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
. 2022 Aug;10(16):904.
doi: 10.21037/atm-22-3810.

Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501)

You-Sheng Mao #  1 , Shu-Geng Gao #  1 , Yin Li #  1   2 , An-Lin Hao  3 , Jun-Feng Liu  4 , Xiao-Fei Li  5 , Tie-Hua Rong  6 , Jian-Hua Fu  6 , Jian-Qun Ma  7 , Mei-Qing Xu  8 , Ren-Quan Zhang  9 , Gao-Ming Xiao  10 , Xiang-Ning Fu  11 , Ke-Neng Chen  12 , Wei-Min Mao  13 , Yong-Yu Liu  14 , Hong-Xu Liu  14 , Zhi-Rong Zhang  1 , Yan Fang  3 , Dong-Hong Fu  3 , Xu-Dong Wei  3 , Li-Gong Yuan  1 , Shan Muhammad  1 , Wen-Qiang Wei  15 , Philip Wai-Yan Chiu  16 , Shane Lloyd  17 , Francisco Schlottmann  18   19 , Kenneth Meredith  20 , Jose M Pimiento  21 , Yi-Bo Gao  1 , Jie He  1
Affiliations

Efficacy and safety of esophagectomy via left thoracic approach versus via right thoracic approach for middle and lower thoracic esophageal cancer: a multicenter randomized clinical trial (NST1501)

You-Sheng Mao et al. Ann Transl Med. 2022 Aug.

Abstract

Background: Left thoracic approach (LTA) has been a favorable selection in surgical treatment for esophageal cancer (EC) patients in China before minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is popular. This study aimed to demonstrate whether right thoracic approach (RTA) is superior to LTA in the surgical treatment of middle and lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC).

Methods: Superiority clinical trial design was used for this multicenter randomized controlled two-parallel group study. Between April 2015 and December 2018, cT1b-3N0-1M0 TESCC patients from 14 centers were recruited and randomized by a central stratified block randomization program into LTA or RTA groups. All enrolled patients were followed up every three months after surgery. The software SPSS 20.0 and R 3.6.2. were used for statistical analysis. Efficacy and safety outcomes, 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated and compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test.

Results: A total of 861 patients without suspected upper mediastinal lymph nodes (umLN) were finally enrolled in the study after 95 ineligible patients were excluded. 833 cases (98.7%) were successfully followed up until June 1, 2020. Esophagectomies were performed via LTA in 453 cases, and via RTA in 408 cases. Compared with the LTA group, the RTA group required longer operating time (274.48±78.92 vs. 205.34±51.47 min, P<0.001); had more complications (33.8% vs. 26.3% P=0.016); harvested more lymph nodes (LNs) (23.61±10.09 vs. 21.92±10.26, P=0.015); achieved a significantly improved OS in stage IIIa patients (67.8% vs. 51.8%, P=0.022). The 3-year OS and DFS were 68.7% and 64.3% in LTA arm versus 71.3% and 63.7% in RTA arm (P=0.20; P=0.96).

Conclusions: Esophagectomies via both LTA and RTA can achieve similar outcomes in middle or lower TESCC patients without suspected umLN. RTA is superior to LTA and recommended for the surgical treatment of more advanced stage TESCC due to more complete lymphadenectomy.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02448979.

Keywords: Esophageal cancer (EC); esophagectomy; left thoracic approach (LTA); outcomes; right thoracic approach (RTA).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://atm.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/atm-22-3810/coif). YSM, SGG, YL, ALH, JFL, XFL, THR, JHF, JQM, MQX, RQZ, GMX, XNF, KNC, WMM, YYL, HXL, ZRZ, YF, DHF, XDW, LGY, SM, WQW, YBG, JH report that this work was supported by the grants from National Science and Technology Support Program (Study ID Number: NKTRDP-2015BAI12B08-01, YSM). The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT flow diagram of patient enrollment and randomization. LN, lymph node; LTA, left thoracic approach; RTA, right thoracic approach; MIE, minimally invasive esophagectomy.
Figure 2
Figure 2
OS (A) and DFS (B) of LTA versus RTA. OS, overall survival; DFS, disease-free survival; LTA (L), left thoracic approach; RTA (R), right thoracic approach.
Figure 3
Figure 3
OS and DFS of patients with open esophagectomy between LTA and RTA. (A): (A1) OS of stage I; (A2) OS of stage II; (A3) OS of stage IIIA; (A4) OS of stage IIIB-C. (B): (B1) DFS of stage I; (B2) DFS of stage II; (B3) DFS of stage IIIA; (B4) DFS of stage IIIB-C. LTA, left thoracic approach; RTA, right thoracic approach; OS, overall survival; DFS, disease-free survival.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Zheng R, Zhang S, Zeng H, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality in China, 2016. Journal of the National Cancer Center 2022;2:1-9. 10.1016/j.jncc.2022.02.002 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wu YK, Loucks HH. Surgical treatment of carcinoma of the esophagus. Chin Med J, 1941, 60:1-33.
    1. Huang GJ, Wang LJ, Liu JS, et al. Surgery of esophageal carcinoma. Semin Surg Oncol 1985;1:74-83. 10.1002/ssu.2980010203 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shao LF, Chen YH, Cao ZR, et al. Surgical treatment of carcinoma of esophagus and gastric cardia-A 34-year investigation. The Chinese-German Journal of Clinical Oncology 2002;1:61-4. 10.1007/BF02851734 - DOI
    1. Zhang DW, Cheng GY, Huang GJ, et al. Operable squamous esophageal cancer: current results from the East. World J Surg 1994;18:347-54. 10.1007/BF00316813 - DOI - PubMed

Associated data