Surgical Evolution in the Modern Era: From Quantity to Quality of Life to Surgical Innovation. The Paradigm of Esophageal Cancer Surgery
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17140/SROJ-7-e005Keywords:
Surgical Evolution, Quality of Life, Cancer Surgery, clinical trials, surgical practiceAbstract
Design and implementation of clinical trials has expanded the possibilities of modern surgery, while carefuly conducted peer review and meta-analyses has consolidated new knowledge and incorporated it into surgical practice. International and multidisciplinary medical societies have organized these surgical advances, by issuing guidelines and submitting recommendations, aiming to enhance the results of surgical intervention.
References
Gisbertz S, Hagens E, Ruurda J, et al. The evolution of surgical Editorial | Volume 7 | Number 1| Surg Res Open J. 2022; 7(1): e1-e3. doi: 10.17140/SROJ-7-e005 approach for esophageal cancer. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018; 1434(1): 149-155. doi: 10.1111/nyas.13957
Wyld L, Audisio R, Poston G. The evolution of cancer surgery and future perspectives. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2014; 12(2): 115-124. doi: 10.1038/nrclinonc.2014.191
Lerut T, Wiesel O. History of esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and the gastroesophageal junction. Ann Transl Med. 2021; 9(10): 897. doi: 10.21037/atm-21-676
Biere S, van Berge Henegouwen M, Maas K, et al. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesoph-ageal cancer: A multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012; 379(9829): 1887-1892. doi: 10.1016/S0140- 6736(12)60516-9
Maas K, Cuesta M, van Berge Henegouwen M, et al. Quality of life and late complications after minimally invasive compared to open esophagectomy: Results of a randomized trial. World J Surg. 2015; 39(8): 1986-1993. doi: 10.1007/s00268-015-3100-y
Straatman J, van der Wielen N, Cuesta M, et al. Minimally in-vasive versus open esophageal resection. Ann Surg. 2017; 266(2): 232-236. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002171
George E, Brand T, LaPorta A, Marescaux J, Satava R. Origins Submit your article to this journal | https://openventio.org/submit-manuscript/ Editorial | Volume 7 | Number 1| Charalabopoulos A, et al PUBLISHERS of robotic surgery: From skepticism to standard of care. JSLS. 2018; 22(4): e2018.00039. doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2018.00039
Murthy R, Clarke N, Kernstine K. Minimally invasive and ro-botic esophagectomy. Innovations (Phila). 2018; 13(6): 391-403. doi: 10.1097/IMI.0000000000000572
Melvin W, Needleman B, Krause K, et al. Computer-enhanced robotic telesurgery. Surg Endosc. 2002; 16: 1790-1792. doi: 10.1007/ s00464-001-8192-9
Young A, Gallesio JMA, Sewell D, Carr R, Molena D. Out-comes of robotic esophagectomy. J Thorac Dis. 2021; 13(10): 6163- 6168. doi: 10.21037/jtd-2019-rts-07
Manigrasso M, Vertaldi S, Marello A, et al. Robotic esophagec-tomy. A systematic review with meta-analysis of clinical outcomes. J Pers Med. 2021; 11(7): 640. doi: 10.3390/jpm11070640
Giacopuzzi S, Weindelmayer J, de Manzoni G. RAMIE: Tradi-tion drives innovation—feasibility of a robotic-assisted intra-tho-racic anastomosis. Updates Surg. 2021; 73(3): 847-852. doi: 10.1007/ s13304-020-00932-1
Claassen L, van Workum F, Rosman C. Learning curve and postoperative outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy. J Thorac Dis. 2019; 11(S5): S777-S785. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2018.12.54 e3
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All content published in Surgical Research (SR) is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). This license allows anyone to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work — including for commercial purposes — provided appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and source.