Users Online : 415 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 ¤   Next article
 ¤   Previous article
 ¤   Table of Contents

 ¤   Similar in PUBMED
 ¤  Search Pubmed for
 ¤  Search in Google Scholar for
 ¤Related articles
 ¤   Citation Manager
 ¤   Access Statistics
 ¤   Reader Comments
 ¤   Email Alert *
 ¤   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded163    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


Year : 2016  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 10-15

Minimally invasive oesophagectomy in prone versus lateral decubitus position: A comparative study

Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, GB Pant Hospital and MAM College, Delhi University, New Delhi, India

Correspondence Address:
Amit Javed
Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2nd Floor, Academic Block, GB Pant Hospital, JLN Marg, Delhi - 110 002
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0972-9941.171954

Rights and Permissions

Background: Thoracoscopic oesophageal mobilisation during a minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIE) is most commonly performed with the patient placed in the lateral decubitus position (LDP). The prone position (PP) for thoracoscopic oesophageal mobilisation has been proposed as an alternative. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective, comparative study designed to compare early outcomes following a minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer in LDP and in PP. Results: During the study period, between January 2011 and February 2014, 104 patients underwent an oesophagectomy for cancer. Of these, 42 were open procedures (transhiatal and transthoracic oesophagectomy) and 62 were minimally invasive. The study group included patients who underwent thoracolaparoscopic oesophagectomy in LDP (n = 23) and in PP (n = 25). The median age of the study population was 55 (24-71) years, and there were 25 males. Twenty-one (21) patients had tumours in the middle third of the oesophagus, 24 in the lower third, and 3 arising from the gastro-oesophageal junction. The most common histology was squamous cell cancer (85.4%). The median duration of surgery was similar in the two groups; however, the estimated median intraoperative blood loss was less in the PP group [200 (50-400) mL vs 300 (100-600) mL; P = 0.01)]. In the post-operative period, 26.1% patients in the LDP group and 8% in the PP group (8%) developed respiratory complications. The incidence of other post-operative complications, including cervical oesophagogastric anastomosis, hoarseness of voice and chylothorax, was not different in the two groups. The T stage of the tumour was similar in the two groups, with the majority (37) having T3 disease. A mean of 8 lymph nodes (range 2-33) were retrieved in the LDP group, and 17.5 (range 5-41) lymph nodes were retrieved in the PP group (P = 0.0004). The number of patients with node-positive disease was also higher in the PP group (19 vs 10, P = 0.037). Conclusion: MIE in the PP is an effective alternative to LDP. The exposure obtained is excellent even without the need for a complete lung collapse, thereby obviating the need for a double-lumen endotracheal tube. A more meticulous dissection can be performed resulting in a higher lymph nodal yield.


Print this article     Email this article

© 2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04