Laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy: outcomes

Background Laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy, indicated for benign and malignant esophageal diseases, is a complex operation, often associated with a high rate of morbidity and mortality. During the past decade this technique has became well accepted among specialized surgeons for the treatment of esophageal cancer, avoiding thoracotomy and reducing open access complications. The aim of the present study was to retrospectively analyze patients with esophageal cancer who underwent laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy. Methods From November 1993 to August 2006, 78 patients underwent laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy. There were 68 cases of esophageal cancer (57 males and 21 females, age range = 28–73 years) with a predominant rate of squamous cell carcinoma (60.2%). Results The conversion rate was 6.4%. The mean operative time was 153 min with a 12.8% rate of cervical leak and a postoperative (30-day) mortality rate of 5.1%. The four-year survival rate was 19% as determined within a subgroup of 21 patients whose followup during the period was possible. Conclusions Laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy is a safe alternative for experienced professionals. This access can improve mortality, hospital stay, and other outcomes when compared with open methods.     

Comparison of minimally invasive esophagectomy with transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy

HYPOTHESIS: Minimally invasive esophagectomy can be performed as safely as conventional esophagectomy and has distinct perioperative outcome advantages. DESIGN: A retrospective comparison of 3 methods of esophagectomy: minimally invasive, transthoracic, and blunt transhiatal. SETTING: University medical center. PATIENTS: Eighteen consecutive patients underwent combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy from October 9, 1998, through January 19, 2000. These patients were compared with 16 patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy and 20 patients who underwent blunt transhiatal esophagectomy from June 1, 1993, through August 5, 1998. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Operative time, amount of blood loss, number of operative transfusions, length of intensive care and hospital stays, complications, and mortality. RESULTS: Patients who had minimally invasive esophagectomy had shorter operative times, less blood loss, fewer transfusions, and shortened intensive care unit and hospital courses than patients who underwent transthoracic or blunt transhiatal esophagectomy. There was no significant difference in the incidence of anastomotic leak or respiratory complications among the 3 groups. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive esophagectomy is safe and provides clinical advantages compared with transthoracic and blunt transhiatal esophagectomy.     

Transhiatal esophagectomy: a safe alternative for selected patients.

One hundred one consecutive patients underwent an esophagectomy with gastric interposition for benign and malignant processes from January 1982 through July 1990. Seventy-seven underwent transhiatal esophagectomy and 24, transthoracic esophagectomy. Multivariate analysis was performed comparing the hospitalization experience of the two groups. There was no significant difference found between the mean intraoperative blood loss for transhiatal esophagectomy (770 +/- 105 mL) and that of transthoracic esophagectomy (700 +/- 175 mL). There was a significant difference between operative time, with transhiatal esophagectomy averaging 5.4 hours and transthoracic esophagectomy averaging 7.3 hours. Postoperative stay was not significantly different although there was a wide range of values for the transthoracic esophagectomy group. An 8% operative mortality was experienced by both groups. There were a significant number of minor anastomotic leaks at the cervical anastomotic level for the transhiatal esophagectomy group, but all responded to nonoperative management. The highest morbidity and mortality were seen in the subgroup of transhiatal esophagectomies done for laryngocervical malignancies. The lowest morbidity and mortality were seen in the subgroup of 12 patients who underwent transhiatal esophagectomy for nonmalignant esophageal conditions. Transhiatal esophagectomy appears to be a safe alternative for early intrathoracic esophageal malignancies at any level, for bulky distal esophageal lesions, and for benign conditions requiring total esophagectomy.     

Limited operation for patients with T1 esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Transhiatal esophagectomy without thoracotomy has been introduced as a minimally invasive operation to prevent postoperative complications in patients with relatively early-stage esophageal cancer who have preoperative pulmonary or cardiovascular complications or who are in a high age bracket. However, this procedure for patients with esophageal cancer remains controversial, especially as regards curative surgery because complete intrathoracic lymphadenectomy cannot be performed in this operation. Thus, cancer recurrence after this operation has been considered to be high. To evaluate the benefits of this less invasive surgery for patients with T1 esophageal cancer, the prognoses of patients who underwent transhiatal esophagectomy without thoracotomy were compared with those of patients who underwent traditional esophagectomy with thoracotomy. METHODS: Between 1989 and 1998, 33 patients with T1 esophageal cancer were operated on in our hospital. We introduced transhiatal esophagectomy without thoracotomy in 19 patients who were over 70 years old or who had preoperative complications (transhiatal group). The remaining 14 patients were treated with the transthoracic procedure (transthoracic group). These 33 patients were followed up at our hospital until the end of 1999. The postoperative complications and prognoses in the two groups were compared. RESULTS: We were able to reduce the operation time using the transhiatal procedure. Even though no significant difference was detected, there were fewer postoperative pulmonary complications with this procedure (11%) than with the transthoracic procedure (21%). The incidences of in-hospital mortality did not differ between the two groups. Cancer recurrence was detected in 5 of 19 patients (26%) in the transhiatal group and in 5 of 14 patients (36%) in the transthoracic group; no difference was observed (P=0.562). The 5-year survival rate (58%) of the transhiatal group was no different from that of the transthoracic group (62%, P=0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Complete intrathoracic lymphadenectomy cannot be performed along with transhiatal esophagectomy; however, the prognoses of patients who were treated with this procedure were no different from those of patients who were treated with transthoracic esophagectomy. Thus, transhiatal esophagectomy without thoracotomy might be a justifiable operation for compromised patients with T1 esophageal cancer.     

A decade of experience with transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy

BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality remain significant for transthoracic (TT) and transhiatal (TH) esophagectomy. We report a case-specific approach employing either resection to minimize perioperative morbidity and mortality. METHODS: All primary esophageal resections performed for benign and malignant esophageal disease were reviewed over a 10-year period. The operative approach was tailored to the location and extent of disease and the physiologic reserve of the patient. RESULTS: In all, 115 patients underwent esophagectomy for benign (25) and malignant (90) disease. Fifty-six TT and 59 TH resections were performed. Four emergent TT cases did not have reconstruction. There was 1 hospital mortality. Perioperative transfusion was avoided in 65 patients. Respiratory complications occurred in 15. Three patients had a cervical anastomotic leak requiring open wound drainage. No association between resection type and complication was evident. CONCLUSIONS: The judicious use of both TT and TH esophagectomy resulted in an operative mortality of less than 1%, reduced operative blood loss, and a relatively low rate of perioperative complications.     

综合治疗食管多原发癌22例

目的 探讨食管多原发癌的治疗策略及疗效。方法回顾性分析2000年3月至2011年3月间北京大学临床肿瘤医院胸外科收治的22例食管多原发癌患者的临床病理资料．并与同期、同一手术组收治的471例单发食管癌患者的预后进行比较。结果22例食管多原发癌手术采用剖胸食管切除者18例,经裂孔食管切除者4例;接受术前化疗者8例,术后化疗者15例,其中手术前、后均予化疗者6例。471例单发食管癌患者手术采用剖胸食管切除者423例,经裂孔食管切除者60例：接受术前化疗者148例,术后化疗者267例,其中手术前后均予化疗者101例。22例多原发癌患者3年生存率为41．9％．中位生存期为29．2个月：471例单发食管癌患者的3年生存率为54．7％,中位生存期46．8个月;两组比较差异无统计学意义（P=0．051）。结论食管多原发癌治疗效果较差：广泛的食管切除在此类患者中有重要的意义．同时辅以积极的全身综合治疗．     

Transhiatal esophagectomy

Controversy still remains regarding the appropriateness of THE asa cancer operation. Critics argue that without an en bloc mediastinal lymphadenectomy, THE does not provide accurate staging or the potential for a curative procedure; however, operative margins are similar after transthoracic and transhiatal esophagectomy, and van Sandick and co-workers reported that 73% of margins were microscopically negative. In many cases, esophageal carcinoma appears to be a systemic disease at the time of diagnosis. According to Orringer and colleagues, 46% of patients have Stage III or IV disease at the time of operation, and Altorki and co-authors found that 35% of patients thought to be potentially curable were found to have occult cervical lymph node disease after three-field lymph node dissection. In addition, survival after THE is similar to that reported after transthoracic esophagectomy as well as radical esophagectomy with mediastinal lymphadenectomy. The most important determinants of survival appear to be the biologic behavior of the tumor and the stage at the time of resection rather than the operative approach, and esophageal carcinoma will likely require systemic therapy for a cure.Transhiatal esophagectomy has been used increasingly in the resection of benign and malignant disease, and has several potential advantages over transthoracic esophagectomy, including significantly decreased respiratory complications and mediastinitis due to the avoidance of thoracotomy and intrathoracic anastomosis. In a meta-analysis of fifty studies comparing transthoracic and transhiatal resection, Hulscher et al found significantly higher early morbidity and mortality rates after transthoracic resections, which was confirmed in a later randomized study of 220 patients(Table 2). Survival after THE is also equivalent to or better than that seen after transthoracic esophagectomy, and transhiatal esophagectomy should be considered in all patients requiring esophagectomy for benign or malignant disease.     

Transhiatal esophagectomy

Between 1991-2001, 40 patients underwent esophagectomy without thoracotomy for: caustic esophageal stenosis (26 cases), cervical esophageal cancer (1), lower esophageal cancer (7), and acute post-caustic oesophagitis (2). Thirty-four patients underwent transhiatal esophagectomy, 3 patients had an esophagectomy by "stripping" and in 3 other patients a combination of stripping and transhiatal esophagectomy. Postoperative complications included: injuries of the laryngeal recurrent nerve (2), pulmonary complications (13), anastomotic leakage (5). Two patients died in the postoperative period one from a myocardial infarction and the other from an acute myocardial dilatation. Trans-hiatal esophagectomy can be considered as a viable alternative to transthoracic esophagectomy in the management of the benign and malignant diseases of the esophagus. Transhiatal esophagectomy is a safe method of resection because of its reported lower morbidity and mortality and similar survival rates compared to transthoracic esophagectomy.     

Thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for benign and malignant disease: lessons learned from 46 consecutive procedures

BACKGROUND: Transhiatal and transthoracic esophagectomy are common approaches for esophageal resection. The literature is limited regarding the combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic approach to esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of combined thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy for the treatment of benign and malignant esophageal disease. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective chart review of 46 consecutive minimally invasive esophagectomies performed between August 1998 and September 2002. Indications for esophagectomy were carcinoma (n = 38), Barrett's esophagus with high-grade dysplasia (n = 3), and recalcitrant stricture (n = 5). Of 38 patients with carcinoma 23 (61%) had neoadjuvant therapy. The main outcome measures were operative time, blood loss, length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, conversion rate, morbidity, mortality, pathology, disease recurrence, and survival. RESULTS: Approaches to esophagectomy were thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy (n = 41), thoracoscopic and laparoscopic Ivor Lewis resection (n = 3), abdominal only laparoscopic esophagogastrectomy (n = 1), and hand-assisted laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy (n = 1). Minimally invasive esophagectomy was successfully completed in 45 (97.8%) of 46 patients. The mean operative time was 350 +/- 75 minutes and the mean blood loss was 279 +/- 184 mL. The median length of intensive care unit stay was 2 days and median length of stay was 8 days. Major complications occurred in 17.4% of patients and minor complications occurred in 10.8%. Late complications were seen in 26.1% of patients. The overall mortality was 4.3%. Among the 38 patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer the 3-year survival was 57%. In a mean followup of 26 months there was no trocar site or neck wound recurrences. CONCLUSIONS: A thoracoscopic and laparoscopic approach to esophagectomy is technically feasible and safe for the treatment of benign and malignant esophageal disease. With a mean followup of 26 months thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy appears to be an oncologically acceptable surgical approach for the treatment of esophageal cancer.     

Adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus and gastric cardia. Comparison of results of transhiatal esophagectomy and thoracoabdominal esophagogastrectomy

Between 1965 and 1984, 72 patients underwent operation for adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastric cardia. A standard transthoracic esophagogastrectomy and esophagogastrostomy was performed in 43 and a transhiatal esophagectomy without thoracotomy and partial proximal gastrectomy was performed in 29. There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, sex, or TNM tumor staging. The perioperative complication rate was 86% in the esophagogastrectomy patients and 48% in the transhiatal esophagectomy patients (p less than 0.05). Mortality was higher in the esophagogastrectomy group (14%) than in the transhiatal esophagectomy group (7%). Average operative blood loss was greater in the esophagogastrectomy patients (2,510 versus 1,187 ml). Average postoperative hospitalization was longer for the esophagogastrectomy patients (22.2 days versus 12.3 days). Both differences are statistically significant (p less than 0.05). Late results, as evaluated by life-table analysis, showed no significant difference in survival between the two groups of patients. Because the morbidity and mortality rates of transhiatal esophagectomy are as low as or lower than those for esophagogastrectomy, late survival is as good, and palliation is superior (less suture-line tumor recurrence and reflux esophagitis), we believe that transhiatal esophagectomy is the preferred operative approach in patients with adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastric cardia.     

Pericardial repair of a tracheal laceration during transhiatal esophagectomy.

Transhiatal esophagectomy has recently been popularized for both benign and malignant esophageal disease. While we were performing a transhiatal esophagectomy for a squamous cell cancer of the upper third of the esophagus, a tear in the membranous trachea near the carina occurred. This was repaired through the cervical incision with a free pericardial patch. This solution to a potentially catastrophic complication of transhiatal esophagectomy gave a satisfactory result without early or late postoperative respiratory complications.     

Indicators of prognosis after transhiatal esophageal resection without thoracotomy for cancer

BACKGROUND: Various techniques have been described for the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer. The transhiatal approach has been debated for its safety and oncologic results. STUDY DESIGN: Between January 1993 and September 1996, 115 patients underwent a transhiatal esophagectomy with curative intent for adenocarcinoma or squamous cell carcinoma of the middle or distal esophagus or esophagogastric junction. Procedure-related hazards, pathologic results, and prognostic factors for survival were evaluated. Median duration of postoperative followup was 27 months (range 1 to 74 months) for all patients and 45 months (range 30 to 74 months) for those alive at final followup. RESULTS: No emergency thoracotomies were experienced. In-hospital mortality was 3.5%. Vocal cord dysfunction (24%) and pulmonary complications (23%) were the most frequent early postoperative complications. A microscopically radical resection was achieved in 73% of patients. Overall survival was 45% at 3 years. In univariate analysis, the most pronounced indicators of longterm survival (p < 0.0001) were radicality of the resection, lymph node involvement, lymph node ratio (ie, the ratio of invaded to removed lymph nodes), and pathologic tumor stage. Multivariate analysis identified the lymph node ratio (p < 0.0001) as the strongest independent predictor of long-term survival, followed by radicality of the resection (p = 0.0064) and duration of ICU stay (p = 0.027). CONCLUSION: Transhiatal esophagectomy without thoracotomy can be considered a safe procedure for resectable cancer of the midesophagus, distal esophagus, or esophagogastric junction. Radicality and survival results were in line with the data reported for traditional transthoracic approaches. A prognostic value of the lymph node ratio was observed. It emphasizes the need for controlled trials aimed at delineating the prognostic impact of an extended lymph node dissection.     

Prognostic factors associated with resectable carcinoma of the esophagus

A retrospective review of esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma between 1982 and 1999 was performed. Two hundred twenty-two patients (mean age 61.7 years) underwent esophagectomy: 128 transhiatal, 74 Ivor Lewis, and 20 abdominal. Most tumors were adenocarcinoma (65%); the majority were in the lower third or cardia (78%). Excluding operative mortality the one-, 3-, and 5-year survival rates were 67, 39, and 31 per cent (median survival, 16.3 months) respectively. The hospital mortality rate was 6.8 per cent. Through univariate analysis race other than white, history of weight loss, poor or moderate differentiation (P = 0.05), full-thickness invasion (P = 0.02), positive lymph nodes (P < 0.01), Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (P = 0.02), intraoperative blood transfusion (P = 0.01), and tumor location in the upper or middle third in node-positive patients (P = 0.02) were associated with a poorer survival. Adjuvant therapy improved survival for patients with positive lymph nodes (P < 0.01). In multivariate analysis positive lymph nodes, tumor location, intraoperative blood transfusion, and adjuvant therapy were independent predictors of survival. To optimize survival esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma should be performed without blood transfusion, and node-positive patients should receive multimodal therapy.     

Prognostic significance of CyclinD1 and E-Cadherin in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: multiinstitutional retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND:

Although many molecular biologic molecules have been analyzed for their prognostic influence on patients with esophageal cancer, previous studies have not been able to raise statistically significant prognostic factors.

STUDY DESIGN:

Immunohistochemical analysis of CyclinD1 expression and E-Cadherin expression was performed retrospectively in 416 esophageal squamous cell cancer patients who underwent curative resection of esophageal cancer at 10 major surgical departments in Japan, where more than 30 esophagectomies are performed in a year. The prognostic impact of these molecules and their relationship to clinicopathologic data of the patients were evaluated.

RESULTS:

Univariate analysis revealed that pN (pTNM), pT (pTNM), CyclinD1 expression, and E-Cadherin expression were significant prognostic factors, and multivariate analysis revealed that pN (risk ratio (RR) 2.19), pT (RR 3.35), CyclinD1 (RR 1.42), and E-Cadherin (RR 0.71) were significant prognostic factors. Combination analysis of these genes revealed that E-Cadherin-preserved and CyclinD1-negative patients had the best prognosis; E-Cadherin-reduced and CyclinD1-positive patients had the worst prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS:

Increased CyclinD1 expression and reduced E-Cadherin expression were significant prognostic factors in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.     

Surgical treatment for poor-risk patients with carcinoma of the esophagus

During the period between 1979 and 1988, 145 patients with cancer of the esophagus were admitted to our department. They were examined for the preoperative risk factors associated with multiple organ function and classified into three groups according to the risk score. Special attention was paid to postoperative pulmonary complications, mortality and the long term results of surgery in the poor-risk patients and the findings analyzed in reference to the operative procedures. The resection rate for the poor-risk group was 41 per cent, however, esophagectomy was only able to be combined with a right thoracotomy and abdominal approach in 26 per cent of the patients in this group. Postoperative pulmonary complications developed in 64 per cent of the poor-risk patients who underwent a transthoracic esophagectomy and in only 25 per cent of those who received a transhiatal esophagectomy, although there was no significant difference in the overall survival rate beteeen these two subgroups. The present observations therefore raised the possibility that transhiatal esophagectomy may improve the results of surgical treatment for poor-risk patients with esophageal cancer.     

Surgical treatment for poor-risk patients with carcinoma of the esophagus

During the period between 1979 and 1988, 145 patients with cancer of the esophagus were admitted to our department. They were examined for the preoperative risk factors associated with multiple organ function and classified into three groups according to the risk score. Special attention was paid to postoperative pulmonary complications, mortality and the long term results of surgery in the poor-risk patients and the findings analyzed in reference to the operative procedures. The resection rate for the poor-risk group was 41 per cent, however, esophagectomy was only able to be combined with a right thoracotomy and abdominal approach in 26 per cent of the patients in this group. Postoperative pulmonary complications developed in 64 per cent of the poor-risk patients who underwent a transthoracic esophagectomy and in only 25 per cent of those who received a transhiatal esophagectomy, although there was no significant difference in the overall survival rate between these two subgroups. The present observations therefore raised the possibility that transhiatal esophagectomy may improve the results of surgical treatment for poor-risk patients with esophageal cancer.     

Treatment of instrumental perforation of esophageal malignancy by transhiatal esophagectomy

Perforation of esophageal malignancy secondary to instrumentation is an uncommon but catastrophic complication. Esophageal perforation at the site of an obstructing esophageal malignancy precludes simple operative repair and mandates esophageal resection with reestablishment of gastro-intestinal tract continuity. In the past the standard surgical approach has involved transthoracic esophageal resection via thoracotomy. We have successfully treated four patients with perforated esophageal neoplasms by transhiatal esophagectomy and cervical esophagogastrostomy, thus avoiding thoracotomy in high-risk patients. We consider transhiatal esophagectomy an advantageous alternative in the management of selected cases of instrumental esophageal perforation adjacent to an esophageal malignancy.     

Transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy: a prospective study of 945 patients

OBJECTIVE: Debate continues as to whether transhiatal esophagectomy results in lower morbidity and mortality than transthoracic esophagectomy. Most data addressing this issue are derived from single-institution studies. To investigate this question from a nationwide multicenter perspective, we used the Veterans Administration National Surgical Quality Improvement Program to prospectively analyze risk factors for morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing transthoracic esophagectomy or transhiatal esophagectomy from 1991 to 2000. METHODS: Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on 945 patients (mean age, 63 +/- 10 years). There were 562 transthoracic esophagectomies and 383 transhiatal esophagectomies in 105 hospitals, with complete 30-day outcomes recorded. RESULTS: There were no differences in recorded preoperative variables between the groups that might bias any comparisons. Overall mortality was 10.0% (56/562) for transthoracic esophagectomy and 9.9% (38/383) for transhiatal esophagectomy (P =.983). Morbidity occurred in 47% (266/562) of patients after transthoracic esophagectomy and in 49% (188/383) of patients after transhiatal esophagectomy (P =.596). Risk factors for mortality common to both groups included a serum albumin value of less than 3.5 g/dL, age greater than 65 years, and blood transfusion of greater than 4 units (P <.05). When comparing transthoracic esophagectomy with transhiatal esophagectomy, there was no difference in the incidence of respiratory failure, renal failure, bleeding, infection, sepsis, anastomotic complications, or mediastinitis. Wound dehiscence occurred in 5% (18/383) of patients undergoing transhiatal esophagectomy and only 2% (12/562) of patients undergoing transthoracic esophagectomy (P =.036). CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate no significant differences in preoperative variables and postoperative mortality or morbidity between transthoracic esophagectomy and transhiatal esophagectomy on the basis of a 10-year, prospective, multi-institutional, nationwide study.     

Esophageal carcinoma. Improved quality of survival with resection

Twenty years ago the experience with carcinoma of the esophagus at Vanderbilt University and affiliated hospitals was reported in 263 patients. Overall 5-year survival was 2 per cent. Esophagectomy was possible in 89 patients (34%) and was associated with a 32 per cent mortality. This study updates the authors' experience with squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus in 311 patients seen from 1966 to 1985. Overall 5-year survival has increased to 6 per cent. Esophageal resection was accomplished in 104 patients (33%), with a 10 per cent operative mortality and 41 per cent complication rate. Multi-variant analysis disclosed that smoking, alcohol use, sex, race, and site of tumor did not influence survival. Actuarial survival rates following esophageal resection were 51 per cent at 1 year, 21 per cent at 2 years, and 13 per cent at 5 years. These survival rates were not influenced by adjuvant radiotherapy. Radiation therapy was used for attempted cure in 83 patients. Actuarial survival rates following curative doses of radiation were 29 per cent at 1 year, 15 per cent at 2 years, and 4 per cent at 5 years. These survival rates were significantly (P less than 0.001) lower than survival rates following esophagectomy. The quality of life following treatment was good or fair in 83 per cent of patients undergoing esophagectomy and good or fair in 64 per cent of patients receiving "curative" doses of radiation. The results of this review demonstrate that esophageal resection using the Lewis operation or transhiatal esophagectomy can be done with an acceptable operative mortality, results in prolonged survival, and improves the quality of life.     

Aggressive treatment of chylothorax complicating transhiatal esophagectomy without thoracotomy

Chylothorax is an unusual complication after transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) and in the past 10 years has occurred in 11 of 320 patients (3%) undergoing this operation for diseases of the intrathoracic esophagus. Four patients had benign esophageal disease: scleroderma reflux esophagitis (1), caustic stricture (1), and achalasia (2), and each had undergone at least one previous esophageal operation. Seven patients had intrathoracic esophageal carcinoma--two upper-third, two middle-third, and three distal-third lesions. Excessive chest tube drainage more than 72 hours after THE was the standard presentation, and the diagnosis of chylothorax was confirmed by the administration of cream through the jejunostomy feeding tube placed routinely at operation. The character of the chest tube drainage changed from serous to opalescent. Aggressive treatment of this complication was the rule, and every patient underwent a thoracotomy between 2 to 14 days (average, 6 days) after the diagnosis was established. Cream was administered through the jejunostomy tube before operation, and in each case the thoracic duct injury was readily identified and controlled with suture ligatures. There were no deaths in this group, and there was one recurrence of the fistula that required reoperation; all patients were discharged from the hospital within 3 to 29 days (average, 10 days) after thoracic duct ligation. It is concluded that early recognition of a chylothorax after transhiatal esophagectomy with prompt transthoracic ligation of the injured duct results in a shorter overall hospitalization and lower morbidity and mortality from this complication. The traditional conservative management of chylothorax with intravenous hyperalimentation and no or low-residue enteral feedings has little place in this nutritionally depleted patient population.