1．Morita M, Yoshida R, Ikeda K, et al. Advances in esophageal cancer surgery in
Japan: an analysis of 1000 consecutive patients treated at a single institute. Surgery.
2008; 143: 499-508
2．Akiyama H, Tsurumaru M, Udagawa H, et al. Radical lymph node dissection for
cancer of the thoracic esophagus. Ann Surg. 1994; 220: 364-72
3．Fujita H, Kakegawa T, Yamana H, et al. Mortality and morbidity rates, postoperative
course, quality of life, and prognosis after extended radical lymphadenectomy for
esophageal cancer. Comparison of three-field lymphadenectomy with two-field
10
11
lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg. 1995; 222: 654-62
4．Lerut T, Moons J, Coosemans W, et al: Postoperative complications after
12
transthoracic esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal
13
junction are correlated with early cancer recurrence: role of systematic grading of
14
complications using the modified Clavien classification. Ann Surg. 2009; 250:
15
798-807.
16
5．Ishiguro S, Sasazuki S, Inoue M, et al. Effect of alcohol consumption, cigarette
17
smoking and flushing response on esophageal cancer risk: a population-based cohort
18
study (JPHC study). Cancer Lett. 2009; 275: 240-6
19
6．Nizet TA, van den Elshout FJ, Heijdra YF, et al. Survival of chronic hypercapnic
20
COPD patients is predicted by smoking habits, comorbidity, and hypoxemia. Chest.
21
2005; 127: 1904-10
22
7．Kamarajah SK, Madhavan A, Chmelo J, et al. Impact of smoking status on
23
perioperative morbidity, mortality, and long-term survival following transthoracic
24
esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2021; 28: 4905-15
17
8．Takeuchi H, Miyata H, Gotoh M, et al. A risk model for esophagectomy using data
of 5354 patients included in a Japanese nationwide web-based database. Ann Surg.
2014; 260: 259-66
9．Yoshida N, Nakamura K, Kuroda D, et al. Preoperative smoking cessation is integral
to the prevention of postoperative morbidities in minimally invasive esophagectomy.
World J Surg. 2018; 42: 2902-9
10．
Biere SS, Henegouwen MI, Bonavina KW, et al. Minimally invasive versus
open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre,
open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012; 379: 1187-92
10
11．
Otsubo D, Nakamura T, Yamamoto M, et al. Prone position in thoracoscopic
11
esophagectomy improves postoperative oxygenation and reduces pulmonary
12
complications. Surg Endosc. 2017; 31: 1136-41
13
14
15
16
17
12．
Hajian TK. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis for medical
diagnostic test evaluation. Caspian J Intern Med. 2013; 4: 627-35
13．
Brierley JD, Gospodarowicz MK, Wittekind C. TNM classification of
malignant tumors. 8th edn. Oxford: Wiley; 2017.
14．
Oshikiri T, Yasuda T, Harada H, et al. A new method (the “Bascule method”)
18
for lymphadenectomy along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve during prone
19
esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2015; 29: 2442-50
20
15．
Oshikiri T, Nakamura T, Miura Y, et al. A new method (the “Pincers
21
maneuver”) for lymphadenectomy along the right recurrent laryngeal nerve during
22
thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal cancer. Surg
23
Endosc. 2017; 31: 1496-504
24
16．
Oshikiri T, Takiguchi G, Miura S, et al. Medial approach for subcarinal
18
lymphadenectomy during thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position.
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2019; 404: 359-67
17．
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification
of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009; 250: 187-96
18．
Uchihara T, Yoshida N, Baba Y, et al. Risk factors for pulmonary morbidities
after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc. 2018;
32: 2852-8
10
11
19．
Osugi H, Takemura M, Higashino M, et al. A comparison of video-assisted
thoracoscopic oesophagectomy and radical lymph node dissection for squamous cell
cancer of the oesophagus with open operation. Br J Surg. 2003; 90: 108-13
20．
Palanivelu C, Prakash A, Senthilkumar R, et al. Minimally invasive
12
esophagectomy: thoracoscopic mobilization of the esophagus and mediastinal
13
lymphadenectomy in prone position—experience of 130 patients. J Am Coll Surg.
14
2006; 203: 7-16
15
21．
Goto H, Oshikiri T, Kato T, et al. Short-and long-term outcomes of
16
thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position for esophageal squamous cell
17
carcinoma in patients with obstructive ventilatory disorder: a propensity
18
score-matched study. Surg Endosc. 2022; doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09309-4. online
19
ahead of print
20
22．
Sjoquist KM, Burmeister BH, Smithers BM, et al. Survival after neoadjuvant
21
chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy for resectable oesophageal carcinoma: an
22
updated meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2011; 12: 681-92
23
24
23．
Ando N, Kato H, Igaki H, et al. A randomized trial comparing postoperative
adjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil versus preoperative
19
chemotherapy for localized advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic
esophagus (JCOG9907). Ann Surg Oncol. 2012; 19: 68-74
24．
Watanabe M, Okamura A, Toihata T, et al. Recent progress in perioperative
management of patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.
Esophagus. 2018; 15: 160-4
25．
Lin Y, Su X, Su H, et al. Prediagnostic smoking and postoperative survival in
lymph node-negative esophagus squamous cell carcinoma patients. Cancer Sci.
2012; 103: 1985-8
26．
Messner B, Bernhard D. Smoking and cardiovascular disease: mechanisms of
10
endothelial dysfunction and early atherogenesis. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol.
11
2014; 34: 509-15
12
13
14
27．
Tyczynski JE, Bray F, Parkin DM. Lung cancer in Europe in 2000:
epidemiology, prevention, and early detection. Lancet Oncol. 2003; 4: 45-55
28．
Freedman ND, Silverman DT, Hollenbeck AR, et al. Association between
15
smoking and risk of bladder cancer among men and women. JAMA. 2011; 306:
16
737-45
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
20
Figure legends
Fig. 1A: Overall survival rates in the current and non-current smoker groups
The 5-year overall survival rate was 63.3% in the current smoker group. The 5-year
overall survival rate was 58.6% in the non-current smoker group. The difference was
not significant (P = 0.290).
Fig. 1B: Overall survival rates in the higher (≥800) and lower (<800) Brinkman
index groups
The 5-year overall survival rate was 60.2% in the higher Brinkman index (≥800) group.
10
The 5-year overall survival rate was 60.0% in the lower Brinkman index (<800) group.
11
The difference was not significant (P = 0.834).
12
13
Fig. 1C: Overall survival rates in the current smoker and higher Brinkman index
14
(≥800) group and other than them groups
15
The 5-year overall survival rate was 64.0% in the current smoker and higher Brinkman
16
index (≥800) group. The 5-year overall survival rate was 59.3% in the other than them
17
group. The difference was not significant (P = 0.368).
18
19
Fig. 2A: Disease-free survival rates in the current and non-current smoker groups
20
The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 56.6% in the current smoker group. The
21
5-year disease-free survival rate was 54.4% in the non-current smoker group. The
22
difference was not significant (P = 0.289).
23
24
Fig. 2B: Disease-free survival rates in the higher (≥800) and lower (<800)
21
Brinkman index groups
The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 52.3% in the higher Brinkman index (≥800)
group. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 56.9% in the lower Brinkman index
(<800) group. The difference was not significant (P = 0.794).
Fig. 2C: Disease-free survival rates in the current smoker and higher Brinkman
index (≥800) group and other than them groups
The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 53.4% in the current smoker and higher
Brinkman index (≥800) group. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 55.8% in the
10
other than them group. The difference was not significant (P = 0.571).
Current smoking group
Non-current smoking group
24
36
48
60
Survival period (months)
Overall survival rate
P=0.290
12
Overall survival rate
Overall survival rate
P=0.834
Brinkman index ≥800 group
Brinkman index <800 group
12
24
36
48
Survival period (months)
P=0.368
Current smoking
and Brinkman index ≥800 group
Others
60
12
24
36
48
Survival period (months)
Fig. 1A: Overall survival rates in the current and non-current smoker groups
The 5-year overall survival rate was 63.3% in the current smoker group. The 5-year overall survival rate was 58.6% in the non-current smoker group.
The difference was not significant (P = 0.290).
Fig. 1B: Overall survival rates in the higher (≥800) and lower (<800) Brinkman index groups
The 5-year overall survival rate was 60.2% in the higher Brinkman index (≥800) group. The 5-year overall survival rate was 60.0% in the lower
Brinkman index (<800) group. The difference was not significant (P = 0.834).
Fig. 1C: Overall survival rates in the current smoker and higher Brinkman index (≥800) group and other than them groups
The 5-year overall survival rate was 64.0% in the current smoker and higher Brinkman index (≥800) group. The 5-year overall survival rate was
59.3% in the other than them group. The difference was not significant (P = 0.368).
60
Current smoking group
Non-current smoking group
24
36
48
60
Survival period (months)
Disease-free survival rate
P=0.289
12
Disease-free survival rate
Disease-free survival rate
P=0.794
Brinkman index ≥800 group
Brinkman index <800 group
12
24
36
48
60
Survival period (months)
P=0.571
Current smoking
and Brinkman index ≥800 group
Others
12
24
36
48
60
Survival period (months)
Fig. 2A: Disease-free survival rates in the current and non-current smoker groups
The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 56.6% in the current smoker group. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 54.4% in the non-current smoker group.
The difference was not significant (P = 0.289).
Fig. 2B: Disease-free survival rates in the higher (≥800) and lower (<800) Brinkman index groups
The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 52.3% in the higher Brinkman index (≥800) group. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 56.9% in the lower
Brinkman index (<800) group. The difference was not significant (P = 0.794).
Fig. 2C: Disease-free survival rates in the current smoker and higher Brinkman index (≥800) group and other than them groups
The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 53.4% in the current smoker and higher Brinkman index (≥800) group. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was
55.8% in the other than them group. The difference was not significant (P = 0.571).
Table 1 ： Comparison of current and non-current smoking patients who underwent
thoracoscopic esophagectomy in prone position
Parameters
Non-current (n=151)
Current (n=83)
P value
Age (years)
67 (40-81)
63 (42-79)
0.001
127 (84%) / 24 (16%)
71 (86%) / 12 (14%)
0.851
21.9 (15.3-29.1)
20.3 (13.1-28.1)
<0.001
Ut
26 (17%)
10 (12%)
0.544
Mt
75 (50%)
42 (51%)
Lt
50 (33%)
31 (37%)
cT1
62 (41%)
35 (42%)
cT2
22 (15%)
13 (16%)
cT3
67 (44%)
35 (42%)
50 (33%) / 101 (67%)
27 (33%) / 56 (67%)
1.000
56 (37%)
31 (37%)
0.943
II
37 (25%)
23 (28%)
III
52 (34%)
26 (31%)
IV
6 (4%)
3 (4%)
142 (94%) / 9 (6%)
79 (95%) / 4 (5%)
1.000
111 (66%) / 58 (34%)
71 (65%) / 38 (35%)
1.000
Overall procedure
688 (461-963)
702 (354-1361)
0.539
Thoracic
317 (198-540)
320 (207-523)
0.867
234 (0-1320)
259 (0-2605)
0.888
119 (79%) / 32 (21%)
64 (77%) / 19 (23%)
0.869
144 (95%) / 7 (5%)
79 (95%) / 4 (5%)
1.000
108 (72%) / 43 (28%)
57 (69%) / 26 (31%)
0.656
Sex
Male / Female
Body mass index
Tumor location
Tumor depth
0.943
(clinical)
Nodal status
cN- / cN+
(clinical)
UICC-Stage
(clinical)
Histological type
Neoadjuvant
SCC / Adeno
Yes / No
chemotherapy
Operative time
(min)
procedure
Blood loss (ml)
Abdominal
Laparoscopy /
procedure
Open
Conduit
Stomach /
Jejunum
Lymph node
Two- / Three-
dissection
field
Postoperative
37 (15-296)
41 (14-257)
0.559
Pneumonia
21 (13.9%)
13 (15.7%)
0.703
Recurrent
12 (7.9%)
11 (13.2%)
0.251
22 (14.6%)
18 (21.7%)
0.204
1 (0.6%)
1.000
4 (3%)
2 (2%)
0.406
48 (32%)
33 (40%)
II
45 (30%)
27 (33%)
III
34 (22%)
16 (19%)
IV
20 (13%)
5 (6%)
hospital stay
(days)
Complicationsa
laryngeal
nerve palsy
Anastomotic
leakage
Mortality
UICC-Stage
(pathological)
SCC: Squamous cell carcinoma; Adeno: Adenocarcinoma
a Based on the Clavien-Dindo classification, grade II or higher [17]
Table 2：Comparison of the patients with the Brinkman index who underwent thoracoscopic
esophagectomy in prone position
Parameters
P value
Brinkman index
Brinkman index
<800 (n=139)
≥800 (n=95)
65 (40-81)
67 (44-79)
0.145
111 (80%) / 28
87 (92%) / 8
0.016
(20%)
(8%)
21.4 (13.1-29.1)
21.2 (15.5-28.1)
0.645
Ut
18 (13%)
18 (19%)
0.454
Mt
72 (52%)
45 (47%)
Lt
49 (35%)
32 (34%)
cT1
59 (42%)
38 (40%)
cT2
18 (13%)
17 (18%)
cT3
62 (45%)
40 (42%)
68 (49%) / 71
47 (49%) / 48
(51%)
(51%)
50 (36%)
37 (39%)
II
40 (29%)
20 (21%)
III
45 (32%)
33 (35%)
IV
4 (3%)
5 (5%)
129 (93%) / 10
92 (97%) / 3
(7%)
(3%)
92 (66%) / 47
65 (68%) / 30
(34%)
(32%)
Overall procedure
696 (354-1215)
689 (471-1361)
0.348
Thoracic procedure
320 (198-523)
315 (207-540)
0.389
Blood loss (ml)
240 (0-2605)
248 (0-1680)
0.506
114 (82%) / 25
69 (73%) / 26
0.107
(18%)
(27%)
133 (96%) / 6 (4%)
90 (95%) / 5
Age (years)
Sex
Male / Female
Body mass index
Tumor location
Tumor depth (clinical)
Nodal status (clinical)
UICC-Stage (clinical)
Histological type
Neoadjuvant
cN- / cN+
SCC / Adeno
Yes / No
chemotherapy
0.581
1.000
0.498
0.250
0.778
Operative time (min)
Abdominal procedure
Laparoscopy /
Open
Conduit
Stomach /
Jejunum
Lymph node dissection
Two- / Threefield
0.761
(5%)
98 (71%) / 41
67 (71%) / 28
(29%)
(29%)
1.000
Postoperative hospital
35 (14-168)
44 (15-296)
0.016
Pneumonia
15 (10.8%)
19 (20.0%)
0.059
Recurrent
10 (7.2%)
13 (13.7%)
0.120
20 (14.4%)
20 (21.1%)
0.217
1 (0.7%)
1.000
3 (2%)
3 (3%)
0.090
44 (32%)
37 (39%)
II
44 (32%)
28 (29%)
III
37 (26%)
13 (14%)
IV
11 (8%)
14 (15%)
stay (days)
Complicationsa
laryngeal
nerve palsy
Anastomotic
leakage
Mortality
UICC-Stage
(pathological)
SCC: Squamous cell carcinoma; Adeno: Adenocarcinoma
a Based on the Clavien-Dindo classification, grade II or higher [17]
Table 3：Comparison of high Brinkman index, current smoking patients and others who
underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy in prone position
Parameters
Age (years)
Sex
Male / Female
P value
Current and Brinkman
Others
index ≥800 (n=48)
(n=186)
66 (53-79)
66 (40-81)
0.542
45 (94%) / 3 (6%)
153 (82%) /
0.070
33 (18%)
Body mass index
20.9 (15.5-28.1)
21.4 (13.1-
0.110
29.1)
Tumor location
Tumor depth
Ut
7 (15%)
29 (16%)
Mt
28 (58%)
89 (48%)
Lt
13 (27%)
68 (36%)
cT1
24 (50%)
73 (39%)
cT2
6 (13%)
29 (16%)
cT3
18 (37%)
84 (45%)
24 (50%) / 24 (50%)
91 (49%) / 95
0.396
0.402
(clinical)
Nodal status
cN- / cN+
(clinical)
UICC-Stage
1.000
(51%)
19 (40%)
68 (36%)
II
12 (25%)
48 (26%)
III
15 (31%)
63 (34%)
IV
2 (4%)
7 (4%)
47 (98%) / 1 (2%)
174 (94%) /
0.978
(clinical)
Histological type
SCC / Adeno
0.477
12 (6%)
Neoadjuvant
Yes / No
32 (67%) / 16 (33%)
chemotherapy
125 (67%) /
1.000
61 (33%)
Operative time (min)
Overall procedure
705 (471-1361)
690 (354-
0.516
1215)
Thoracic procedure
322 (207-491)
318 (198-540)
0.816
Blood loss (ml)
257 (0-1680)
239 (0-2605)
0.418
36 (75%) / 12 (25%)
147 (79%) /
0.559
Abdominal procedure
Laparoscopy /
Open
39 (21%)
Conduit
Stomach /
45 (94%) / 3 (6%)
Jejunum
Lymph node
dissection
Two- / Three-
0.701
(4%)
31 (65%) / 17 (35%)
field
Postoperative
178 (96%) / 8
134 (72%) /
0.375
52 (28%)
50 (15-296)
35 (14-168)
0.196
Pneumonia
12 (25.0%)
22 (11.8%)
0.036
Recurrent
8 (16.7%)
15 (8.1%)
0.099
11 (22.9%)
29 (15.6%)
0.281
1 (0.5%)
1.000
1 (2%)
5 (2%)
0.166
23 (48%)
58 (31%)
II
15 (31%)
57 (31%)
III
6 (13%)
44 (24%)
IV
3 (6%)
22 (12%)
hospital stay (days)
Complicationsa
laryngeal nerve
palsy
Anastomotic
leakage
Mortality
UICC-Stage
(pathological)
SCC: Squamous cell carcinoma; Adeno: Adenocarcinoma
a Based on the Clavien-Dindo classification, grade II or higher [17]
Table 4：Multivariate analysis of postoperative pneumonia (Clavien-Dindo classification,
grade II or higher)
Parameters
Odds Ratio (95% CI)
P value
Age
0.98 (0.93-1.03)
0.413
Sex, male
0.34 (0.07-1.63)
0.135
Body mass index
1.07 (0.93-1.23)
0.329
Tumor depth (clinical)
0.990
cT1
1.000
cT2
0.95 (0.24-3.69)
0.944
cT3
0.97 (0.34-2.73)
0.951
Nodal status (clinical), positive
1.04 (0.39-2.81)
0.931
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, yes
0.87 (0.24-3.31)
0.872
Abdominal procedure, Laparoscopy
0.81 (0.31-2.18)
0.683
Thoracic operative time
0.99 (0.99-1.01)
0.889
Blood loss
0.99 (0.99-1.01)
0.182
Current smoker and Brinkman index ≥800
0.41 (0.18-0.93)
0.037
CI: Confidence interval
...
論文の公開元へ
