizi S, Lv H, Sun W. Minimally invasive oesophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol 2016;14:304
  6. Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, Levy RM, Keeley S, Shende M, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg 2012;256:95103
  7. Levy RM, Pennathur A, Luketich JD. Randomized trial comparing minimally invasive esophagectomy and open esophagectomy: early perioperative outcomes appear improved with a minimally invasive approach. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012;24:1534
  8. Levy RM, Trivedi D, Luketich JD. Minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Clin North Am 2012;92:126585
  9. Mallipeddi MK, Onaitis MW. The contemporary role of minimally invasive esophagectomy in esophageal cancer. Curr Oncol Rep 2014;16:374
  10. Espinoza-Mercado F, Imai TA, Borgella JD, et al. Does the approach matter? comparing survival in robotic, minimally invasive, and open esophagectomies. Ann Thorac Surg 2019;107:378–85
  11. Weksler B, Sharma P, Moudgill N, Chojnacki KA, Rosato EL. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy is equivalent to thoracoscopic minimally invasive esophagectomy. Dis Esophagus 2012;25:403–9
  12. Deng HY, Huang WX, Li G, Li SX, Luo J, Alai G, et al. Comparison of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy and video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy in treating middle thoracic esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus 2018;31
  13. Visser E, van Rossum PSN, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R. Impact of Lymph Node Yield on Overall Survival in Patients Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Esophagectomy for Cancer: A Population-based Cohort Study in the Netherlands. Ann Surg 2017;266:863–9
  14. Jin D, Yao L, Yu J, Liu R, Guo T,