Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 25, 2025
Single Incision Plus One Port Laparoscopic Proximal Gastrectomy with Double Channel Anastomosis for Gastric Cancer Treatment
Published on: December 27, 2024
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy gastric pull-up following thoracoscopic esophagectomy: A propensity score-matched
Chuan Cheng1, Chun-Yi Tsai2, Yin-Kai Chao1
1Division of Thoracic Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital-Linkou, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Background:
Because of its capacity to reduce surgical trauma to the chest wall, thoracoscopic esophagectomy is considered paramount for decreasing the risk of pulmonary complications in the context of minimally invasive esophagectomy. Whether laparoscopy (LS) following thoracoscopic esophagectomy can further improve outcomes compared with open laparotomy (OL) is unknown.
Materials And Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and imaging records of 428 patients who received McKeown esophagectomy with a thoracoscopic approach for cancer. Using propensity score matching based on eight parameters (age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidity index, tumor location, type of preoperative therapy, reconstruction route, and occurrence/severity of postoperative vocal cord palsy), 60 pairs were identified and compared with regard to perioperative complications and overall survival (OS).
Result:
Compared with OL, LS resulted in lower blood loss (mean: 171.21 versus 107.58 mL, respectively, p = 0.023) and a reduced incidence of pneumonia (13.3% versus 3.3%, respectively, p = 0.048), albeit at the expense of a longer operating time (mean: 399.37 versus 443.93 min, respectively, p = 0.003). Notably, lymph node yields and OS of patients who were treated with LS were similar to those observed in those who underwent OL.
Conclusions:
Patients who receive LS after thoracoscopic esophagectomy experience lower blood loss and have a reduced risk of pneumonia than those treated with OL.
