Minimally Invasive Versus Open McKeown for Patients with Esophageal Cancer: A Retrospective Study

Introduction McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy (McKeown-MIE) offers advantages in short-term outcomes compared with McKeown open esophagectomy (McKeown-OE); however, debate as to whether MIE is equivalent or better than OE regarding survival outcomes is ongoing. Objective The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival between McKeown-MIE and McKeown-OE in a large cohort of esophageal cancer (EC) patients. Methods We used a prospective database (independently managed by LinkDoc company) of the Thoracic Surgery Department at Henan Cancer Hospital and included patients who underwent McKeown-MIE and McKeown-OE for EC from 1 January 2015 to 6 January 2018. The perioperative data and overall survival (OS) rate in the two groups were retrospectively compared. Results We included 502 patients who underwent McKeown-MIE ( n = 306) or McKeown-OE ( n = 196) for EC. The median age in the total patient population was 63 years. All baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two groups. There was a significantly shorter mean operative time (269.76 min vs. 321.14 min, p < 0.001) in the OE group. The 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates were 0, and there was no difference in 90-day mortality ( p = 0.053) between the groups. The postoperative stay was shorter in the MIE group and was 14 days and 18 days in the MIE and OE groups, respectively ( p < 0.001). The OS at 60 months was 58.8% and 41.6% in the MIE and OE groups, respectively ( p < 0.001) [hazard ratio 1.783, 95% confidence interval 1.347–2.359]. Conclusions These results showed that McKeown-MIE was associated with better long-term survival than McKeown-OE for patients with resectable EC.