Comparison of Efficacy Between Transabdominal and Transthoracic Surgical Approaches for Siewert Type II Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagogastric Junction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

BackgroundThe optimal surgical approach, whether transabdominal (TA) or transthoracic (TT), for Siewert type II adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (AEG) remains controversial. This study compares the efficacy of TA and TT surgical approaches for Siewert type II AEG.MethodsStudies comparing the surgical and oncological outcomes of TA and TT surgical approaches for Siewert type II AEG up to June 2021 were systematically searched on the Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. A pooled analysis was performed for the available data regarding the baseline features, surgical, and oncological outcomes. The RevMan 5.3 software was used to perform the statistical analysis. Quality evaluation and publication bias were also conducted.ResultsTwelve studies with a total of 2,011 patients, including 985 patients in the TA group and 1,026 patients in the TT group, were included in this study. In the pooled analysis, the surgical outcomes, namely, operative time (MD = −54.61, 95% CI = −123.76 to 14.54, P = 0.12), intraoperative blood loss (MD = −28.85, 95% CI = −71.15 to 13.46, P = 0.18), the number of dissected lymph nodes (MD = 1.90, 95% CI = −1.32 to 5.12, P = 0.25), postoperative complications (OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.65 to 1.07, p = 0.16), anastomotic leakage rate (OR = 1.02, 95% CI = 0.63 to 1.65, p = 0.93), and postoperative death rate (OR = 0.89, 95% CI = 0.46 to 1.72, p = 0.73), and the oncological outcomes, namely, overall recurrence rate (OR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.37 to 1.50, p = 0.41), 3-year overall survival (OS) rate (OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.54 to 2.65, p = 0.66), and 5-year OS rate (OR = 1.21, 95% CI = 0.84 to 1.74, p = 0.30) of the two groups were all comparable.ConclusionsBoth TA and TT surgical approaches are appropriate for Siewert type II AEG, and neither has a significant advantage in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this conclusion.

Efficacy of indocyanine green fluorescence imaging-guided lymphadenectomy in radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…At present, radical gastrectomy combined with D2 lymphadenectomy is still the most effective treatment for GC (2,3). The status of lymph nodes (LNs) is a stronger prognostic factor for the survival of GC patients and sufficient lymphadenectomy can improve the prognosis of GC patients (4)(5)(6). Howerer, lymphadenectomy for GC is usually performed without the aid of visual instruments and complete lymphadenectomy is sometimes difficult, especially for inexperienced gastrointestinal surgeons, which always results in LNs residue and in turn leads to tumor recurrence as well as the death of these patient.…”

Impact of the Surgical Approach for Neoadjuvantly Treated Gastro-Esophageal Junction type II Tumors- a Multi-National, High-Volume Center Retrospective Cohort Analysis

“…A multicenter study with 260 patients showed a survival benefit for THG versus TTE, possibly due to more cT1 stages in the THG group 37 . Last year, a meta-analysis of 12 studies showed no differences between both approaches, including patients as long ago as 1985, therefore not reflecting current standards 38 …”

Locally advanced mismatch repair‐deficient gastroesophageal junction cancer: Diagnosis, treatment modifications, and monitoring

“…Multiple studies have been conducted with the aim of identifying the optimal surgical resection type; however, ultimately, no particular approach has demonstrated superiority. 25,28,29 Instead, surgical planning should be guided by aiming to achieve the aforementioned tenets of obtaining a margin-negative resection with safe reconstruction and complete oncologic lymphadenectomy. In addition, there appear to be clear benefits to performing resection using minimally invasive techniques-as opposed open surgerywhen this is technically feasible.…”

“…Potential options for resection include total gastrectomy, proximal gastrectomy, and esophagectomy. Multiple studies have been conducted with the aim of identifying the optimal surgical resection type; however, ultimately, no particular approach has demonstrated superiority 25,28,29 . Instead, surgical planning should be guided by aiming to achieve the aforementioned tenets of obtaining a margin‐negative resection with safe reconstruction and complete oncologic lymphadenectomy.…”