Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 May;90(5):398-402.
doi: 10.1007/s00104-019-0954-9.

[Updated German S3 guidelines on esophageal cancer and supplements from a surgical perspective]

[Article in German]
Affiliations
Review

[Updated German S3 guidelines on esophageal cancer and supplements from a surgical perspective]

[Article in German]
A H Hölscher et al. Chirurg. 2019 May.

Abstract

The updated German S3 guidelines recommend transthoracic subtotal esophagectomy with 2‑field lymphadenectomy for surgical treatment of esophageal cancer in patients with squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric (AEG type I) junction of the middle and lower third. For AEG type III transhiatal extended total gastrectomy with distal esophageal resection is favored. Patients with AEG type II can be treated by both procedures under the prerequisite that an R0 resection can be achieved. A limited resection of the distal esophagus and the proximal stomach can only be considered in cT1 N0 M0 possibly cT2 AEG junction without an oncological risk constellation, i.e. grade G1/G2, intestinal type and no poorly cohesive carcinoma, because the rate of lymph node metastasis at the distal stomach is less than 2%. Minimally invasive procedures provide advantages compared to open esophagectomy due to the lower rate of postoperative total and especially pulmonary complications. This is true for hybrid esophagectomy (laparoscopy and thoracotomy) versus open access in cases of intrathoracic anastomoses and for total minimally invasive esophagectomy including robotic techniques versus open access in cervical esophagogastrostomy.

Keywords: Adenocarcinoma; Gastrectomy; Minimally invasive esophagectomy; Postoperative complications; Squamous cell carcinoma.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Ann Surg. 2007 Dec;246(6):992-1000; discussion 1000-1 - PubMed
    1. Lancet. 2012 May 19;379(9829):1887-92 - PubMed
    1. World J Surg. 2014 Jun;38(6):1444-52 - PubMed
    1. Ann Surg. 2014 Dec;260(6):1016-22 - PubMed
    1. Br J Surg. 2015 Mar;102(4):341-8 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources