P1.182. Development of Difficulty Prediction Method for Mediastinoscopic Esophagectomy in Esophageal Cancer

Clicks: 21
ID: 325987
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #144 of 453 articles by views in diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the international society for diseases of the esophagus

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 453 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Topic Esophageal Cancer: Surgical Treatment of Esophageal Cancer Background Mediastinoscopic esophagectomy is a minimally invasive procedure for esophageal cancer, but no established method exists to predict surgical difficulty. This study aimed to identify a difficulty factor of this technique and develop a novel scoring system to predict the difficulty of mediastinoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Methods A total of 192 patients who underwent radical mediastinoscopic esophagectomy between 2019 and 2024 at the University Hospital, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine were retrospectively analyzed. Forty-three patients were defined as Hard case of this technique based on operative time or blood loss exceeded the mean plus one standard deviation, and conversion to thoracotomy. Five difficulty factors (DFs) were identified based on relationships between Hard group and clinicopathological features in univariate analysis. The DFs were scored to classify cases into three difficulty levels, Difficult, Moderate, and Easy. Associations between the three difficulty levels and clinicopathological variables, operative outcomes, and postoperative complications were assessed. Results Forty-three patients were defined as the Hard group based on surgical time, blood loss (391 minutes or 253 g, respectively), or four cases of conversion to thoracotomy. Five difficulty factors (DFs), Male, pre-treatment (ESD or NAC), advanced cStage (III-IV), short aorta distance (≦33mm), and tumor location, were identified and scored to create a difficulty classification system with three levels: Easy, Moderate, and Difficult. Higher difficulty levels were significantly associated with 5 DFs, prolonged operative time, and tumor progression (T and N factors) (p< 0.01, respectively). Furthermore, they were also correlated with postoperative respiratory complications (p= 0.02). Although other complications, such as recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis and anastomotic leakage, tended to increase in difficult cases, these differences were not statistically significant. Conclusion We developed a novel scoring system for evaluating the difficulties of radical mediastinoscopic esophagectomy. This scoring system may predict not only surgical courses, such as surgical time, blood loss, and transcervical subcarinal lymphadenectomy, but also postoperative complications, especially respiratory complications. It enables preoperative prediction of surgical difficulty of mediastinoscopic esophagectomy and may facilitate safe introduction, appropriate patient selection, reduce postoperative complications, and standardization of this minimally invasive technique in clinical practice.
Reference Key
openalex_W7203964478 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors
Journal diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the international society for diseases of the esophagus
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/dote/doag077.330
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.