Cargando…
Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501)
BACKGROUND: Left thoracic approach (LTA) has been a favorable selection in surgical treatment for esophageal cancer (EC) patients in China before minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is popular. This study aimed to demonstrate whether right thoracic approach (RTA) is superior to LTA in the surgica...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
AME Publishing Company
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9469177/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36111056 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-22-3810 |
_version_ | 1784788583508344832 |
---|---|
author | Mao, You-Sheng Gao, Shu-Geng Li, Yin Hao, An-Lin Liu, Jun-Feng Li, Xiao-Fei Rong, Tie-Hua Fu, Jian-Hua Ma, Jian-Qun Xu, Mei-Qing Zhang, Ren-Quan Xiao, Gao-Ming Fu, Xiang-Ning Chen, Ke-Neng Mao, Wei-Min Liu, Yong-Yu Liu, Hong-Xu Zhang, Zhi-Rong Fang, Yan Fu, Dong-Hong Wei, Xu-Dong Yuan, Li-Gong Muhammad, Shan Wei, Wen-Qiang Chiu, Philip Wai-Yan Lloyd, Shane Schlottmann, Francisco Meredith, Kenneth Pimiento, Jose M. Gao, Yi-Bo He, Jie |
author_facet | Mao, You-Sheng Gao, Shu-Geng Li, Yin Hao, An-Lin Liu, Jun-Feng Li, Xiao-Fei Rong, Tie-Hua Fu, Jian-Hua Ma, Jian-Qun Xu, Mei-Qing Zhang, Ren-Quan Xiao, Gao-Ming Fu, Xiang-Ning Chen, Ke-Neng Mao, Wei-Min Liu, Yong-Yu Liu, Hong-Xu Zhang, Zhi-Rong Fang, Yan Fu, Dong-Hong Wei, Xu-Dong Yuan, Li-Gong Muhammad, Shan Wei, Wen-Qiang Chiu, Philip Wai-Yan Lloyd, Shane Schlottmann, Francisco Meredith, Kenneth Pimiento, Jose M. Gao, Yi-Bo He, Jie |
author_sort | Mao, You-Sheng |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Left thoracic approach (LTA) has been a favorable selection in surgical treatment for esophageal cancer (EC) patients in China before minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is popular. This study aimed to demonstrate whether right thoracic approach (RTA) is superior to LTA in the surgical treatment of middle and lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC). METHODS: Superiority clinical trial design was used for this multicenter randomized controlled two-parallel group study. Between April 2015 and December 2018, cT1b-3N0-1M0 TESCC patients from 14 centers were recruited and randomized by a central stratified block randomization program into LTA or RTA groups. All enrolled patients were followed up every three months after surgery. The software SPSS 20.0 and R 3.6.2. were used for statistical analysis. Efficacy and safety outcomes, 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 861 patients without suspected upper mediastinal lymph nodes (umLN) were finally enrolled in the study after 95 ineligible patients were excluded. 833 cases (98.7%) were successfully followed up until June 1, 2020. Esophagectomies were performed via LTA in 453 cases, and via RTA in 408 cases. Compared with the LTA group, the RTA group required longer operating time (274.48±78.92 vs. 205.34±51.47 min, P<0.001); had more complications (33.8% vs. 26.3% P=0.016); harvested more lymph nodes (LNs) (23.61±10.09 vs. 21.92±10.26, P=0.015); achieved a significantly improved OS in stage IIIa patients (67.8% vs. 51.8%, P=0.022). The 3-year OS and DFS were 68.7% and 64.3% in LTA arm versus 71.3% and 63.7% in RTA arm (P=0.20; P=0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Esophagectomies via both LTA and RTA can achieve similar outcomes in middle or lower TESCC patients without suspected umLN. RTA is superior to LTA and recommended for the surgical treatment of more advanced stage TESCC due to more complete lymphadenectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02448979. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9469177 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | AME Publishing Company |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94691772022-09-14 Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501) Mao, You-Sheng Gao, Shu-Geng Li, Yin Hao, An-Lin Liu, Jun-Feng Li, Xiao-Fei Rong, Tie-Hua Fu, Jian-Hua Ma, Jian-Qun Xu, Mei-Qing Zhang, Ren-Quan Xiao, Gao-Ming Fu, Xiang-Ning Chen, Ke-Neng Mao, Wei-Min Liu, Yong-Yu Liu, Hong-Xu Zhang, Zhi-Rong Fang, Yan Fu, Dong-Hong Wei, Xu-Dong Yuan, Li-Gong Muhammad, Shan Wei, Wen-Qiang Chiu, Philip Wai-Yan Lloyd, Shane Schlottmann, Francisco Meredith, Kenneth Pimiento, Jose M. Gao, Yi-Bo He, Jie Ann Transl Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Left thoracic approach (LTA) has been a favorable selection in surgical treatment for esophageal cancer (EC) patients in China before minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is popular. This study aimed to demonstrate whether right thoracic approach (RTA) is superior to LTA in the surgical treatment of middle and lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC). METHODS: Superiority clinical trial design was used for this multicenter randomized controlled two-parallel group study. Between April 2015 and December 2018, cT1b-3N0-1M0 TESCC patients from 14 centers were recruited and randomized by a central stratified block randomization program into LTA or RTA groups. All enrolled patients were followed up every three months after surgery. The software SPSS 20.0 and R 3.6.2. were used for statistical analysis. Efficacy and safety outcomes, 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 861 patients without suspected upper mediastinal lymph nodes (umLN) were finally enrolled in the study after 95 ineligible patients were excluded. 833 cases (98.7%) were successfully followed up until June 1, 2020. Esophagectomies were performed via LTA in 453 cases, and via RTA in 408 cases. Compared with the LTA group, the RTA group required longer operating time (274.48±78.92 vs. 205.34±51.47 min, P<0.001); had more complications (33.8% vs. 26.3% P=0.016); harvested more lymph nodes (LNs) (23.61±10.09 vs. 21.92±10.26, P=0.015); achieved a significantly improved OS in stage IIIa patients (67.8% vs. 51.8%, P=0.022). The 3-year OS and DFS were 68.7% and 64.3% in LTA arm versus 71.3% and 63.7% in RTA arm (P=0.20; P=0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Esophagectomies via both LTA and RTA can achieve similar outcomes in middle or lower TESCC patients without suspected umLN. RTA is superior to LTA and recommended for the surgical treatment of more advanced stage TESCC due to more complete lymphadenectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02448979. AME Publishing Company 2022-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9469177/ /pubmed/36111056 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-22-3810 Text en 2022 Annals of Translational Medicine. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Mao, You-Sheng Gao, Shu-Geng Li, Yin Hao, An-Lin Liu, Jun-Feng Li, Xiao-Fei Rong, Tie-Hua Fu, Jian-Hua Ma, Jian-Qun Xu, Mei-Qing Zhang, Ren-Quan Xiao, Gao-Ming Fu, Xiang-Ning Chen, Ke-Neng Mao, Wei-Min Liu, Yong-Yu Liu, Hong-Xu Zhang, Zhi-Rong Fang, Yan Fu, Dong-Hong Wei, Xu-Dong Yuan, Li-Gong Muhammad, Shan Wei, Wen-Qiang Chiu, Philip Wai-Yan Lloyd, Shane Schlottmann, Francisco Meredith, Kenneth Pimiento, Jose M. Gao, Yi-Bo He, Jie Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501) |
title | Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501) |
title_full | Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501) |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501) |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501) |
title_short | Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501) |
title_sort | efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (nst1501) |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9469177/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36111056 http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/atm-22-3810 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT maoyousheng efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT gaoshugeng efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT liyin efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT haoanlin efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT liujunfeng efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT lixiaofei efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT rongtiehua efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT fujianhua efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT majianqun efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT xumeiqing efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT zhangrenquan efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT xiaogaoming efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT fuxiangning efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT chenkeneng efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT maoweimin efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT liuyongyu efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT liuhongxu efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT zhangzhirong efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT fangyan efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT fudonghong efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT weixudong efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT yuanligong efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT muhammadshan efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT weiwenqiang efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT chiuphilipwaiyan efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT lloydshane efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT schlottmannfrancisco efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT meredithkenneth efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT pimientojosem efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT gaoyibo efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 AT hejie efficacyandsafetyofesophagectomyvialeftthoracicapproachversusviarightthoracicapproachformiddleandlowerthoracicesophagealcanceramulticenterrandomizedclinicaltrialnst1501 |