Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

Outcomes after total robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched comparison with hybrid robotic esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) reduces postoperative respiratory complications and enables meticulous mediastinal lymphadenectomy. However, whether adding a robotic abdominal procedure to a robotic thoracic procedure can result in better outcomes is unclear. We examined outcomes after total-RAMIE (T-RAMIE) and compared them with the outcomes after hybrid-RAMIE (H-RAMIE).

METHODS

Total of 227 patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were included. T-RAMIE was defined as esophagectomy performed robotically in both the thoracic and abdominal cavities. Laparotomy was used instead of the robotic procedure in H-RAMIE. T-RAMIE was performed in 144 patients (63.4%), and propensity score matching produced 49 matched pairs from each group. Early and long-term clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

T-RAMIE was mostly performed for upper or mid-thoracic squamous cell carcinoma (n=119, 82.6%) and cervical anastomosis, and three-field lymphadenectomy was performed in 113 (78.5%) and 54 (37.5%) patients, respectively. One laparotomy conversion was necessary because of severe obesity. The propensity-matched analysis demonstrated that T-RAMIE showed a comparable 90-day mortality rate with H-RAMIE (0% vs. 6.1%, P=0.083). The incidence rates of total (63.3% vs. 63.3%; P=1.000), abdominal (8.2% vs. 14.3%; P=0.366), and respiratory complications (10.2% vs. 10.2%; P=1.000) were not different between two groups. The number of harvested abdominal lymph nodes was similar (12.4±9.0 vs. 12.3±8.9; P=0.992). Median follow-up duration for T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE was 16.3 and 23.5 months, respectively. Two-year overall survival rate (86.2% in T-RAMIE vs. 77.6% in H-RAMIE; P=0.150) and recurrence-free survival (76.6% in T-RAMIE vs. 62.2% in H-RAMIE; P=0.280) were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this matched analysis, T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE showed comparable early outcomes and long-term survival. The low tendencies of early mortality and conversion rate of T-RAMIE suggest that it might be a safe alternative to open stomach mobilization and abdominal lymphadenectomy.

Treatment of early stage (T1) esophageal adenocarcinoma: Personalizing the best therapy choice

Esophagectomy is considered the primary form of management for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC); however, the surgery is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. For patients with early-stage EAC, endoscopic resection (ER) presents a potential curative treatment option that is less invasive and carries fewer risks procedure related risks, but it is associated with higher rates of cancer recurrence following the procedure. For some patients, age and comorbidities may prevent them from having esophagectomy as a treatment option, while other patients may be operative candidates but do not wish to undergo esophagectomy for a variety of reasons related to their values and preferences. Furthermore, while anxiety of cancer recurrence following ER may significantly diminish a patient’s quality of life (QOL), so might the morbidity surrounding esophagectomy. In addition to considering health status, patient preferences, and impacts on QOL, physicians and patients must also consider what treatments would be both beneficial and available to the patient, considering esophagectomy methods-minimally invasive vs open-or the use of chemoradiotherapy in addition to ER. Our article reviews and summarizes available treatment options for patients with early EAC and their potential effects on the health and wellbeing of patients based on the current data. We conclude with a request for more research of available options for early EAC patients, the conditions that determine when each option should be employed, and their effects not only on patient health but also QOL.

Laparoscopically assisted versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer-the Randomised Oesophagectomy: Minimally Invasive or Open (ROMIO) study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial (RCT)

INTRODUCTION

Surgery (oesophagectomy), with neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy, is the main curative treatment for patients with oesophageal cancer. Several surgical approaches can be used to remove an oesophageal tumour. The Ivor Lewis (two-phase procedure) is usually used in the UK. This can be performed as an open oesophagectomy (OO), a laparoscopically assisted oesophagectomy (LAO) or a totally minimally invasive oesophagectomy (TMIO). All three are performed in the National Health Service, with LAO and OO the most common. However, there is limited evidence about which surgical approach is best for patients in terms of survival and postoperative health-related quality of life.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will undertake a UK multicentre randomised controlled trial to compare LAO with OO in adult patients with oesophageal cancer. The primary outcome is patient-reported physical function at 3 and 6 weeks postoperatively and 3 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include: postoperative complications, survival, disease recurrence, other measures of quality of life, spirometry, success of patient blinding and quality assurance measures. A cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed comparing LAO with OO. We will embed a randomised substudy to evaluate the safety and evolution of the TMIO procedure and a qualitative recruitment intervention to optimise patient recruitment. We will analyse the primary outcome using a multi-level regression model. Patients will be monitored for up to 3 years after their surgery.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study received ethical approval from the South-West Franchay Research Ethics Committee. We will submit the results for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10386621.

Efficacy of hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy vs open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The first line treatment regimen for esophageal cancer is still surgical resection and the choice of surgical scheme depends on surgeon. Now the efficacy comparison of hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) and open esophagectomy (OE) is still controversial.

AIM

To compare the perioperative and postoperative outcomes of HMIE and OE in patients with esophageal cancer.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for related articles. The odds ratio (OR) or standard mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to evaluate the effectiveness of HMIE and OE.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies including a total of 2397 patients were selected. HMIE was significantly associated with less blood loss (SMD = -0.43, 95%CI: -0.66, -0.20; P = 0.0002) and lower incidence of pulmonary complications (OR = 0.72, 95%CI: 0.57, 0.90; P = 0.004). No significant differences were seen in the lymph node yield (SMD = 0.11, 95%CI: -0.08, 0.30; P = 0.26), operation time (SMD = 0.24, 95%CI: -0.14, 0.61; P = 0.22), total complications rate (OR = 0.68, 95%CI: 0.46, 0.99; P = 0.05), cardiac complication rate (OR = 0.91, 95%CI: 0.62, 1.34; P = 0.64), anastomotic leak rate (OR = 0.95, 95%CI: 0.67, 1.35; P = 0.78), duration of intensive care unit stay (SMD = -0.01, 95%CI: -0.21, 0.19; P = 0.93), duration of hospital stay (SMD = -0.13, 95%CI: -0.28, 0.01; P = 0.08), and total mortality rates (OR = 0.70, 95%CI: 0.47, 1.06; P = 0.09) between the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the OE, HMIE shows less blood loss and pulmonary complications. However, further studies are necessary to evaluate the long-term oncologic outcomes of HMIE.

Surgical and Surgeon-Related Factors Related to Long-Term Survival in Esophageal Cancer: A Review

Esophagectomy is the mainstay of curative treatment for most patients with a diagnosis of esophageal cancer. This procedure needs to be optimized to secure the best possible chance of cure for these patients. Research comparing various surgical approaches of esophagectomy generally has failed to identify any major differences in long-term prognosis. Comparisons between minimally invasive and open esophagectomy, transthoracic and transhiatal approaches, radical and moderate lymphadenectomy, and high and moderate hospital volume generally have provided only moderate alterations in long-term survival rates after adjustment for established prognostic factors. In contrast, some direct surgeon-related factors, which remain independent of known prognostic factors, seem to influence the long-term survival more strongly in esophageal cancer. Annual surgeon volume is strongly prognostic, and recent studies have suggested the existence of long surgeon proficiency gain curves for achievement of stable 5-year survival rates and possibly also a prognostic influence of surgeon age and weekday of surgery. The available literature indicates a potentially more critical role of the individual surgeon’s skills than that of variations in surgical approach for optimizing the long-term survival after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. This finding points to the value of paying more attention to how the skills of the individual esophageal cancer surgeon can best be achieved and maintained. Careful selection and evaluation of the most suitable candidates, appropriate and structured training programs, and regular peer-review assessments of experienced surgeons may be helpful in this respect.

Comparison of Outcomes with Semi-mechanical and Circular Stapled Intrathoracic Esophagogastric Anastomosis following Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Several techniques have been described for esophagogastric anastomosis following esophagectomy. This study compared the outcomes of circular stapled anastomoses with semi-mechanical technique using a linear stapler.

METHODS

Perioperative data were extracted from a contemporaneously collected database of all consecutive esophagectomies for cancer with intrathoracic anastomoses performed in the Trent Oesophago-Gastric Unit between January 2015 and April 2018. Anastomotic techniques: circular stapled versus semi-mechanical, were evaluated and outcomes were compared. The primary outcome was anastomotic leak rate. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic stricture, overall complication rates, length of stay (LOS) and 30 day all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-nine consecutive esophagectomies with intrathoracic anastomosis were performed during the study period. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score, Charlson comorbidity index and neoadjuvant therapies received. Circular stapled anastomoses were performed in 85 patients, while 74 patients received a semi-mechanical anastomosis. Clavien-Dindo complications II or more were higher in the circular stapled group (p = 0.02). There were 16 (10%) anastomotic leaks overall, three (4%) in semi-mechanical group versus 13 (15%) in the circular stapled group (p < 0.019). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of LOS, 30-day mortality or the need for endoscopic dilatation of the anastomosis at 3 months follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The move from a circular stapled to a semi-mechanical intrathoracic anastomosis has been associated with a reduced postoperative anastomotic leak rate following esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Systematic assessment of complications after robotic-assisted total versus distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: A retrospective propensity score-matched study using Clavien-Dindo classification

BACKGROUND

Despite increasing evidence demonstrated robot-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) is safe and feasible for the treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC), robot-assisted total gastrectomy (RATG) remains a challenging procedure due to its technical difficulties and possible postoperative complications (POCs). This study aimed to systematically evaluate POCs following RATG.

METHODS

Between January 2017 and January 2019, 319 AGC patients with pathological stage T2-4aN0-3M0 who underwent RADG or RATG were enrolled. POCs were stratified using the Clavien-Dindo classification. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to reduce confounding differences.

RESULTS

After matching, 266 patients met the criteria for further analysis. Ultimately, 64 patients (24.1%) who developed POCs had 126 clinical manifestation events. Overall the POCs rate was significantly greater after RATG in comparison with RADG (29.3% vs. 18.8%; P = 0.045), and more major POCs (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ IIIa) were observed in the RATG group (14.3% vs. 5.3%; P = 0.013). The POCs were then classified into local and systemic POCs. The rates of local POCs (35.3% vs. 19.5%; P = 0.004) and systemic POCs (24.8% vs. 15.0%; P = 0.046) were significantly higher in the RATG group than the RADG group. Subgroup analysis showed that the anastomotic leakage rate was higher after RATG (5.3% vs. 0.8%; P = 0.031), whereas the remaining POCs were similar between the two groups. Patients with higher POCs significantly had longer postoperative length of stay (R = 0.895, P = 0.003). Multivariate analysis confirmed age, extent of resection, and TNM stage were risk factors for all POCs.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrated that RATG is technically feasible and safe for treatment of AGC with acceptable morbidity and mortality rates. The POCs rate of RATG was higher than RADG, especially for anastomotic leakage. More effective anastomotic techniques are needed in RATG to prevent leakage.

Using Benchmarking Standards to Evaluate Transition to Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is performed in nearly 50% of patients worldwide. The effectiveness of the technique arises from a single randomized control trial and multiple single series cohorts. Consistent reporting of complications is varied. We describe our experience of transitioning to MIE compared with open esophagectomy (OE) with the use of Esophageal Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) standardized complication benchmark definitions.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2017, all patients undergoing esophagectomy were identified with the use of a prospectively curated database. Complications were defined by the ECCG and graded with the Clavien-Dindo (most severe complication) and comprehensive complication index (complexity of complications during hospital stay).

RESULTS

Of 383 patients, 299 (76%) were men with a median age of 64.5 years (range, 56-72 years). MIE was performed in 49.6%. No differences were found in age, histologic finding (P = .222), pT stage (P = .136), or nodal positivity (P = .918). Stage 3 cancers accounted for 42.0% of OEs and 47.9% of MIEs. A thoracic anastomosis was more frequent in MIEs (156 of 190; 82.1%) than in OEs (113 of 193; 58.5%; P = .001). Frequency, severity (Clavien-Dindo), and complexity (comprehensive complication index) of complications were better in the MIE group, without compromising operative outcomes. No differences were identified in individual complication groupings or grade in MIEs compared with OEs (pneumonia: 19.5% versus 26.9% ([P = .09]; intensive care unit readmission: 7.4% versus 9.3% [P = .519]; atrial fibrillation: 11.1% versus 6.7% [P = .082], or grade of leak [P = .99]).

CONCLUSIONS

These results compare favorably to those reported by ECCG. MIE can be the standard approach for surgical management of esophageal cancer. Introduction of the approach in each surgeon's practice should be benchmarked to international standards.

[Fluorescence angiography for esophageal anastomoses : Perfusion evaluation of the gastric conduit with indocyanine green]

BACKGROUND

The incidence of esophageal cancer continues to increase. Despite increasing experience in esophageal surgery and perioperative management, anastomotic leakage remains a frequent and severe complication.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article is to demonstrate the current role of fluorescence angiography (FA) with indocyanine green (ICG) in the assessment of esophageal anastomoses. The main focus is on the evaluation of the perfusion situation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search was carried out in PubMed and Medline on FA and ICG, especially with respect to current subjective and objective interpretation approaches of FA against the background of own research.

RESULTS

The rate of anastomotic leakage remains high despite modern surgical procedures. Assessment of neoesophageal perfusion with FA can significantly reduce the rate of anastomotic leakage. At present, FA is mostly subjectively applied in small case studies. The study situation is heterogeneous. Randomized studies do not so far exist.

CONCLUSION

The use of FA with ICG is suitable for evaluation of perfusion of the gastric tube. The implementation is simple and can be standardized. Prospective, randomized trials and objective quantification are needed in the future in order to clarify the potential of the technique.

Cardiorespiratory Comorbidity and Postoperative Complications following Esophagectomy: a European Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The impact of cardiorespiratory comorbidity on operative outcomes after esophagectomy remains controversial. This study investigated the effect of cardiorespiratory comorbidity on postoperative complications for patients treated for esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A European multicenter cohort study from five high-volume esophageal cancer centers including patients treated between 2010 and 2017 was conducted. The effect of cardiorespiratory comorbidity and respiratory function upon postoperative outcomes was assessed.

RESULTS

In total 1590 patients from five centers were included; 274 (17.2%) had respiratory comorbidity, and 468 (29.4%) had cardiac comorbidity. Respiratory comorbidity was associated with increased risk of overall postoperative complications, anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, pneumonia, increased Clavien-Dindo score, and critical care and hospital length of stay. After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, respiratory comorbidity was associated with increased risk of anastomotic leak [odds ratio (OR) 1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-3.04], pneumonia (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.10-2.47), and any pulmonary complication (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.04-2.22), an effect which was not observed following neoadjuvant chemotherapy or surgery alone. Cardiac comorbidity was associated with increased risk of cardiovascular and pulmonary complications, respiratory failure, and Clavien-Dindo score ≥ IIIa. Among all patients, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)/forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio > 70% was associated with reduced risk of overall postoperative complications, cardiovascular complications, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary complications, and pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that cardiorespiratory comorbidity and impaired pulmonary function are associated with increased risk of postoperative complications after esophagectomy performed in high-volume European centers. Given the observed interaction with neoadjuvant approach, these data indicate a potentially modifiable index of perioperative risk.

Ivor Lewis esophagectomy patients are particularly vulnerable to respiratory impairment - a comparison to major lung resection

Pulmonary complications and a poor clinical outcome are common in response to transthoracic esophagectomy, but their etiology is not well understood. Clinical observation suggests that patients undergoing pulmonary resection, a surgical intervention with similarities to the thoracic part of esophagectomy, fare much better, but this has not been investigated in detail. A retrospective single-center analysis of 181 consecutive patients after right-sided thoracotomy for either Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (n = 83) or major pulmonary resection (n = 98) was performed. An oxygenation index <300 mm Hg was used to indicate respiratory impairment. When starting surgery, respiratory impairment was seen more frequently in patients undergoing major pulmonary resection compared to esophagectomy patients (p = 0.009). On postoperative days one to ten, however, esophagectomy caused higher rates of respiratory impairment (p < 0.05) resulting in a higher cumulative incidence of postoperative respiratory impairment for patients after esophagectomy (p < 0.001). Accordingly, esophagectomy patients were characterized by longer ventilation times (p < 0.0001), intensive care unit and total postoperative hospital stays (both p < 0.0001). In conclusion, the postoperative clinical course including respiratory impairment after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy is significantly worse than that after major pulmonary resection. A detailed investigation of the underlying causes is required to improve the outcome of esophagectomy.

[Updated German S3 guidelines on esophageal cancer and supplements from a surgical perspective]

The updated German S3 guidelines recommend transthoracic subtotal esophagectomy with 2‑field lymphadenectomy for surgical treatment of esophageal cancer in patients with squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric (AEG type I) junction of the middle and lower third. For AEG type III transhiatal extended total gastrectomy with distal esophageal resection is favored. Patients with AEG type II can be treated by both procedures under the prerequisite that an R0 resection can be achieved. A limited resection of the distal esophagus and the proximal stomach can only be considered in cT1 N0 M0 possibly cT2 AEG junction without an oncological risk constellation, i.e. grade G1/G2, intestinal type and no poorly cohesive carcinoma, because the rate of lymph node metastasis at the distal stomach is less than 2%. Minimally invasive procedures provide advantages compared to open esophagectomy due to the lower rate of postoperative total and especially pulmonary complications. This is true for hybrid esophagectomy (laparoscopy and thoracotomy) versus open access in cases of intrathoracic anastomoses and for total minimally invasive esophagectomy including robotic techniques versus open access in cervical esophagogastrostomy.

Effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiation on preoperative pulmonary physiology, postoperative respiratory complications and quality of life in patients with oesophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

It remains controversial whether neoadjuvant chemoradiation (nCRT) for oesophageal cancer influences operative morbidity, in particular pulmonary, and quality of life. This study combined clinical outcome data with systematic evaluation of pulmonary physiology to determine the impact of nCRT on pulmonary physiology and clinical outcomes in locally advanced oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

Consecutive patients treated between 2010 and 2016 were included. Three-dimensional conformal radiation was standard, with a lung dose-volume histogram of V20 less than 25 per cent, and total radiation between 40 and 41·4 Gy. Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) were assessed at baseline and 1 month after nCRT. Radiation-induced lung injury (grade 2 or greater), comprehensive complications index (CCI) and pulmonary complications were monitored prospectively. Health-related quality of life was assessed among disease-free patients in survivorship.

RESULTS

Some 228 patients were studied. Comparing pulmonary physiology values before with those after nCRT, FEV1 decreased from mean(s.d.) 96·8(17·7) to 91·5(20·4) per cent (-3·6(10·6) per cent; P < 0·001), FVC from 104·9(15·6) to 98·1(19·8) per cent (-3·2(11·9) per cent; P = 0·005) and DLCO from 97·6(20·7) to 82·2(20·4) per cent (-14·8(14·0) per cent; P < 0·001). Five patients (2·2 per cent) developed radiation-induced lung injury precluding surgical resection. Smoking (P = 0·005) and increased age (P < 0·001) independently predicted percentage change in DLCO. Carboplatin and paclitaxel with 41·4 Gy resulted in a greater DLCO decline than cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil with 40 Gy (P = 0·001). On multivariable analysis, post-treatment DLCO predicted CCI (P = 0·006), respiratory failure (P = 0·020) and reduced physical function in survivorship (P = 0·047).

CONCLUSION

These data indicate that modern nCRT alters pulmonary physiology, in particular diffusion capacity, which is linked to short- and longer-term clinical consequences, highlighting a potentially modifiable index of risk.

Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy-Surgical Technique and Results

BACKGROUND

Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) has been proven to be superior when compared with open esophagectomy, with a significant reduction of postoperative morbidity. In HMIE, the laparotomy is replaced by a minimally invasive laparoscopic approach. The radical mediastinal resection plus reconstruction is performed by a thoracic approach through a muscle-sparing thoracotomy. In this instructional article, we describe the surgical technique of HMIE in detail in order to facilitate possible adoption of the procedure by other surgeons. In addition, we give the monocentric results of our own practice.

METHODS

Between 2013 and 2018, HMIE was performed in 157 patients. The morbidity and mortality data of the procedure is shown in a retrospective monocentric analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 54% of patients had at least one perioperative complication. Anastomotic leak was evident in 1.9%, and a single patient had focal conduit necrosis of the gastric pull-up. Postoperative pulmonary morbidity was 31%. Pneumonia was found in 17%. The 90 day mortality was 2.5%. Wound infection rate was 3%, and delayed gastric emptying occurred in 17% of patients. In follow up, 12.7% presented with diaphragmatic herniation of the bowel, requiring laparoscopic hernia reduction and hiatal reconstruction and colopexy several months after surgery.

CONCLUSION

HMIE is a highly reliable technique, not only for the resection part but especially in terms of safety in reconstruction and anastomosis. For esophageal surgeons with experience in minimally invasive anti-reflux procedures and obesity surgery, HMIE is easy and fast to learn and adopt.

Extent of lymphadenectomy for Barrett's cancer

Adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction (EGJ) has become the predominant histological cell type in western countries due to the prevalence of obesity, gastroesophageal reflux disease and Barrett's esophagus. There is some evidence that this is increasing in the East as well. Surgery aims at achieving an R0 resection with clear margins, together with adequate and appropriate lymphadenectomy. Siewert type I and II cancers are more likely to be associated with Barrett's esophagus (especially in western countries), while type III cancers are mostly proximal gastric cancers that have grown upwards to involve the EGJ. For type I cancers, most surgeons would perform an esophagectomy, with at least an infra-carinal lymphadenectomy. It is more controversial for type II tumors, with some surgeons preferring an esophagectomy, while others may opt for a proximal or total radical gastrectomy via an abdominal approach. All procedures can be performed using open or minimally invasive methods. In addition to oncologic reasons, the chosen surgical approach also depends on expertise available, safety issues, and postoperative quality-of-life considerations. More data are needed in this area. How to integrate knowledge and also multimodality treatment strategies is an active area of research.

Paravertebral catheter analgesia for minimally invasive Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy

Background

Oesophagectomy is a major complex operation associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Epidural analgesia has long been the gold standard postoperative analgesia but is associated with side-effects like hypotension, epidural haematoma and infection. In an attempt to lower morbidity and enhance recovery postoperatively, we have adopted the use of paravertebral catheter analgesia (PVCA) for patients undergoing totally minimal invasive oesophagectomy (TMIO).

Methods

Our objective was to review the current literature about the use of both PVCA and epidural analgesia. In addition, we evaluated the effect of PVCA in a large group of patients undergoing TMIO for cancer. We reviewed the records of 100 consecutive patients who had a TMIO with PVCA, spinal morphine, and PCA. Prospective independent scoring of postoperative pain, length of stay, high-dependency unit (HDU) stay, PVCA failure, the use of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), and the use of vasoconstrictor medication postoperatively was analysed.

Results

One hundred consecutive patients received PVCA with PCA after the TMIO. Catheter related failures occurred in 4 cases. The median pain score over each of the 5 days were 0. The average pain score was highest in the first 24 hours and decreased over the next 4 days postoperatively. The use of PCA was highest in the first 2 days and reduced daily over the subsequent 3 days. Seven patients required rescue analgesia in the form of intercostal nerve (ICN) block. Spinal morphine was successful in 94% of cases. Vasoconstrictors were required in 19% on day 1 and 3% on day 2, postoperatively.

Conclusions

Intraoperative placement of PVCA results in good postoperative pain control after a TMIO. This technique is simple, safe, reproducible and with very low failure rates. Therefore, it should be used instead of epidural catheter analgesia.