目的 对比微创荷包钳法Ivor-Lewis术(MIILE)与微创McKeown术(MIME)治疗中下段食管癌的效果。方法 选取2015 年1月-2017年1月我院中下段食管癌患者60例，分为MIILE组34例及MIME组26例，MIILE组采取微创荷包钳法IvorLewis术，MIME组采取微创McKeown术，比较两组手术相关情况、并发症发生率及1年内复发率。结果 结果显示， MIILE组手术时长、置管时间及住院时间均显著低于MIME组(P<0.05)，两组术中出血量、淋巴清扫数比较差异无统 计学意义(P>0.05)；结果显示，MIILE组并发症发生率8.82%，与MIME组15.38%比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)； 随访1年中，MIILE组复发率8.82%，MIME组复发率7.69%，两组复发率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 MIILE 术与MIME术均是中下段食管癌治疗重要术式，但MIILE术可以缩短手术时长、置管时间及住院时间，近期疗效优于 MIME术。

Objective To compare the effects of minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (MIILE) and minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (MIME) in the treatment of middle and lower esophageal cancer. Methods 60 patients with middle and lower esophageal cancer in our hospital from January 2015 to January 2017 were selected and divided into MIILE group (34 cases) and MIME group (26 cases). MIILE group was given minimally invasive IvorLewis esophagectomy, and MIME group was given minimally invasive McKeown surgery. The surgery-related status, incidence rate of complications and recurrence rate within 1 year were compared between the two groups. Results The results showed that the duration of operation, catheterization time and hospital stay in MIILE group were significantly lower than those in MIME group (P<0.05), and there were no significant differences in the intraoperative blood loss and lymphatic dissection quantity between the two groups (P>0.05). The incidence rate of complications in MIILE group was not significantly different from that in MIME group (8.82% vs 15.38%) (P>0.05). At 1 year of followup, the recurrence rate was 8.82% in MIILE group and 7.69% in MIME group (P>0.05). Conclusion Both MIILE and MIME are important procedures for middle and lower esophageal cancer, but MIILE can shorten the duration of operation, catheterization time and hospital stay, and its short-term efficacy is better than MIME.