Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byGeraldine Gibson Modified over 5 years ago
1
Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Population- Based Analysis
Babatunde A. Yerokun, MD, Zhifei Sun, MD, Chi-Fu Jeffrey Yang, MD, Brian C. Gulack, MD, Paul J. Speicher, MD, Mohamed A. Adam, MD, Thomas A. D’Amico, MD, Mark W. Onaitis, MD, David H. Harpole, MD, Mark F. Berry, MD, Matthew G. Hartwig, MD The Annals of Thoracic Surgery Volume 102, Issue 2, Pages (August 2016) DOI: /j.athoracsur Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Terms and Conditions
2
Fig 1 Forest plot of factors associated with use of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Black squares represent odds ratios for the independent association of each factor with using MIE; 95% confidence interval bounds are represented by the corresponding horizontal lines. Factors to the right of the vertical line at 1.0 are independently associated with using MIE. Patients receiving care at an academic or comprehensive institution are associated with use of minimally invasive esophagectomies, whereas patients with cT2 and cT3 tumors were associated with use of open esophagectomy (OE). The Annals of Thoracic Surgery , DOI: ( /j.athoracsur ) Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Terms and Conditions
3
Fig 2 Survival of open esophagectomy (OE) versus minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and standard minimally invasive esophagectomy (SMIE) versus robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), stratified by histologic type. (A) Adenocarcinoma: OE versus MIE; (B) adenocarcinoma: SMIE versus RAMIE; (C) squamous cell carcinoma: OE versus MIE; (D) squamous cell carcinoma: SMIE versus RAMIE. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery , DOI: ( /j.athoracsur ) Copyright © 2016 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Terms and Conditions
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.