Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Surg. Oct 27, 2025; 17(10): 109729
Published online Oct 27, 2025. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i10.109729
Published online Oct 27, 2025. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i10.109729
Table 1 Comparison of general data between the two groups, mean ± SD/n (%)
| Group | n | Sex | Age (years) | Tumor location | Tumor staging | Histological classification | |||||
| Male | Female | Mid-thoracic | Upper thoracic | Stage I | Stage IIa | Squamous carcinoma | Adenocarcinoma | Others | |||
| Observation group | 66 | 37 (56.06) | 29 (43.94) | 62.33 ± 5.78 | 42 (63.64) | 24 (36.36) | 35 (53.03) | 31 (46.97) | 17 (25.76) | 25 (37.88) | 24 (36.36) |
| Control group | 61 | 33 (54.10) | 28 (45.90) | 61.54 ± 6.40 | 36 (59.02) | 25 (40.98) | 39 (63.93) | 22 (36.07) | 15 (24.59) | 30 (49.18) | 16 (26.23) |
| χ2/t | 0.049 | 0.710 | 0.286 | 1.550 | 1.956 | ||||||
| P value | 0.824 | 0.479 | 0.593 | 0.213 | 0.371 | ||||||
Table 2 Comparison of surgical indicators between the two groups, mean ± SD
| Group | n | Surgical duration (minutes) | Intraoperative blood loss (mL) | Chest drainage volume (mL) | Number of dissected lymph nodes |
| Observation group | 66 | 165.48 ± 20.44 | 89.08 ± 10.23 | 256.34 ± 31.61 | 8.44 ± 0.75 |
| Control group | 61 | 194.63 ± 22.78 | 123.62 ± 15.28 | 310.29 ± 35.72 | 6.23 ± 0.61 |
| t | 7.600 | 15.072 | 9.028 | 18.129 | |
| P value | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 | < 0.001 |
Table 3 Comparison of pain mediator levels between the two groups, mean ± SD
| Group | n | 5-HT (nmol/L) | K+ (nmol/L) | NE (ng/L) | |||
| Preoperatively | Postoperatively | Preoperatively | Postoperatively | Preoperatively | Postoperatively | ||
| Observation group | 66 | 0.22 ± 0.04 | 0.41 ± 0.04a | 28.35 ± 2.40 | 33.69 ± 2.58a | 1.25 ± 0.11 | 3.03 ± 0.48a |
| Control group | 61 | 0.21 ± 0.03 | 0.69 ± 0.05a | 27.94 ± 2.33 | 38.86 ± 3.71a | 1.27 ± 0.16 | 5.78 ± 0.52a |
| t | 1.584 | 34.973 | 0.975 | 9.174 | 0.826 | 30.992 | |
| P value | 0.114 | < 0.001 | 0.331 | < 0.001 | 0.410 | < 0.001 | |
Table 4 Comparison of immune response between the two groups, mean ± SD
| Group | n | CD4+ (%) | CD8+ (%) | CD4+/CD8+ | |||
| Preoperatively | Postoperatively | Preoperatively | Postoperatively | Preoperatively | Postoperatively | ||
| Observation group | 66 | 36.85 ± 2.45 | 31.73 ± 2.12a | 26.76 ± 2.85 | 29.46 ± 3.55a | 1.37 ± 0.12 | 1.07 ± 0.10a |
| Control group | 61 | 37.41 ± 3.03 | 27.49 ± 2.98a | 27.01 ± 2.64 | 33.95 ± 3.96a | 1.39 ± 0.18 | 0.81 ± 0.07a |
| t | 1.149 | 9.293 | 0.512 | 6.737 | 0.742 | 16.845 | |
| P value | 0.253 | < 0.001 | 0.610 | < 0.001 | 0.460 | < 0.001 | |
Table 5 Comparison of inflammatory markers between the two groups, mean ± SD, ng/L
| Group | n | IL-6 | IL-8 | TNF-α | |||
| Preoperatively | Postoperatively | Preoperatively | Postoperatively | Preoperatively | Postoperatively | ||
| Observation group | 66 | 192.64 ± 18.33 | 268.75 ± 25.48a | 168.33 ± 17.68 | 221.43 ± 20.38a | 102.49 ± 11.71 | 132.05 ± 15.43a |
| Control group | 61 | 189.45 ± 20.41 | 295.03 ± 31.62a | 165.26 ± 15.45 | 271.69 ± 25.74a | 98.74 ± 10.65 | 178.63 ± 16.65a |
| t | 0.928 | 5.175 | 1.039 | 12.246 | 1.883 | 16.364 | |
| P value | 0.355 | < 0.001 | 0.301 | < 0.001 | 0.062 | < 0.001 | |
Table 6 Comparison of pulmonary function parameters between the two groups, mean ± SD, mL
| Group | n | FVC | FEV1 | MVV | |||
| Preoperatively | Postoperatively | Preoperatively | Postoperatively | Preoperatively | Postoperatively | ||
| Observation group | 66 | 95.45 ± 8.46 | 78.28 ± 7.75a | 89.49 ± 9.11 | 76.68 ± 6.41a | 86.68 ± 9.21 | 68.49 ± 7.11a |
| Control group | 61 | 96.02 ± 10.21 | 62.43 ± 5.33a | 88.32 ± 8.46 | 66.50 ± 5.78a | 85.12 ± 8.78 | 56.37 ± 6.44a |
| t | 0.344 | 13.323 | 0.748 | 9.372 | 0.975 | 10.040 | |
| P value | 0.732 | < 0.001 | 0.456 | < 0.001 | 0.331 | < 0.001 | |
Table 7 Comparison of complication rates between the two groups, n (%)
| Group | n | Intraoperative iatrogenic injuries | Chylothorax | Anastomotic fistula | Massive hemorrhage | Pleural effusion | Infections in the lungs and other systems | Overall incidence |
| Observation group | 66 | 0 (0) | 2 (3.03) | 1 (1.52) | 0 (0) | 2 (3.03) | 1 (1.52) | 6 (7.58) |
| Control group | 61 | 2 (3.28) | 2 (3.28) | 4 (6.56) | 2 (3.28) | 1 (1.64) | 2 (3.28) | 13 (21.31) |
| χ2 | 4.917 | |||||||
| P value | 0.027 |
- Citation: Zhang TY, Ren MZ, Gong XK, Ma J. Application of total thoracoscopic ultrasonic scalpel resection in esophageal cancer patients. World J Gastrointest Surg 2025; 17(10): 109729
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-9366/full/v17/i10/109729.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v17.i10.109729
