Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Journal of Surgical ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Surgical Oncology
Article . 2005 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Surgical techniques

Authors: T, Lerut; W, Coosemans; G, Decker; P, De Leyn; J, Moons; P, Nafteux; D, Van Raemdonck;

Surgical techniques

Abstract

AbstractAdenocarcinoma of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) has shown a remarkable increase during recent decades. Most patients are present with advanced stage disease, reflecting transmural growth and metastasis to lymph nodes at the time of diagnosis. Moreover, the pattern of lymph node dissemination is chaotic and difficult to predict, and despite the use of modern technology (e.g., spiral CT, EUS, FDG‐PET), clinical staging remains suboptimal. These shortcomings in staging, as well as in different attitudes toward extent of resection and lymphadenectomy, are reflected by a great variation in surgical techniques, which are discussed in this review. As to the results, primary surgery can currently be performed with low mortality, below 5% in high volume centers. Hospital mortality and morbidity are mainly related to pulmonary complications and anastomotic leaks, the latter mostly resolving under conservative treatment. Overall 5‐year survival varies between 10% and 59%. As expected the most important prognostic determinants are completeness of resection (R0 vs. R1–R2) and lymph node status (N0, N1). R0 resection currently offers 5‐year survival rates of over 40%. Five‐year survival figures for node‐negative (N0) patients exceed 70%, and even for node‐positive (N1), patients reach 25%. It is not known whether performing a three‐field lymph node dissection is beneficial for patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus. With overall 5‐year survival currently exceeding 30%–40%, these figures should be the gold standard against which all other therapeutic modalities are compared. J. Surg. Oncol. 2005;92:218–229. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Laparotomy, Esophageal Neoplasms, Anastomosis, Surgical, Adenocarcinoma, Esophagectomy, Survival Rate, Postoperative Complications, Gastric Emptying, Thoracotomy, Humans, Lymph Node Excision, Esophagogastric Junction

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    56
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
56
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!