Table 2.
Characteristics and pathological condition of patients in different groups
| A New method (n = 58) | B Conventional (n = 64) | C Reporteda (n = 107) |
Statistical analysis |
||
| x2/t | P Value | ||||
| Sex (male/female) | 46/12 | 43/21 | 81/26 | 2.563 | 0.279 |
| Mean age (range) (years) | 57 (34-78) | 54(28-76) | 62 (30-81) | ||
| Tumor site | |||||
| Upper (include cervical) | 4 (7%) | 3 (4.6%) | 2 (2%) | 2.731 | 0.604 |
| Middle | 21 (36%) | 24 (37.5%) | 43 (40%) | ||
| Lower(junctional part) | 33 (57%) | 37 (57.8%) | 62 (58%) | ||
| Pathological typeb | |||||
| Squamous | 32 (55%) | 34(53%) | 28 (26%) | 14.399 | 0.001b |
| Adenocarcinoma | 22 (38%) | 28(44%) | 72 (67%) | 1.155 | 0.561c |
| Others | 4 (7%) | 2(3%) | 7 (7%) | ||
| Tumor Diameter | |||||
| (Mean ± SD)(cm) | 3.1 ± 1.94 | 3.6 ± 1.58 | ND | 1.551 (t) | 0.084 |
| Clinical Staging | |||||
| Stage I | 18 (31%) | 22 (35%) | 34 (32%) | 7.272 | 0.122 |
| StageIIA | 31 (53%) | 29 (45%) | 65 (61%) | ||
| StageIIB | 9 (16%) | 13 (22%) | 8 (8%) | ||
a
By McLarty AJ, Deschamps C, Trastek VF, et al[7]. Ann Thorac Surg, 1997; 63: 1568-1572.
b
The pathological type of esophageal carcinoma was different as reported in the west from that in China (P = 0.001), but it was not the major factor that affected the methods and early outcomes of operation.
c
Compared the pathologic type of cancer treated by the new(Group A) and the conventional (Group B) methods. ND: No data available.