Background: Most surgeons now accept lymphadenectomy as an essential feature of the operative treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Three-field and two-field lymphadenectomy are two of the most popular excision scopes among surgeons. Over recent years, researchers have performed a range of comparative studies regarding these techniques, although the conclusions remain inconsistent.
Method: We systematically retrieved the records of PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov until October 2019 and performed preliminary and full-text screening of the articles. We used the NOS scale to evaluate the quality of the enrolled studies, with only medium- and high-quality studies included. Review Manager 5.3 and Stata15 were used for the meta-analysis.
Results: A total of eight studies involving 1676 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma using with two-field and three-field lymphadenectomy, although three-field lymphadenectomy led to the gaining of a higher number of lymph nodes, there were no significant differences between the two in terms of the number of positive lymph nodes and overall survival. Three-field lymphadenectomy also caused higher levels of intraoperative blood loss and higher morbidity of the anastomotic fistula. No significant differences in operation time, recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, pneumonia, chylothorax, anastomotic stenosis, ileus, cervical nodal recurrence and hospital mortality were observed.
Conclusions: According to our meta-analysis, two-field lymphadenectomy is recommended as a first-choice surgical treatment for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. However, since the results showed a risk of bias, they should be treated with caution.
Keywords: Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; Lymphadenectomy; Three-field; Two-field.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.