Observational analysis shows safe total resection in gastric tube cancer patients, indicating improved operability with laparoscopic techniques.
Background As a minimally invasive procedure for gastric tube cancer through a retrosternal route, we have previously reported a total resection of the gastric tube combined with a laparoscopic-assisted mediastinal approach (Abe T et.al, Annals of Gastroenterological Surgery, 2021). In this method, a gastric tube inversion technique was added to secure surgical space in the narrow retrosternal space. In the present report, we reported a retrosternal gastric tube resection with a laparoscopic mediastinal approach to further minimize invasiveness and improve operability. Methods A 7 cm small laparotomy was made 2 cm below the xiphoid process, the intra-abdominal adhesions were dissected as much as possible, and the duodenum was cut. The small laparotomy wound was sealed with a surgical glove and insufflated at 10 mmHg. Ports were placed 12 mm below the umbilicus, 12 mm 4 cm lateral to the umbilicus on each side, and 5 mm 2 cm below the rib arch on each side. The gastric tube was sharply dissected caudally up to the cervix using a laparoscopic mediastinal approach. Results We performed this technique in 5 patients. All cases were completed via a laparoscopic mediastinal approach without a median sternotomy. Compared to the laparoscopic-assisted approach, the use of pneumoperitoneum enlarged the retrosternal space, reduced bleeding, and provided a better operative field. Median mediastinal approach time was 151 minutes (range 135–184 minutes), median intraoperative blood loss was 220 g (range 140–370 g), and one patient had a postoperative right pyothorax, which improved with drainage. The median hospital stay was 18 days (range 14–21 days). Conclusion The laparoscopic mediastinal approach for patients with gastric tube cancer through a retrosternal route is a safe and minimally invasive approach that is superior in terms of improving the operative field and reducing bleeding due to insufflation pressure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abe et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: