Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients

Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: technique and early outcomes

Esophagectomy is pivotal for the long-term survival in patients with early stage and advanced esophageal cancer, and improved perioperative care and advanced surgical techniques have contributed to reduced postoperative morbidity. However, despite these advances, esophagectomy continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive esophageal surgery (MIE) has been increasingly used in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer. Potential advantages of MIE include the decreased postoperative pain; lower postoperative wound infection, decreased pulmonary complications, and decreased length of hospitalization. Robotic esophageal surgery has the ability to overcome some of the limitations of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approaches to esophagectomy while maintaining the benefits of the minimally invasive approach. In this article, we will review the clinical efficacy and outcomes associated with robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAIL).

Comparison of perioperative outcomes following hybrid minimally invasive versus open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of various minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) procedures for esophageal cancer have been reported; however, those of the hybrid approach are lacking. This study aimed to assess the impacts of hybrid minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (HIL, laparoscopy and right thoracotomy) for esophageal cancer on perioperative outcomes compared with the open approach.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of 153 patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for squamous cell carcinoma between January 2008 and December 2016. Patients who received neoadjuvant treatment prior to surgery (n=22) and underwent complete minimally invasive procedures (n=16) were excluded. Clinical characteristics and perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent HIL (n=53) were compared with findings in patients who underwent open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (OIL, n=62).

RESULTS

There were 112 men (97.4%) and 3 women (2.6%) with a median age of 66 years (range, 45-83 years). The HIL and OIL groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, preoperative pulmonary function, location of the tumor, and preoperative laboratory findings. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding surgical data, except for pyloric management. Postoperative complications occurred in 17 (32.1%) and 23 (37.1%) patients in the HIL and OIL groups, respectively (P=0.573); in-hospital mortality rates were 3.8% and 8.1%, respectively (P=0.337). HIL group patients had higher albumin (3.3 vs. 2.9 g/dL; P<0.001) and lower C-reactive protein (6.4 vs. 8.1 mg/L; P<0.001) postoperatively. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the HIL group (13.5 vs. 19.2 days; P=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the conventional open approach, HIL for esophageal cancer showed better postoperative nutritional and inflammatory status, resulting in shorter hospital stays. However, further studies are required to evaluate the long-term oncologic outcomes of this hybrid approach.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophageal Resection: Three-year Follow-up of the Previously Reported Randomized Controlled Trial: the TIME Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate 3-year survival following a randomized controlled trial comparing minimally invasive with open esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND

Research on minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has shown faster postoperative recovery and a marked decrease in pulmonary complications. Debate is ongoing as to whether the procedure is equivalent to open resection regarding oncologic outcomes. The study is a follow-up study of the TIME-trial (traditional invasive vs minimally invasive esophagectomy, a multicenter, randomized trial).

METHODS

Between June 2009 and March 2011, patients with a resectable intrathoracic esophageal carcinoma, including the gastroesophageal junction tumors (Siewert I), were randomized between open and MI esophagectomy with curative intent. Primary outcome was 3-year disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes include overall survival, lymph node yield, short-term morbidity, mortality, complications, radicality, local recurrence, and metastasis. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, NTR TC 2452. Both trial protocol and short-term results have been published previously.

RESULTS

One hundred fifteen patients were included from 5 European hospitals and randomly assigned to open (n = 56) or MI esophagectomy (n = 59). Combined overall 3-year survival was 40.4% (SD 7.7%) in the open group versus 50.5% (SD 8%) in the minimally invasive group (P = 0.207). The hazard ratio (HR) is 0.883 (0.540 to 1.441) for MIE compared with open surgery. Disease-free 3-year survival was 35.9% (SD 6.8%) in the open versus 40.2% (SD 6.9%) in the MI group [HR 0.691 (0.389 to 1.239).

CONCLUSIONS

The study presented here depicted no differences in disease-free and overall 3-year survival for open and MI esophagectomy. These results, together with short-term results, further support the use of minimally invasive surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal cancer.

Predictive factors for post-operative respiratory infections after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: outcome of randomized trial

BACKGROUND

The first and only randomized trial comparing open esophagectomy (OE) with minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) showed a significant lower incidence of post-operative respiratory infections in the patients who underwent MIE. In order to identify which specific factors are related to a better respiratory outcome in this trial an additional analysis was performed.

METHODS

This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Eligible patients, with a resectable intrathoracic esophageal carcinoma, including the gastro-esophageal (GE) junction tumors and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ≤2, were randomized to either MIE or OE. Respiratory infection investigated was defined as a clinical manifestation of (broncho-) pneumonia confirmed by thorax X-ray and/ or Computed Tomography scan and a positive sputum culture. A logistic regression model was used.

RESULTS

From 2009 to 2011, 115 patients were randomized in 5 centers. Eight patients developed metastasis during neoadjuvant therapy or had an irresectable tumor and were therefore excluded from the analysis. Fifty-two OE patients were comparable to 55 MIE patients with regard to baseline characteristics. In-hospital mortality was not significantly different [2% (open group) and 4% (MIE group)]. A body mass index (BMI) ≥26 and OE were associated with a roughly threefold risk of developing a respiratory infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Overweight patients and OE are independently associated with a significant higher incidence of post-operative respiratory infections, i.e., pneumonia.

The impact of flexible endoscopy in esophageal surgery

Achalasia and Treatment of esophageal Adenocarcinoma are commonly associated to surgical resection. Newer technologies in interventional endoscopy gave way to a substantial paradigm shift in the management of these conditions. In the case of achalasia, endoscopic myotomy is rapidly displacing Heller's myotomy as the gold standard in many centers. Early stage neoplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) comprising high-grade dysplasia (HGD), intramucosal and, in some cases, submucosal carcinoma is now being treated without the need of esophagectomy. This review presents a summary of the most relevant endoscopic techniques for both achalasia and esophageal cancer. Endoscopic advances in diagnostic and therapeutic arenas allow for minimally invasive therapies and organ preservation in most settings of achalasia and early stage neoplasia of the esophagus provided that the clinical setting and physician's expertise are prepared for this approach.

CMISG1701: a multicenter prospective randomized phase III clinical trial comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by minimally invasive esophagectomy in patients with locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (cT3-4aN0-1M0) (NCT03001596)

Background

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation is not recommended as an approach for treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma due to its significant postoperative mortality. However, it is assumed the combination of neoadjuvant chemoradiation with minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) may reduce postoperative mortality, which can revive preoperative chemoradiation. No randomized controlled studies comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation plus MIE with neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus MIE have been performed so far. The present trial is initiated to obtain valid information whether neoadjuvant chemoradiation plus MIE yields better survival without worse postoperative morbidity and mortality in the treatment of locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma(cT_3-4aN_0-1M₀).

Methods/design

CMISG1701 is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, phase III clinical trial, investigating the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiation plus MIE compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus MIE. Patients with locally advanced resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (cT_3-4aN_0-1M₀) are eligible for the study. A total of 264 patients are randomly assigned to neoadjuvant chemoradiation (arm A) or neoadjuvant chemotherapy (arm B) with a 1:1 allocation ratio. The primary outcome is overall survival assessed with a minimum follow-up of 36 months. Secondary outcomes are progression-free survival, recurrence-free survival, postoperative pathologic stage, treatment-related complications, postoperative mortality as well as quality of life.

Discussion

The objective of this trial is to identify the superior protocol with regard to patient survival, treatment morbidity/mortality and quality of life between neoadjuvant chemoradiation plus MIE and neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus MIE.

Trial registration

NCT03001596 (December 17, 2016).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-017-3446-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A standardized comparison of peri-operative complications after minimally invasive esophagectomy: Ivor Lewis versus McKeown

BACKGROUND

While our institutional approach to esophageal resection for cancer has traditionally favored a minimally invasive (MI) 3-hole, McKeown esophagectomy (MIE 3-hole) during the last five years several factors has determined a shift in our practice with an increasing number of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis (MIE IL) resections being performed. We compared peri-operative outcomes of the two procedures, hypothesizing that MIE IL would be less morbid in the peri-operative setting compared to MIE 3-hole.

METHODS

Our institution's IRB-approved esophageal database was queried to identify all patients who underwent totally MI esophagectomy (MIE IL vs. MIE 3-hole) from June 2011 to May 2016. Patient demographics, preoperative and peri-operative data, as well as post-operative complications were compared between the two groups. Post-operative complications were analyzed using the Clavien-Dindo classification system.

RESULTS

There were 110 patients who underwent totally MI esophagectomy (MIE IL n = 49 [45%], MIE 3-hole n = 61 [55%]). The majority of patients were men (n = 91, 83%) with a median age of 62.5 (range 31-83). Preoperative risk stratifiers such as ECOG score, ASA, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were not significantly different between groups. Anastomotic leak rate was 2.0% in the MIE IL group compared to 6.6% in the MIE 3-hole group (p = 0.379). The rate of serious (Clavien-Dindo 3, 4, or 5) post-operative complications was significantly less in the MIE IL group (34.7 vs. 59.0%, p = 0.013). Serious pulmonary complications were not significantly different (16.3 vs. 26.2%, p = 0.251) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this cohort, totally MIE IL showed significantly less severe peri-operative morbidity than MIE 3-hole, but similar rates of serious pulmonary complications and anastomotic leaks. These findings confirm the safety of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomies for esophageal cancer when oncologically and clinically appropriate. Minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy remains a satisfactory and appropriate option when clinically indicated.

Current trends in multimodality treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer - Review article

PURPOSE

Multimodality treatment has now been widely introduced in the curatively intended treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer. We aim to give an overview of the scientific evidence for the available treatment strategies and to describe which trends that are currently developing.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the scientific evidence for the different curatively intended treatment strategies that are available today. Relevant articles of randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, and meta analyses were included.

RESULTS

After a systematic search of relevant papers we have included 64 articles in the review. The results show that adenocarcinomas and squamous cell carcinomas of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction are two separate entities and should be analysed and studied as two different diseases. Neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgical resection is the gold standard of the curatively intended treatment today. There is no scientific evidence to support the use of chemoradiotherapy over chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting for esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. There is reasonable evidence to support definitive chemoradiotherapy as a treatment option for squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base for curatively intended treatments of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer is not very strong. Several on-going trials have the potential to change the gold standard treatments of today.

Endoscopic esophagogastric anastomosis with luminal apposition Axios stent (LAS) approach: a new concept for hybrid "Lewis Santy"

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Esophagogastric anastomosis (EGA) has a high risk of leakage. Based upon our experience in endoscopic gastrojejunal anastomosis using LAS, the aim of this study was to verify the technical feasibility and the safety of performing an EGA using a hybrid approach (endoscopic and surgical).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A pilot prospective study was performed on 8 survival pigs. The procedure was carried out in 2 stages: (i) surgical step consisting of an esogastrectomy by laparotomy with separated suture of the esophagus and stomach; (ii) endoscopic esophagogastric anastomosis using the LAS. The first 2 pigs allowed for the setting of the 2 steps procedure, and 6 were included in the study for assessing the efficacy and safety of the procedure with a 3-week survival course. The primary endpoint was morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

All procedures were successfull. The mean operative time was 98 minutes, with a mean endoscopic time of 46 minutes. Three early deaths occurred within the first weeks, unrelated to the LAS anastomosis. At 3 weeks, endoscopic assessment followed by necropsy demonstrated the right position and the endoscopic removability of the stent with good patency of the esophagogastric anastomosis, without leakage of the endoscopic suture. Pathological examination confirmed the patency of the anastomosis with fusion of mucosal and muscle layers.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic esophagogastric anastomosis with LAS is feasible and reproducible, without anastomotic leakage. It could be a new alternative to perform safe anastomoses, as part of a hybrid approach (surgical and endoscopic).

Laparoscopic ischemic conditioning of the stomach increases neovascularization of the gastric conduit in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Gastric ischemic preconditioning has been proposed to improve blood flow and reduce the incidence of anastomotic complications following esophagectomy with gastric pull-up. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of prolonged ischemic preconditioning on the degree of neovascularization in the distal gastric conduit at the time of esophagectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database identified 30 patients who underwent esophagectomy. The patients were divided into three groups: control (no preconditioning, n = 9), partial (short gastric vessel ligation only, n = 8), and complete ischemic preconditioning (left and short gastric vessel ligation, n = 13). Microvessel counts were assessed, using immunohistologic analysis to determine the degree of neovascularization at the distal gastric margin.

RESULTS

The groups did not differ in age, gender, BMI, pathologic stage, or cancer subtype. Ischemic preconditioning durations were 163 ± 156 days for partial ischemic preconditioning, compared to 95 ± 50 days for complete ischemic preconditioning (P = 0.2). Immunohistologic analysis demonstrated an increase in microvessel counts of 29% following partial ischemic preconditioning (P = 0.3) and 67% after complete ischemic preconditioning (P < 0.0001), compared to controls.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that prolonged ischemic preconditioning is safe and does not interfere with subsequent esophagectomy. Complete ischemic preconditioning increased neovascularization in the distal gastric conduit.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer according to the location of the tumor: Experience of 251 patients

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly used for the treatment of esophageal cancer. However, the ideal approach of MIE is not yet standardized. We explore the ideal approach of MIE according to the location of the tumor and compare the clinical outcomes between patients with cancer arising in the upper third of the esophagus and those with tumors involving the middle and lower third of the esophagus.

METHODS

We included patients with esophageal carcinoma and had clear indications for MIE. For cancer arising in the upper third of the esophagus, MIE McKeown approach was performed. For tumors involving the middle and lower third of the esophagus, MIE Ivor Lewis approach was adopted.

RESULTS

Of the 251 patients included in this analysis, 200 patients underwent Ivor-Lewis MIE and 51 patients underwent McKeown MIE. The incidence of anastomotic leak, anastomotic stenosis and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury was significantly higher in the McKeown MIE group than that in the Ivor Lewis MIE group. The 30-day postoperative mortality rate was 1.2% (n = 1) in the McKeown MIE group. Lymph nodes harvested were significantly more in the MIE-McKeown group than in Ivor Lewis MIE group (P < 0.05). The median follow-up period was 15 months (1-25 months) and the overall survival rate at 1 year stratified by pathologic stage at esophagectomy was 95.9% (stage 1), 83.8% (stage II), 73.4% (stage III).

CONCLUSIONS

MIE for esophageal cancer according to the location and clinical stage of the tumor will decrease all postoperative complications and may yield the greatest benefit from surgery.

Esophageal cancer's 100 most influential manuscripts: a bibliometric analysis

Bibliometric analysis highlights key topics and publications that have shaped the understanding and management of esophageal cancer (EC). Here, the 100 most cited manuscripts in the field of EC are analyzed. The Thomson Reuters Web of Science database with the search terms 'esophageal cancer' or 'esophageal carcinoma' or 'oesophageal cancer' or 'oesophageal carcinoma' or 'gastroscopy' was used to identify all English language full manuscripts for the study. The 100 most cited papers were further analyzed by topic, journal, author, year, and institution. A total of 121,556 eligible papers were returned and the median (range) citation number was 406.5 (1833 to 293). The most cited paper focused on the role of perioperative chemotherpy in EC (1833 citations). Gastroenterology published the highest number of papers (n = 15, 6362 citations) and The New England Journal of Medicine received the most citations (n = 12, 12125 citations). The country and year with the greatest number of publications were the USA (n = 50), and 1998, 1999, and 2000 (n = 7). The most ubiquitous topic was the pathology of EC (n = 66) followed by management of EC (n = 54), and studies related to EC prognosis (n = 44). The most cited manuscripts highlighted the pathology, management, and prognosis of EC and this bibliometirc review provides the most influential references serving as a guide to popular research themes.

Introduction of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in a Community Teaching Hospital

Background and Objectives:

The safety of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) outside of high-volume centers has not been studied. Therefore, we evaluated our experience with the introduction of MIE in the setting of a community teaching hospital.

Methods:

A retrospective cohort of all elective esophagectomy patients treated in a community hospital from 2008 through 2015 was evaluated (n = 57; open = 31 vs MIE = 26). Clavien-Dindo complication grades were recorded prospectively.

Results:

Mean age was 63 ± 11 years (range, 30–83), mean Charlson comorbidity index was 4.5 ± 1.7 and proportion of ASA score ≥3 was 87%. The groups did not differ in age, gender distribution, or comorbidity indices. There were 108 complications observed, including 2 deaths (3.5%, both coronary events). Postoperative complication rate was 77.1% and serious complication rate (grades 3 and 4) was 50.8% in the entire cohort. The rate of serious complications was similar (58% for open vs 42% for MIE group; 2-sided P = .089). MIE operations were longer (342 ± 109 vs 425 ± 74 minutes; P = .001). Length of stay trended toward not being significantly shorter among MIE cases (15 ± 13 vs 12 ± 12 days; P = .071). Logistic regression models including MIE status were not predictive of complications.

Conclusions:

Introduction of MIE esophagectomy in our community hospital was associated with prolonged operative time, but no detectable adverse outcomes. Length of stay was nonsignificantly shortened by the use of MIS esophagectomy.

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and open chest surgery in esophageal cancer treatment: present and future

Surgical esophageal cancer treatment has, like other solid organ cancer treatments, evolved from a monospeciality treatment towards a multidisciplinary treatment. In an increasing number of centers around the world minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is now proposed as the preferred surgical approach although there is still a place for open surgery in selected cases. Careful assessment of oncologic and medical operability and adequate pre-operative preparation are the first and foremost important steps to guarantee optimal oncological and functional results. This article serves as a practical guide to MIE for esophageal cancer with figures, equipment preference cards and videos explaining and illustrating a MIE procedure in prone position as one example of the present state of the art. Some future perspectives will also be discussed.

Prognosis and Progression of ESCC Patients with Perineural Invasion

Perineural invasion (PNI) has been recognized as a poor prognostic factor in several malignancies, but the definition and pathogenesis of PNI in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains to be defined. PNI was evaluated by H&E staining and S100 immunohistochemistry. The predictive value of PNI in the prognosis of ESCC patients was analyzed. PNI was evaluated in vitro and in vivo. A total of 54 specimens (17.88%) were defined as PNI-a and 99 specimens (32.78%) as PNI-b. S100 staining was superior to H&E staining for PNI detection (50.66% vs 27.15%, P < 0.001, κ = 0.506). Tumor depth (P = 0.001), tumor stage (P = 0.010), and vascular invasion (P < 0.001) were significantly associated with PNI. PIN-a and PNI-b had significant lower disease free survival (DFS) and disease specific survival (DSS) than PNI-0 patients, and the prognosis of PNI-b patients was significantly worse than PNI-a patients for DFS (P = 0.009). PNI was an independent predictor for DFS and DSS in ESCC as evaluated by univariate and multivariate analyses. ESCC cells could metastasize along the nerve in vitro and in vivo, and PNI was a dynamic process. S100 staining significantly improved the accuracy of PNI detection. PNI was associated with local recurrence and poor prognosis of ESCC patients.

[Oncologic esophageal resection and reconstruction : Open, hybrid, minimally invasive or robotic?]

Minimally invasive resections are increasingly employed in oncologic surgery for esophageal carcinoma. The new German S3 guideline states that esophagectomy, as well as reconstruction of the esophagus, can be performed minimally invasively or in combination with open techniques (hybrid). However, the current value of different techniques - ranging from complete minimally invasive esophagectomy over hybrid to robotic surgery - remains unregarded.This review provides a critical comparison of these techniques based on current evidence. Minimally invasive procedures of oncologic esophageal resection are safe in experienced hands and show numerous advantages with regard to postoperative reconvalescence. Laparoscopic gastrolysis with intra-abdominal lymphadenectomy and muscle sparing as well as anterolateral mini-thoracotomy (also via VATS as single-port technique) as a hybrid method also result in a relevant reduction of postoperative mortality and offer the possibility of extended mediastinal lymphadenectomy, which requires a high level of expertise when performed thoracoscopically. At present, robotic esophagectomy is applied in only a few clinics in Germany. A lack of evidence based on studies for esophageal surgery, as well as high acquisition and operating costs of the robotic system, have to be taken into account.

Minimally invasive oesophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis

Background

Open esophagectomy (OE) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO) reduces complications in resectable esophageal cancer. The aim of this study is to explore the superiority of MIO in reducing complications and in-hospital mortality than OE.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index, Wanfang, and Wiley Online Library were thoroughly searched. Odds ratio (OR)/weighted mean difference (WMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to assess the strength of association.

Results

Fifty-seven studies containing 15,790 cases of resectable esophageal cancer were included. MIO had less intraoperative blood loss, short hospital stay, and high operative time (P < 0.05) than OE. MIO also had reduced incidence of total complications; (OR = 0.700, 95% CI = 0.626 ~ 0.781, P_V < 0.05), pulmonary complications (OR = 0.527, 95% CI = 0431 ~ 0.645, P_V < 0.05), cardiovascular complications (OR = 0.770, 95% CI = 0.681 ~ 0.872, P_V < 0.05), and surgical technology related (STR) complications (OR = 0.639, 95% CI = 0.522 ~ 0.781, P_V < 0.05), as well as lower in-hospital mortality (OR = 0.668, 95% CI = 0.539 ~ 0.827, P_V < 0.05). However, the number of harvested lymph nodes, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, gastrointestinal complications, anastomotic leak (AL), and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (RLNP) had no significant difference.

Conclusions

MIO is superior to OE in terms of perioperative complications and in-hospital mortality.

Comparison of single- and multi-incision minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for treating esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the perioperative outcome of minimally invasive (MIE) esophagectomy performed with a single- or a multi-incision in treating esophageal cancer.

METHOD

Patients with esophageal cancer who underwent MIE from 2006 to 2016 were evaluated. A 3-4-cm incision was created in both the thoracoscopic and the laparoscopic phases during the single-incision MIE procedures. A propensity-matched comparison was made between the two groups of patients.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 48 pairs of patients with propensity-matched from the cohort of 360 patients undergoing MIE during 2006-2015. There is no statistical difference in terms of postoperative ICU and hospital stay, number of dissected lymph nodes and presence of major surgical complications (anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications) between the two groups of patients. The pain score one week after surgery was significantly lower in the single-incision group (p < 0.05). There was no surgical mortality in the single-incision MIE group.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive esophagectomy performed with a single-incision approach is feasible for treating patients with esophageal cancer, with a comparable perioperative outcome with that of multi-incision approaches. The postoperative pain one week after surgery was significantly reduced in patients undergoing single-incision MIE.

Survival outcomes of 220 consecutive patients with three-staged thoracoscopic esophagectomy

Patients with thoracic esophageal cancer are often treated by minimally invasive esophagectomy. However, the long-term survival benefits of minimally invasive esophagectomy remain unclear. Two approaches are available for thoracoscopic surgery: one with the patient in the left lateral decubitus position (LLDP), and the other with the patient in the prone position (PP). We investigated the survival benefit of thoracoscopic esophagectomy according to the tumor stage and patient position during the thoracoscopic procedure. We reviewed the records of 220 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer treated from 1998 to 2012. In total, 146 and 74 patients were treated with thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the LLDP and PP, respectively. No patients were initially proposed to be candidates for esophagectomy by thoracotomy during the study period. Data collection was performed with a focus on survival and recurrent disease. Among all the 220 patients, the overall 5-year survival rates were 83.7%, 74.1%, 45.5%, 78.6%, 44.2%, 29.4% and 24.3% in the patients with pStage IA, IB, IIA, IIB, IIIA, IIIB and IIIC disease, respectively. Despite the greater number of dissected mediastinal lymph nodes in the PP procedure, there were no significant differences in the survival curves between the LLDP and PP procedures. The long-term results of thoracoscopic esophagectomy are comparable and acceptable. The PP procedure was not confirmed to offer a superior survival benefit to the LLDP procedure in this retrospective study.

The benefits and limitations of robotic assisted transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Robotic-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy (RATE) is a minimally invasive approach to total esophagectomy with less morbidity but equivalent efficacy when compared with the traditional open approach. The robotic platform offers numerous technical advantages that assist with the esophageal dissection, which allows the procedure to be completed without entry into the thoracic cavity. The major criticism of the transhiatal approach is that it forfeits the ability of the surgeon to perform a formal lymphadenectomy, but this does not appear to affect long-term survival.

Esophagectomy: Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes between Single-versus Two-Team Approach

Literature about combining expertise of two specialties in esophageal cancer surgery is limited. We present the experience at a single institute comparing single-team (ST) versus two-team (TT) approach combining thoracic and abdominal surgeons. This is a retrospective study from a single tertiary care center. Data were collected from electronic medical records. Patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer from November 2006 until August 2014 were included. The primary outcome measured was 30-day postoperative morbidity, secondary outcomes measured were operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and 30-day mortality. Results are reported as mean with an interquartile range. Forty-nine patients underwent esophagectomy by an ST and 51 patients by TT. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, stage, pathology, and use of neoadjuvant therapy were comparable between groups. Charlson comorbidity index was significantly higher in TT group [3 (2, 4) vs 2 (2, 3), P = 0.02]. The TT group had a significantly shorter operative time compared to the ST group [304 (252,376) minutes vs 438 (375, 494] minutes, P < 0.0001). Intraoperative blood loss was 300 (200, 550) mL for the TT group and 250 (200,400) mL for the ST group ( P = 0.29). There was no difference in 30-day postoperative morbidity (68.6% for TT, 59.2% for ST, P = 0.32) and mortality (2% each, P = 1) between the two groups. In conclusion, the operative time by the TT approach was significantly shorter than the ST approach with comparable postoperative morbidity and mortality. Long-term follow-up is needed to study this approach's effect on long-term survival.

Proximal Resection Margin in Ivor-Lewis Oesophagectomy for Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a long proximal oesophageal resection margin (PRM) is associated with improved survival after oesophagectomy for cancer and to identify the optimal margin to aim for in this patient group.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database identified 174 patients who underwent Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy for cancer. Demographic, clinical, and pathological data were collected. X-tile software was used to identify the optimal resection point. Two models were analysed: single point resection with comparison of two groups (short and long), and two resection points with three groups (short, medium, and long) to provide a range.

RESULTS

The median PRM was 4.0 cm (interquartile range: 2.5-6.0 cm). After adjustment for significant confounders, multivariable Cox PH analysis demonstrated that the optimal resection margin was 1.7 cm, and in the three-group analysis the optimum PRM was between 1.7 and 3 cm. In the two-group analysis, the long margin had no effect on DFS (p = 0.37), but carried a significantly improved overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.46, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.87, p = 0.02). In the three-group analysis, the medium and long groups had improved OS compared with the short group (on average 54 %, HR ≥ 0.45, p ≤ 0.04). The 5-year disease-free and overall survival rates were highest in the medium PRM group (48 and 57 % respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Optimal survival following oesophagectomy for cancer is achieved with a PRM > 1.7 cm, but a PRM > 3 cm does not yield a further survival advantage. Thus, the optimal PRM is likely to be between 1.7 and 3 cm.

Transhiatal Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

Survival for esophageal cancer has improved over the past four decades, probably as a result of a combination of more accurate staging, improved surgical outcomes, advances in adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies, and the increasing implementation of multimodality treatment. Surgical resection still remains the mainstay in the treatment of localized esophageal adenocarcinoma. Multiple techniques have been described for esophagectomy, which are based on either a transthoracic or transhiatal approach. Despite proponents of each technique touting potential advantages such as superior oncologic resection with more extensive transthoracic lymphadenectomy compared to the relatively limited morbidity and mortality with a transhiatal resection, the superiority of one technique over another is not clear and may be relegated to a topic of historical significance in the era of minimally invasive surgery. With the increased acceptance of neoadjuvant multimodality therapy, both approaches have been shown to have acceptable outcomes. And in the hands of experienced surgeons, both techniques can provide excellent short-term results. Moreover, surgeon and hospital volume have shown to be strongly associated with improved operative morbidity and oncologic outcomes, which may supersede the type of approach selected for an individual patient.

Robotic esophagectomy

Robotic esophagectomy is an increasingly used modality. Patients who are candidates for traditional, open esophagectomy are typically also candidates for robotic esophagectomy. Knowledge of and training on the robotic platform is critical for success. Patient and port positioning is described. Either a hand-sewn or stapled intrathoracic anastomosis may be performed. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) appears to be associated with decreased respiratory complications versus open esophagectomy. Robotic esophagectomy may be performed with excellent perioperative outcomes, though long-term oncologic data regarding the operation are not yet available.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy: Chinese experiences

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer is one of the four most common cancers in China. Its pathological type of esophageal cancer in China is mostly squamous cell carcinoma, which is quite different from western countries. Surgery is the first choice for resectable patients. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has become a standard surgical approach for esophageal cancer in the world, including China. This paper provides some introduction and experience of MIE in China.

METHODS

As one of the largest esophageal cancer center in China, our center performed the first case of MIE in China in 1994, and the total number of our MIE cases has exceeded 1,300. The development of MIE in China contains the lateral prone position, the esophageal suspension, and so on.

RESULTS

In the past two decades, we have performed more than 1,300 cases of MIE. The incidence of perioperative cardiopulmonary complications was decreased in MIE group. The technical progress and innovation, including patient position and esophageal suspension, helps shorten the duration of operation, and facilitate the dissection of lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

MIE has become the standard surgical procedure for resectable esophageal cancer patients in China. The advantages of MIE are the lower incidence of perioperative complication than open surgery. Technical improvement is still in progress.

Laparoscopic-Assisted Transhiatal Esophagectomy (LATE) for Carcinoma of the Esophagus

Total laparoscopic approach for the management of carcinoma of the esophagus has not gained much popularity due to its complexity. The aim of this study was to evaluate safety, feasibility, and outcome of laparoscopic-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy (LATE) for patients with carcinoma of the esophagus. This retrospective study involves a total of 26 patients with carcinoma of the esophagus who were considered for LATE by a single surgical team from January 2010 to September 2014. The median (range) age was 55 years (35-72), and male to female ratio was 20:6. The median (range) operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were 300 min (180-660), 300 ml (100-500), and 11.5 days (8-25), respectively. Pulmonary complications and cervical anastomotic leak (including one patient with conduit necrosis) occurred in eight (30.7 %) and three (11.5 %) patients, respectively. AJCC stage (7th ed.) was IIA in 12 (46.15 %), IIB in 10 (38.46 %), IIIA in 3 (11.53 %), and IIIB in 1 (3.84 %) patient. Surgical resection margin was negative in all but one patient (3.8 %). The median (range) number of lymph nodes (LN) retrieved was 13 (8-28). During a median follow-up 19 months (8-39), five patients (19.23 %) developed recurrence and three (11.5 %) of them died. LATE is a safe and feasible for the management of selected patients with carcinoma of the lower thoracic esophagus.

Robot-Assisted Mckeown Esophagectomy is Feasible After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation. Our Initial Experience

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation has become the standard of care for esophageal cancer, especially for middle third esophageal lesions and those with squamous histology. Although more and more thoracic surgeons and surgical oncologists have now shifted to video-assisted and robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy; there is still limited experience for the use of minimal-assisted approaches in patients undergoing surgery after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Most surgeons have concerns of feasibility, safety, and oncological outcomes as well as issues related to difficult learning curve in adopting robotic esophagectomy in patients after chemoradiation. We present our initial experience of Robot-Assisted Mckeown Esophagectomy in 27 patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiation, from May 2013 to October 2014. All patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation to a dose of 50.4 Gy/25Fr with concurrent weekly cisplatin, followed by reassessment with clinical examination and repeat FDG PET/CT 6 weeks after completion of chemoradiation. Patients with progressive disease underwent palliative chemotherapy while patients with either partial or significant response to chemoradiation underwent Robot-Assisted Mckeown Esophagectomy with esophageal replacement by gastric conduit and esophagogastric anastomosis in the left neck. Out of 27 patients, 92.5 % patients had stage cT3/T4 tumours and node-positive disease in 48.1 % on imaging. Most patients were middle thoracic esophageal cancers (23/27), with squamous histology in all except for one. All patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and subsequently underwent Robot Assisted Mckeown Esophagectomy. The average time for robot docking, thoracic mobilization and total surgical procedure was 13.2, 108.4 and 342.7 min, respectively. The procedure was well tolerated by all patients with only one case of peri-operative mortality. Average ICU stay was 6.35 days (range 3-9 days). R0 resection rate of 96.3 % and average lymph node yield of 18 could be achieved. Pathological node negativity rate (pN0) and complete response (pCR) were 66.6 and 44.4 %, respectively. In the initial cases, four patients had to be converted to open due technical reasons or intraoperative complications. The present study, with shorter operative times, similar ICU stay, overall low morbidity, and mortality and optimal oncological outcomes suggest that robot-assisted thoracic mobilization of esophagus in patients with prior chemoradiation is feasible and safe with acceptable oncological outcomes. It has a shorter learning curve and hence allows for a transthoracic minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy to more and more patients, otherwise unfit for conventional approach.

Minimally Invasive Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy (MIILE): A Single-Center Experience

With the development of minimally invasive procedures, minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (MIILE) has been proposed as a safe and feasible surgical choice for the treatment of esophageal cancer. This retrospective study evaluated MIILE results from a single medical center. A total of 619 patients were selected as candidates for Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy from December 2011 to May 2015, in which 334 patients accepted MIILE and 285 patients accepted open Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (OILE). General characteristics, surgical data, complication rates, and survival were analyzed. Differences in general characteristics between groups were not significant. Intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.01), postoperative volume of drainage for the first day (P < 0.01), time to drain removal (P ≤ 0.01), wound infection rate (P = 0.04), and length of hospital stay (P < 0.01) were significantly reduced in the MIILE group. There were no statistically significant differences in general morbidity (P = 0.56), the total swept lymph nodes (P = 0.47), mortality (P = 0.34), and survival rate at 3 years (P = 0.63). MIILE is a safe and feasible method for the treatment of esophageal cancer, in which good outcomes were reported and some advantages were found over the open procedure.

Total minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: approaches and outcomes

Since the introduction of minimally invasive esophagectomy 25 years ago, its use has been reported in several high volume centers. With only one published randomized control trial and five meta-analyses comparing its outcomes to open esophagectomy, available level I evidence is very limited. Available technical approaches include total minimally invasive transthoracic (Ivor Lewis or McKeown) or transhiatal esophagectomy; several hybrid options are available with one portion of the procedure completed via an open approach. A review of available level I evidence with focus on total minimally invasive esophagectomy is presented. The old debate regarding the superiority of a transthoracic versus transhiatal approach to esophagectomy may have been settled by minimally invasive esophagectomy as only few centers are reporting on the latter being utilized. The studies with the highest level of evidence available currently show that minimally invasive techniques via a transthoracic approach are associated with less overall morbidity, fewer pulmonary complications, and shorter hospital stays than open esophagectomy. There appears to be no detrimental effect on oncologic outcomes and possibly an added benefit derived by improved lymph node retrieval. Quality of life improvements may also translate into improved survival, but no conclusive evidence exists to support this claim. Robotic and hybrid techniques have also been implemented, but there currently is no evidence showing that these are superior to other minimally invasive techniques.

Prone position in thoracoscopic esophagectomy improves postoperative oxygenation and reduces pulmonary complications

BACKGROUND

While thoracoscopic esophagectomy is a widely performed surgical procedure, only few studies regarding the influence of body position on changes in circulation and breathing, after the surgery, have been reported. This study aimed at evaluating the effect of body position, during surgery, on the postoperative breathing functions of the chest.

METHODS

A total of 266 patients who underwent right-sided transthoracic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer from 2004 to 2012 were included in this study. Fifty-four of them underwent open thoracotomies in the left lateral decubitus position (Group O), 108 underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left lateral decubitus position (Group L) and 104 patients were treated by thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position (Group P). Two patients in Group P, who presented with intra-operative bleeding and underwent thoracotomy, were subsequently excluded from the pulmonary function analysis.

RESULTS

Two patients in Group P had to be changed from the prone position to the lateral decubitus position and underwent thoracotomy in order to control intra-operative bleeding. Despite the significantly longer chest operation period in Group P, total blood loss was significantly lower in this group when compared to Groups O and L. Furthermore, patients in Group P presented with significantly lower water balance during the perioperative period and markedly higher SpO₂/FiO₂ ratio after the surgery. The incidence of respiratory complications was significantly higher in Group O when compared to the other two groups; however, no significant differences were observed between the Groups L and P.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study demonstrate that thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position improves postoperative oxygenation and is therefore a potentially superior surgical approach.

Unusual postoperative complication of minimally invasive transhiatal esophagectomy and esophageal substitution for absolute dysphagia in a child with corrosive esophageal stricture

Esophageal substitution in children is a rare and challenging surgery. The minimally invasive approach for esophageal substitution is novel and reported from a few centers worldwide. While detailed report on the various complications of this approach has been discussed in adult literature, the pediatric experience is rather limited. We report the laparoscopic management of a rare complication which developed after laparoscopic esophagectomy and esophageal substitution. The timely recognition and management by the minimally invasive approach have been highlighted.

Video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy: keynote lecture

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) by thoracoscopy after neoadjuvant therapy results in significant short-term advantages such as a lower incidence of pulmonary infections and a better quality of life (QoL) with the same completeness of resection. After 1 year, a better QoL is still observed for MIE in comparison with the open approach, while having the same survival. Seven issues about implementation of MIE for cancer require discussion: (1) choice of the extension of esophageal resection and use of neoadjuvant therapy; (2) reasons to approach the esophageal cancer by MIE; (3) determining the best minimally invasive approach for gastro-esophageal junction cancers; (4) implementation of evidence-based MIE; (5) standardization of the surgical anatomy of the esophagus based on MIE; (6) future lines of research of MIE; and (7) learning process. In the time of imaging-integrated surgery it is clear that the MIE approach should be increasingly implemented in all centers worldwide having an adequate volume of patients and expertise.

Use of single-lumen tube for minimally invasive and hybrid esophagectomies with prone thoracoscopic dissection: case series

Minimally invasive and hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a technically challenging procedure. Anesthesia for the same is equally challenging due to special requirements of the video-assisted thoracoscopic technique used and shared operative and respiratory fields. Standard ventilatory strategy for this kind of surgery has been 1-lung ventilation with the help of a double-lumen tube. Prone positioning for thoracoscopic dissection facilitates gravity-dependant collapse of the operative side lung induced by a unilateral capnothorax, thus making the use of single-lumen endotracheal tube a feasible option for this surgery. We report our experience of 10 consecutive cases of minimally invasive esophagectomy conducted in prone position at our center and the use of single-lumen endotracheal tube for ventilation.

Outcomes of thoracoscopic esophagectomy in prone position with laparoscopic gastric mobilization for esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes of thoracoscopic esophagectomy performed in the prone position (TSE-PP) followed by laparoscopic gastric mobilization (LGM) compared with open thoracotomy and LGM, for esophageal cancers.

METHODS

We reviewed the records of 105 consecutive patients who underwent esophagectomy with LGM for esophageal cancer at Kochi Medical School. Among the study patients, 60 patients underwent TSE-PP, while 45 underwent open thoracotomy (OPEN group). The perioperative outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

Compared to the OPEN group, the TSE-PP group had lower blood loss (TSE-PP, 150 mL; OPEN, 430 mL; P < 0.001), longer operative time (TSE-PP, 609 min; OPEN, 570 min; P = 0.012), more lymph nodes dissected around the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (TSE-PP, 6; OPEN, 2; P < 0.001), and a shorter length of hospital stay (TSE-PP, 16.5 days; OPEN, 35 days; P < 0.001). The incidence of postoperative complications was similar in the two groups. Though the recurrence rate and overall survival were not significantly different in the two groups, the TSE-PP group had better overall survival rates than the OPEN group (P = 0.122).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent TSE-PP with LGM for esophageal cancers recovered earlier after surgery compared to those who underwent open thoracotomy with LGM.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate outcomes of minimally invasive approaches to esophagectomy using population-level data.

METHODS

Multivariable regression modeling was used to determine predictors associated with the use of minimally invasive approaches for patients in the National Cancer Data Base who underwent resection of middle and distal clinical T13N03M0 esophageal cancers from 2010 to 2012. Perioperative outcomes and 3-year survival were compared between propensity-matched groups of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) or open esophagectomy (OE). A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of using robotic-assisted operations as part of the minimally invasive approach.

RESULTS

Among 4,266 patients included, 1,308 (30.6%) underwent MIE. It was more likely to be used in patients treated at academic (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 10.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.2-33.1) or comprehensive cancer facilities (adjusted OR, 6.4; 95% CI, 2.6-21.1). Compared with propensity-matched patients who underwent OE, patients who underwent MIE had significantly more lymph nodes examined (15 versus 13; p = 0.016) and shorter hospital lengths of stay (10 days versus 11 days; p = 0.046) but similar resection margin positivity, readmission, and 30-day mortality (all p > 0.05). Survival was similar between the matched groups at 3 years for both adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (p > 0.05). Compared with MIE without robotic assistance, use of a robotic approach was not associated with any significant differences in perioperative outcomes (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of minimally invasive techniques to perform esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is associated with modestly improved perioperative outcomes without compromising survival.

Techniques and short-term outcomes for total minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophageal resection in distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers: pooled data from six European centers

Introduction

Esophagectomy for cancer can be performed in a two-stage procedure with an intrathoracic anastomosis: the Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. A growing incidence of distal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas and increasing use of minimally invasive techniques have prompted interest in this procedure. The aim of this study was to assess short-term results of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL).

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed from June 2007 until September 2014, including patients that underwent MIE-IL for distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer in six different hospitals in the Netherlands and Spain. Data were collected with regard to operative techniques, pathology and postoperative complications.

Results

In total, 282 patients underwent MIE-IL, of which 90.2 % received neoadjuvant therapy. Anastomotic leakage was observed in 43 patients (15.2 %), of whom 13 patients (4.6 %) had empyema, necessitating thoracotomy for decortication. With an aggressive treatment of complications, the 30-day and in-hospital mortality rate was 2.1 %. An R0-resection was obtained in 92.5 % of the patients. After neoadjuvant therapy, 20.1 % of patients had a complete response.

Conclusions

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for distal esophageal and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinomas is an upcoming approach for reducing morbidity caused by laparotomy and thoracotomy. Anastomotic leakage rate is still high possibly due to technical diversity of anastomotic techniques, and a high percentage of patients treated by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. An aggressive approach to complications leads to a low mortality of 2.1 %. Further improvement and standardization in the anastomotic technique are needed in order to perform a safe intrathoracic anastomosis.

Sentinel node biopsy during thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy for advanced esophageal cancer

Background

Omitting extensive lymph node dissection could reduce esophagectomy morbidity in patients without lymph node metastases. Sentinel node biopsy may identify abdominal or thoracic lymph node metastases, thereby differentiating treatment. Feasibility of this approach was investigated in Western European esophageal cancer patients with advanced disease, without lymph node metastases at diagnostic work-up.

Methods

The sentinel node biopsy was performed in eight esophageal cancer patients with cT1-3N0 disease. One day pre-operatively, Tc-99m-labeled nanocolloid was endoscopically injected around the tumor. Lymphoscintigraphy was performed 1 and 3 h after injection. All patients underwent robotic thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy with two-field lymph node dissection. Intraoperatively, sentinel nodes were detected by gamma probe. The resection specimen was analyzed for remaining activity by scintigraphy and gamma probe.

Results

Visualization rates of lymphoscintigraphy 1 and 3 h after tracer injection were 88 and 100 %, respectively. Intraoperative identification rate was 38 %. Postoperative identification was possible in all patients using the gamma probe to analyze the resection specimen. In 5/8 patients, lymph node metastases were found at histopathology, none of which was detected by the sentinel node biopsy. No adverse events related to the sentinel node biopsy were observed.

Conclusions

In our advanced esophageal cancer patients who underwent thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy, the sentinel node biopsy did not predict lymph node status. Probably the real sentinel node could not be identified due to localization adjacent to the primary tumor or bypassing due to metastatic tumor involvement. Therefore, we consider the sentinel node biopsy not feasible in advanced esophageal cancer.

Intraoperative Endoscopic Botox Injection During Total Esophagectomy Prevents the Need for Pyloromyotomy or Dilatation

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy may lead to impairment in gastric emptying unless pyloric drainage is performed. Pyloric drainage may be technically challenging during minimally invasive esophagectomy and can add morbidity. We sought to determine the effectiveness of intraoperative endoscopic injection of botulinum toxin into the pylorus during robotic-assisted esophagectomy as an alternative to surgical pyloric drainage.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with adenocarcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction who underwent robotic-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy (RATE) without any surgical pyloric drainage. Patients with and without intraoperative endoscopic injection of 200 units of botulinum toxin in 10 cc of saline (BOTOX group) were compared to those that did not receive any pyloric drainage (noBOTOX group). Main outcome measure was the incidence of postoperative pyloric stenosis; secondary outcomes included operative and oncologic parameters, length of stay (LOS), morbidity, and mortality.

RESULTS

From November 2006 to August 2014, 41 patients (6 females) with a mean age of 65 years underwent RATE without surgical drainage of the pylorus. There were 14 patients in the BOTOX group and 27 patients in the noBOTOX group. Mean operative time was not different between the comparison groups. There was one conversion to open surgery in the BOTOX group. No pyloric dysfunction occurred in the BOTOX group postoperatively, and eight stenoses in the noBOTOX group (30%) required endoscopic therapy (P < .05). There were no differences in incidence of anastomotic strictures or anastomotic leaks. One patient in group noBOTOX required pyloroplasty 3 months after esophagectomy. There was one death in the noBOTOX group postoperatively (30-day mortality 2.4%). Mean LOS was 9.6 days, and BOTOX patients were discharged earlier (7.4 versus 10.7, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative endoscopic injection of botulinum toxin into the pylorus during RATE is feasible, safe, and effective and can prevent the need for pyloromyotomy.