Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment and Comparison of Recovery after Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Cancer: An Exploratory Study in Two Centers

  • Thoracic Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) may lead to early restoration of health-related quality of life, but few prospective comparative studies have been performed. This exploratory study compared recovery between totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), laparoscopically assisted esophagectomy (LAE) and open surgery (OE).

Methods

A prospective study in 2 specialist centers recruited consecutive patients undergoing OE, LAE, or MIE for high-grade dysplasia or cancer. Patients completed validated questionnaires, the Multi-Dimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI-20), modified Katz Scale, and modified Lawton and Brody Scale (assessing activities of daily living) before and 6 weeks and 3 and 6 months after surgery.

Results

A total of 97 patients (26 women; median age 64 years) were scheduled for surgery that was abandoned in 11 due to occult low-volume metastatic disease. In the remaining 86 (OE = 19, LAE = 31, and MIE = 36), there were 4 in-hospital deaths (4 %), and 54 postoperative complications (OE = 12, LAE = 19, and MIE = 23). Overall questionnaire compliance was high (77 %) and baseline scores similar in all groups, although clinical differences between groups were observed with earlier tumors and more squamous cell cancers selected for MIE. Following surgery fatigue levels increased dramatically and activity levels reduced in all groups. These gradually recovered to baseline following MIE and LAE within 6 months, but the ability to perform activities of daily living and most parameters of fatigue had not returned to baseline levels in the OE group.

Conclusions

This exploratory prospective nonrandomized study of recovery after different types of surgery for esophageal cancer showed possible small benefits to MIE. A much larger study is needed to confirm these findings.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The National Oesophago-Gastric Cancer Audit. http://www.augis.org/clinical_audits/clinical_audits_og_cancer.htm. Accessed 8 Jan 2013.

  2. Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, Christie NA, McCaughan JS, Litle VR, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg. 2003;238:486–94.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Smithers BM, Gotley DC, Martin I, Thomas JM. Comparison of the outcomes between open and minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2007;245:232–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nagpal K, Ahmed K, Vats A, Yakoub D, James D, Ashrafian H, et al. Is minimally invasive surgery beneficial in the management of esophageal cancer? A meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:1621–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Parameswaran R, Blazeby JM, Hughes R, Mitchell K, Berrisford RG, Wajed SA. Health-related quality of life after minimally invasive oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 2010;97:525–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wang H, Feng M, Tan L, Wang Q. Comparison of the short-term quality of life in patients with esophageal cancer after subtotal esophagectomy via video-assisted thoracoscopic or open surgery. Dis Esophagus. 2010;23:408–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Weeks JC, Nelson H, Gelber S, Sargent D, Schroeder G; Clinical Outcomes of Surgical Therapy (COST) Study Group. Short-term quality-of-life outcomes following laparoscopic-assisted colectomy vs open colectomy for colon cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2002;287:321–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. King PM, Blazeby JM, Ewings P, Longman RJ, Kipling RM, Franks PJ, et al. The influence of an Enhanced Recovery Programme on clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life after surgery for colorectal cancer. Colorectal Dis. 2006;8:506–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H, Walker J, Jayne DG, Smith AM, et al. Short-term endpoints of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASICC trial): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365:1718–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kleinbeck SV, Eells KR. Monitoring postdischarge ambulatory surgical recovery costs and outcomes. Surg Serv Manage. 1997;3:33–5.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Oberle K, Allen M, Lynkowski P. Follow-up of same day surgery patients. A study of patient concerns. AORN J. 1994;59:1016–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zalon ML. Correlates of recovery among older adults after major abdominal surgery. Nurs Res. 2004;53:99–106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Blazeby JM, Blencowe NS, Titcomb DR, Metcalfe C, Hollowood AD, Barham CP. Demonstration of the IDEAL recommendations for evaluating and reporting surgical innovation in minimally invasive oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 2011;98:544–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Berrisford RG, Wajed SA, Sanders D, Rucklidge MW. Short-term outcomes following total minimally invasive oesophagectomy. Br J Surg. 2008;95:602–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Medical Research Council Oesophageal Cancer Working Group. Surgical resection with or without preoperative chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer. Lancet. 2002;359:1727–33.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Medical Research Council. A randomised controlled trial comparing standard chemotherapy followed by resection versus ECX chemotherapy followed by resection in patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus. ISRCTN01852072. 2005.

  17. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250:187–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Katz S. Assessing self-maintenance: activities of daily living, mobility, and instrumental activities of daily living. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1983;31:721–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist. 1969;9:179–86.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Smets EM, Garssen B, Bonke B, De Haes JC. The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory (MFI) psychometric qualities of an instrument to assess fatigue. J Psychosom Res. 1995;39:315–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, Bonavina L, Rosman C, Garcia JR, et al. 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 

  22. Briez N, Piessen G, Bonnetain F, Brigand C, Carrere N, Collet D, et al. Open versus laparoscopically-assisted oesophagectomy for cancer: a multicentre randomised controlled phase III trial—the MIRO trial. BMC Cancer. 2011;11:310.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Donovan J, Mills N, Smith M, Brindle L, Jacoby A, Peters T, et al. Improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. BMJ. 2002;325:766–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Metcalfe C, Blazeby JM, Berrisford R et al. ROMIO: Randomised Oesophagectomy: minimally invasive or open. Sydney: Health Technology Assessment Trial Funded; 2012.

  25. Hulscher JB, van Sandick JW, de Boer AG, Wijnhoven BP, Tijssen JG, Fockens P, et al. 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 

  26. Blencowe NS, Strong S, McNair AG, Brookes ST, Crosby T, Griffin SM, et al. Reporting of short-term clinical outcomes after esophagectomy: a systematic review. Ann Surg. 2012;255:658–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Reynolds JV, McLaughlin R, Moore J, Rowley S, Ravi N, Byrne PJ. Prospective evaluation of quality of life in patients with localized oesophageal cancer treated by multimodality therapy or surgery alone. Br J Surg. 2006;93:1084–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Blazeby JM, Sanford E, Falk SJ, Alderson D, Donovan JL. Health-related quality of life during neoadjuvant treatment and surgery for localized esophageal carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;103:1791–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bege T, Lelong B, Esterni B, Turrini O, Guiramand J, Francon D, et al. The learning curve for the laparoscopic approach to conservative mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: lessons drawn from a single institution’s experience. Ann Surg. 2010;251:249–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Itani KM, Hur K, Kim LT, Anthony T, Berger DH, Reda D, et al. Comparison of laparoscopic and open repair with mesh for the treatment of ventral incisional hernia: a randomized trial. Arch Surg. 2010;145:322–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. International Union Against Cancer. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. In: Sobin LH, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C, editors. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell; 2009.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Thoracic and Upper GI Surgery, The Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital Foundation Trust, Exeter, United Kingdom

    R. Parameswaran MRCS, MD, R. G. Berrisford FRCS(Th) & S. A. Wajed MChir, FRCS

  2. Academic Unit of Surgical Research, School of Social & Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom

    R. Parameswaran MRCS, MD & J. M. Blazeby MD, FRCS

  3. Division of Surgery, Head & Neck, University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, United Kingdom

    D. R. Titcomb FRCS, N. S. Blencowe MRCS, C. G. Streets MD, FRCS, A. D. Hollowood PhD, FRCS, R. Krysztopik FRCS, C. P. Barham MD, FRCS & J. M. Blazeby MD, FRCS

Authors
  1. R. Parameswaran MRCS, MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. R. Titcomb FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. N. S. Blencowe MRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R. G. Berrisford FRCS(Th)
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. A. Wajed MChir, FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C. G. Streets MD, FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. A. D. Hollowood PhD, FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. R. Krysztopik FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. C. P. Barham MD, FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. J. M. Blazeby MD, FRCS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Parameswaran MRCS, MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Parameswaran, R., Titcomb, D.R., Blencowe, N.S. et al. Assessment and Comparison of Recovery after Open and Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Cancer: An Exploratory Study in Two Centers. Ann Surg Oncol 20, 1970–1977 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2848-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2848-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation