Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

[Thoracoscopic esophagectomy].

Authors: Harushi, Osugi; Nobuyasu, Takada; , Masashi; , Takemura; Shigeru, Lee; Masakatsu, Ueno; Yoshinori, Tanaka; +2 Authors

[Thoracoscopic esophagectomy].

Abstract

The current roles of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the treatment of cancer in Japan are described. Lymphadenectomy of the same quality as open surgery should be performed thoracoscopically to obtain good oncological outcomes. The indications for thoracoscopic esophagectomy are 1) no extensive pleural adhesions; 2) pulmonary function sufficient for single-lung ventilation; and 3) tumor not invading other organs. Hand-assisted or mini-thoracotomy facilitates the dissection of lymph nodes, especially on the left side of the trachea. However, for any type of procedure, a good en-face view is essential for safe and accurate lymphadenectomy. The magnifying effect of video, with the camera in close proximity, is important to maintain a proper dissecting plane. Although sufficient experience is necessary to master the learning curve, lymphadenectomy of the same quality as open surgery can be performed with mini-thoracotomy in a feasible time period. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy contributes to reducing postoperative pain and constrictive pulmonary dysfunction. It may be too soon to assert that the thoracoscopic approach can provide oncological outcomes comparable to those after open surgery because long-term follow up is not yet sufficient. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy, however, has the potential to improve the postoperative quality of life of patients with esophageal cancer.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Esophagectomy, Survival Rate, Esophageal Neoplasms, Respiration, Thoracoscopy, Humans, Lymph Node Excision

  • 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).
    0
    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.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
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!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
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!