Our study compared the Ivor-Lewis and Sweet procedures used for treating middle and lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and assessed the associated perioperative complications and long-term survival rates of the patients. This retrospective study involved 624 middle and lower thoracic esophageal squamous carcinoma patients who received either Ivor-Lewis (n = 325) or Sweet (n = 299) procedures at our hospital. Further, the perioperative conditions and long-term survival rates were analyzed for both groups. Relative to the Sweet group, the Ivor-Lewis group showed lower volume of drainage within 24 hours after operation (400 (300–500) ml vs 550 (400–658) ml, P = .031). Although we found no significant differences in major postoperative complications between the groups (72 (22.2) vs 65 (21.7), P = .90), there were significant differences observed in minor postoperative complications between the Ivor-Lewis and Sweet groups (59 (18.2) vs 32 (10.7), P = .008). Perioperative death rates remained comparable for the 2 groups (2 (0.6) vs 2 (0.7), P > .99). Further, comparison of the 2 groups revealed that the Ivor-Lewis group had increased number of dissected lymph nodes, (20 (4–42) vs 16 (3–31), P < .001), especially in the upper mediastinum (4 (0–5) vs 2 (0–2), P < .001). The long-term survival rates did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (Kaplan-Meier method, P = .95; Cox regression, P = .20). These findings suggest that perioperative complications and long-term survival rates were comparable for both patients groups. Patients receiving the Sweet procedure had reduced minor postoperative complications compared to those receiving the Ivor-Lewis procedure. Due to improved quality of lymph node dissection in the upper mediastinum, the Ivor-Lewis procedure may have advantages over the Sweet procedure for treating patients with esophageal cancer with enlarged lymph nodes in the upper mediastinum.

BackgroundWe aimed to compare mediastinoscopy-assisted esophagectomy (MAE) with the Ivor Lewis procedure in T2 middle and lower thoracic esophageal carcinoma patients in fields of perioperative complications and overall survival (OS).MethodsThe clinical data of 112 T2 esophageal cancer patients who received MAE (n = 31) or Ivor Lewis procedure (n = 81) from January 2010 to December 2015 were retrospectively analyzed in propensity score analysis. Thirty-eight T2 esophageal cancer patients who underwent MAE (n = 19) and Ivor Lewis procedure (n = 19) were included in this study. The perioperative conditions and OS were analyzed.ResultsThe MAE group showed shorter operation time (143.2 ± 20.6 vs 176.8 ± 31.1 min, P = 0.001), less drainage in 24 h (119.2 ± 235.1 vs 626.3 ± 396.3 mL, P < 0.001), less retention time of thoracic tube (27.8 ± 24.0 vs 101.2 ± 54.6 h, P < 0.001), and less hemorrhage during operation (255.4 ± 159.8 vs 367.4 ± 150.9 mL, P = 0.059) compared with the Ivor Lewis group. Less dissected lymph nodes were detected in the MAE group (12.2 ± 5.4 vs 16.8 ± 5.8, P = 0.044) than in the Ivor Lewis group, especially in the upper mediastinum (1.8 ± 2.1 vs 3.5 ± 2.3, P < 0.001) and middle mediastinum (2.5 ± 2.0 vs 5.3 ± 3.2, P = 0.027). The mean survival time was 59.1 and 53.3 months for the MAE group and Ivor Lewis group, respectively (P = 0.635). The results of Cox regression indicated that the nodal stage (P = 0.016) was an independent prognostic factor and the surgical method was not an independent prognostic factor for these patients (P = 0.290).ConclusionsMAE procedure showed less surgical trauma compared with the Ivor Lewis procedure. The mediastinal lymphadenectomy of T2 esophageal carcinoma patients who underwent MAE was inferior to those who underwent Ivor Lewis procedure. The perioperative complications and OS of the MAE group were no worse than that of the Ivor Lewis group.

MAO could be performed for T1 OC patients with serious comorbidities who cannot tolerate transthoracic oesophagectomy. Lymph node metastasis and tumour length were independent prognostic factors for these patients.