Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whether patients can benefit from three-field lymphadenectomy (3-FL) in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) remains unclear. This study retrospectively compared short-term outcomes between 3-FL and two-field lymphadenectomy (2-FL) in MIE for patients with esophageal cancer (EC) and aimed to evaluate the clinical significance of 3-FL. METHODS: There were 284 patients enrolled in the study (124 patients with 3-FL and 160 patients with 2-FL). The cases were matched based on their propensity scores using a matching ratio of 1:1, the nearest neighbor matching protocol, and a caliper of 0.02. Patients were propensity-score matched for sex, cancer location, Age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (ACCI), and neoadjuvant treatment. The short-term outcomes were postoperative complications, operation characteristics, pathology results and postoperative hospital stay. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in intraoperative hemorrhage, postoperative hospital stay, or postoperative complications between the 2-FL and 3-FL groups. The operation time of the two groups was significantly different (227.1±46.2 vs. 248.5±45.9 min, P=0.001); the operation time of the 3-FL group was about 20 minutes longer than that of the 2-FL group. The number of lymphatic nodes (LNs) obtained in the 3-FL group was significantly higher than that in the 2-FL group (31.3±12.9 vs. 54.6±18.0, P<0.001). Pathological N stage was also significantly different (P=0.002); the 3-FL group was more advanced than the 2-FL group. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to 2-FL MIE, 3-FL MIE does not increase postoperative complications, can obtain more LNs, and improves the accuracy of tumor LN staging.