Current advances and challenges in minimally invasive esophagectomy.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Eisuke Booka, Hiroya Takeuchi
{"title":"Current advances and challenges in minimally invasive esophagectomy.","authors":"Eisuke Booka, Hiroya Takeuchi","doi":"10.1007/s10147-025-02806-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Advances in endoscopic equipment and thoracoscopic surgery have contributed to the increasing adoption of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Compared with open esophagectomy (OE), MIE is associated with longer operative times and offers many advantages, such as reduced blood loss and a lower incidence of pulmonary complications, including pneumonia. Two patient positions are commonly used for thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE): left lateral decubitus position and prone position. MIE has demonstrated significant benefits in reducing postoperative respiratory complications. However, the optimal MIE technique, surgical approach, and patient positioning remain controversial. Recently, robot-assisted thoracoscopic and/or laparoscopic esophagectomy using the da Vinci Surgical System and other emerging robotic platforms has gained attention as an attractive surgical option. In addition, nonthoracic radical esophagectomy, performed via transcervical or transhiatal approaches using mediastinoscopic devices, has been developed as an alternative approach. Despite these technological advances, there is a lack of definitive scientific evidence establishing MIE as a superior alternative to OE. However, a recent randomized phase III trial (JCOG1409) confirmed the noninferiority of TE compared with OE in terms of overall survival of patients with thoracic esophageal cancer. Furthermore, MIE-including robotic-assisted and mediastinoscopic approaches-has been associated with lower pulmonary complication rates while maintaining comparable oncological outcomes. These findings support the adoption of MIE as a standard treatment modality in Japan. Future studies should focus on evaluating the long-term outcomes of MIE and determining the optimal integration of robotic assistance in the surgical management of esophageal cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":13869,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Clinical Oncology","volume":" ","pages":"1463-1474"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10147-025-02806-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/6/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Advances in endoscopic equipment and thoracoscopic surgery have contributed to the increasing adoption of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Compared with open esophagectomy (OE), MIE is associated with longer operative times and offers many advantages, such as reduced blood loss and a lower incidence of pulmonary complications, including pneumonia. Two patient positions are commonly used for thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE): left lateral decubitus position and prone position. MIE has demonstrated significant benefits in reducing postoperative respiratory complications. However, the optimal MIE technique, surgical approach, and patient positioning remain controversial. Recently, robot-assisted thoracoscopic and/or laparoscopic esophagectomy using the da Vinci Surgical System and other emerging robotic platforms has gained attention as an attractive surgical option. In addition, nonthoracic radical esophagectomy, performed via transcervical or transhiatal approaches using mediastinoscopic devices, has been developed as an alternative approach. Despite these technological advances, there is a lack of definitive scientific evidence establishing MIE as a superior alternative to OE. However, a recent randomized phase III trial (JCOG1409) confirmed the noninferiority of TE compared with OE in terms of overall survival of patients with thoracic esophageal cancer. Furthermore, MIE-including robotic-assisted and mediastinoscopic approaches-has been associated with lower pulmonary complication rates while maintaining comparable oncological outcomes. These findings support the adoption of MIE as a standard treatment modality in Japan. Future studies should focus on evaluating the long-term outcomes of MIE and determining the optimal integration of robotic assistance in the surgical management of esophageal cancer.

微创食管切除术的进展与挑战。
内窥镜设备和胸腔镜手术的进步促进了微创食管切除术(MIE)的日益普及。与开放式食管切除术(OE)相比,MIE手术时间更长,并且具有许多优点,例如减少失血量和降低肺部并发症(包括肺炎)的发生率。胸腔镜食管切除术(TE)常用两种患者体位:左侧侧卧位和俯卧位。MIE已证明在减少术后呼吸并发症方面有显著的益处。然而,最佳MIE技术、手术入路和患者体位仍然存在争议。最近,使用达芬奇手术系统和其他新兴机器人平台的机器人辅助胸腔镜和/或腹腔镜食管切除术作为一种有吸引力的手术选择受到了关注。此外,非胸腔根治性食管切除术,经颈或经膈腔镜装置进行,已发展成为一种替代方法。尽管有这些技术进步,但缺乏明确的科学证据证明MIE是OE的更好选择。然而,最近的一项随机III期试验(JCOG1409)证实,在胸段食管癌患者的总生存率方面,TE与OE相比无劣效性。此外,包括机器人辅助和纵隔镜入路在内的mie与较低的肺部并发症发生率相关,同时保持相当的肿瘤预后。这些发现支持在日本采用MIE作为标准治疗方式。未来的研究应侧重于评估MIE的长期疗效,并确定机器人辅助在食管癌手术治疗中的最佳整合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
3.00%
发文量
175
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Clinical Oncology (IJCO) welcomes original research papers on all aspects of clinical oncology that report the results of novel and timely investigations. Reports on clinical trials are encouraged. Experimental studies will also be accepted if they have obvious relevance to clinical oncology. Membership in the Japan Society of Clinical Oncology is not a prerequisite for submission to the journal. Papers are received on the understanding that: their contents have not been published in whole or in part elsewhere; that they are subject to peer review by at least two referees and the Editors, and to editorial revision of the language and contents; and that the Editors are responsible for their acceptance, rejection, and order of publication.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信