Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients

Is Chemical Pyloroplasty Necessary for Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy?

BACKGROUND

Many centers use botulinum toxin for chemical pyloroplasty in minimally invasive esophagectomies as prophylaxis against delayed gastric emptying. No previous studies have compared botulinum toxin injection with no pyloric intervention for patients treated with a combined laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approach. The authors hypothesized that chemical pyloroplasty does not improve outcomes for these patients.

METHODS

The study investigated patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomies from September 2009 to June 2015. Delayed gastric emptying was defined as inability to tolerate a soft diet by postoperative day 10, as corroborated by esophagram, upper endoscopy, or both. Data were compared using Student's t test, χ ² analysis, and Mann-Whitney U test where appropriate.

RESULTS

The study identified 71 patients treated with minimally invasive esophagectomy: 35 patients with chemical pyloroplasty treated from September 2009 to January 2014 and 36 patients without pyloric intervention from February 2014 to June 2015. The groups were statistically similar in age, gender distribution, T stage, percentage of patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy, body mass index, preoperative weight loss, preoperative serum albumin, and preoperative placement of feeding tubes (all p > 0.05). The overall incidence of delayed gastric emptying was low in both groups: 8.6% (3/35) of the patients with chemical pyloroplasty versus 5.6% (2/36) of the patients with no pyloric intervention (p = 0.62). The two groups also did not differ significantly in the development of aspiration pneumonia or the need for pyloric intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

In a well-matched cohort study with a historical control group, use of botulinum toxin for chemical pyloroplasty in minimally invasive esophagectomies was not associated with improved outcomes related to the pylorus versus no pyloric intervention. Although preliminary, these data suggest that chemical pyloroplasty is not necessary in minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Simple preoperative risk scale accurately predicts perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy

Surgery remains one of the major treatment options available to patients with esophageal cancer, with high mortality in certain cohorts. The aim of this study was to develop a simple preoperative risk scale based on patient factors, hospital factors, and tumor pathology to predict the risk of perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was used to create the risk scale. Patients who underwent open or laparoscopic transhiatal and transthoracic esophageal resection were identified using International Classification of Diseases, 9th edition codes. Patients <18 years and those with peritoneal disease were excluded. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to define a predictive model of perioperative mortality and to create a simple risk scale. From 1998 to 2011, a total of 23 751 patients underwent esophagectomy. The observed overall perioperative mortality rate for this cohort was 7.7%. Minimally invasive techniques, and operations performed in higher volume centers were protective, whereas increasing age, comorbidities and diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma were independent predictors of mortality. Based on this population, a risk scale from 0-16 was created. The calibration revealed a good agreement between the observed and risk scale-predicted probabilities. A set of sensitivity/specificity analyses was then performed to define normal (score 0-7) and high risk (score 8-16) patients for clinical practice. Mortality in patients with a score of 0-7 ranged from 1.3-7.6%, compared with 10.5-34.5% in patients with a score of 8-16. This simple preoperative risk scale may accurately predict the risk of perioperative mortality following esophagectomy for malignancy and can be used as a clinical tool for preoperative counseling.

Modified anastomotic technique for thoracolaparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: early outcomes and technical details

Thoracoscopic intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is a technically demanding operation; these technical requirements restrict the extensive application of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. In an attempt to reduce the difficulty of this surgical procedure, we developed a modified anastomotic technique for thoracolaparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. During the entirety of this modified approach, neither technically challenging operations such as intrathoracic suturing, or knotting, nor special instruments such as an OrVil system or a reverse-puncture head are required. Between Octomber 2015 and January 2016, 15 consecutive patients with cancer in the distal third of the esophagus or the gastric cardia underwent this modified surgical procedure. The good short-term outcomes that were achieved suggest that the modified anastomotic technique is safe and feasible for thoracolaparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Worldwide trends in surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer

The aim of this study was to evaluate the worldwide trends in surgical techniques for esophageal cancer surgery by comparing it to our survey from 2007. In addition, new questions were added for gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer. An international survey on surgery of esophageal and GEJ cancer was performed among surgical members of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Disease of the Esophagus, the International Gastric Cancer Association. Also, surgeons from personal networks were contacted. The participants filled out a web based questionnaire about surgical strategies for esophageal and gastroesophageal cancer. The overall response rate was 478/1147 (42%). The respondents represented 49 different countries and 6 different continents. The annual cumulative number of esophageal and gastric resections per surgeon was low (≤11) in 11%, medium (11-21) in 17%, and high (≥21) in 72% of respondents. In a subgroup analysis of esophageal surgeons the number of high volume surgeons increased from 45 to 54% over the past 7 years. The preferred lymph node dissection was two-field in 86%. A gastric conduit was the preferred method of reconstruction in 95%. In 2014, the preferred approach to esophagectomy was minimally invasive transthoracic in 43%, compared with 14% in 2007. In minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy the cervical anastomosis was favored in 54% of respondents in 2014 compared with 87% in 2007. The preferred technique of construction of the cervical anastomosis was hand-sewn in 64% and stapled in 36%, whereas the thoracic anastomosis was stapled in 77% and hand-sewn in 23%. The preferred surgical approach for Siewert type 1 tumors (5-1 cm proximal of the GEJ) was esophagectomy in 93% of respondents, whereas 6% favored gastrectomy and 3% combined a distal esophagectomy with a proximal gastrectomy. For Siewert type 2 tumors (1-2 cm from the GEJ) an extended gastrectomy was favored by 66% of respondents, followed by esophagectomy in 27% and total gastrectomy in 7%. Siewert type 3 tumors (2-5 cm distal of the GEJ) were preferably treated with gastrectomy in 90% of respondents, esophagectomy in 6%, and extended gastrectomy in 4%. The preferred curative surgical treatment of esophageal cancer is minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy with a two-field lymph node dissection and gastric conduit reconstruction. A strong worldwide trend toward minimally invasive surgery is observed. The preferred surgical treatment of GEJ tumors is esophagectomy for Siewert type 1 tumors and gastrectomy for Siewert type 3 tumors. The majority of surgeons favor an extended gastrectomy for Siewert type 2 tumors.

New approaches in esophageal carcinomas

New approaches in the treatment of esophageal cancer comprise endoscopy with refinements of esophagoscopic intraluminal resection by endoscopic submucosal dissection. Radical open surgery is more and more replaced by minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIO), especially in the hybrid technique with laparoscopic gastrolysis and transthoracic esophageal resection and gastric pull-up. Total MIO also in the robotic technique has not yet shown that it produces superior results than the hybrid technique. Fluorescent dye can improve the intraoperative visualization of the vascularization of the gastric conduit. The individualization of neoadjuvant therapy is the magic word in clinical research of multimodal treatment of esophageal cancer. This means response prediction based on molecular markers or clinical response evaluation. The documentation of the diversity of postoperative complications is now standardized by an international consensus. The value of enhanced recovery after surgery is not yet approved compared to conventional management.

Thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy and enhanced recovery after surgery

Thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy has already become a common procedure of minimally invasive esophagectomy. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a series of ways that use multidisciplinary care methods to minimize surgical stress and hasten recovery. ERAS has obvious advantages in decreasing postoperative complications, shortening postoperative hospital stay, reducing medical costs, and increasing the satisfaction of patients. Under the guidance of ERAS, thoracoscopic-laparoscopic esophagectomy combined with optimized measures taken in perioperative period will be the future development direction of esophagectomy.

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Adenocarcinomas of the Gastroesophageal Junction and Distal Esophagus: Notes on Technique

In the last three decades, with the advancement of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic surgery, minimally invasive approaches for benign and malignant diseases of the esophagus have been developed and more experience is starting to accumulate across the world. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has demonstrated acceptable lymph node retrieval, good postoperative outcomes, and low mortality. In this article, we review our preferred technique of MIE for adenocarcinomas of the gastroesophageal junction and distal esophagus.

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is the malignant tumor arising from the esophagus and has a poor prognosis. Squamous cell carcinoma and adenocarcinoma are the main subtypes of esophageal cancer with different risk factors. In the early stage, surgical resection is the most curative treatment modality. However, the procedure is considered an advanced and technically demanding surgery because esophageal cancer surgery includes esophagectomy, lymph node dissection, and a creation of esophageal conduit. Stomach is the commonest organ for the esophageal substitute. In open procedures, pulmonary complications and anastomotic failure are the most severe problems. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been introduced to decrease the postoperative pulmonary complications, but anastomotic failure remains a serious issue because of the extra-anatomical anastomosis between the esophagus and the conduit in the thorax or the neck.

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.

Recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node dissection in minimally invasive esophagectomy

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has become increasingly important in the treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. However, it's still controversial about the effects of recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node dissection in MIE. Patient was placed in the lateral prone position. RLN lymph node dissection was performed in MIE. MIE can get comparable results of RLN lymph node dissection as open surgery. The number of dissected lymph nodes is 9.8±4.3 pieces and the time of lymphadenectomy is about 24 mins. RLN lymph node dissection is feasible and safe in MIE. The helpful surgical techniques include clear exposure of RLN, good collaboration with assistant, esophageal suspension, and so on.

Intrathoracic versus Cervical ANastomosis after minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: study protocol of the ICAN randomized controlled trial

Background

Currently, a cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEA) is often performed after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). However, the CEA is associated with a considerable incidence of anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation and moderate functional results. An intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis (IEA) might reduce the incidence of anastomotic leakage, improve functional results and reduce costs. The objective of the ICAN trial is to compare anastomotic leakage and postoperative morbidity, mortality, quality of life and cost-effectiveness between CEA and IEA after MIE.

Methods/design

The ICAN trial is an open randomized controlled multicentre superiority trial, comparing CEA (control group) with IEA (intervention group) after MIE. All patients with esophageal cancer planning to undergo curative MIE are considered for inclusion. A total of 200 patients will be included in the study and randomized between the groups in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation, and secondary outcomes are (amongst others) other postoperative complications, new onset of organ failure, length of stay, mortality, benign strictures requiring dilatation, quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

Discussion

We hypothesize that an IEA after MIE is associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic leakage requiring reintervention or reoperation than a CEA. The trial is also designed to give answers to additional research questions regarding a possible difference in functional outcome, quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

Trial registration

Netherlands Trial Register: NTR4333. Registered on 23 December 2013.

Comparison of robot-assisted esophagectomy and thoracoscopic esophagectomy in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to compare robot-assisted esophagectomy (RE) with thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

METHODS

A total of 105 patients who underwent RE (n=62) or TE (n=43) due to ESCC were included in this study. Early postoperative outcomes and long-term survivals between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The RE and TE groups were comparable in preoperative clinical characteristics. Total operation times were not significantly different between the two groups (490 minutes in RE vs. 458 minutes in TE; P=0.118). The total number of dissected lymph nodes was significantly greater in the RE group (37.3±17.1 vs. 28.7±11.8; P=0.003), and intergroup differences were significant for numbers of lymph nodes dissected from the upper mediastinum (10.7±9.7 in RE vs. 6.3±9.3 in TE; P=0.032) and the abdomen (12.2±8.7 in RE vs. 7.8±7.1 in TE; P=0.007). Five-year overall survival was not different between the two groups (69% in RE and 59% in TE; P=0.737).

CONCLUSIONS

Better quality lymphadenectomy could be achieved in RE although survival benefit was not clear. Prospective randomized studies comparing the RE and TE are necessary.

Utilization of surgical treatment for local and locoregional esophageal cancer: Analysis of the National Cancer Data Base

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have suggested that esophagectomy is severely underused for patients with resectable esophageal cancer. The recent expansion of endoscopic local therapies, advances in surgical techniques, and improved postoperative outcomes have changed the therapeutic landscape. The impact of these developments and evolving treatment guidelines on national practice patterns is unknown.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with clinical stage 0 to III esophageal cancer were identified from the National Cancer Database (2004-2013). The receipt of potentially curative surgical treatment over time was analyzed, and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with surgical treatment.

RESULTS

The analysis included 52,122 patients. From 2004 to 2013, the overall rate of potentially curative surgical treatment increased from 36.4% to 47.4% (P < .001). For stage 0 disease, the receipt of esophagectomy decreased from 23.8% to 17.9% (P < .001), whereas the use of local therapies increased from 34.3% to 58.8% (P < .001). The use of surgical treatment increased from 43.4% to 61.8% (P < .001), from 36.1% to 45.0% (P < .001), and from 30.8% to 38.6% (P < .001) for patients with stage I, II, and III disease, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, divergent practice patterns and adherence to national guidelines were noted between academic and community facilities.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of potentially curative surgical treatment has increased for patients with stage 0 to III esophageal cancer. The expansion of local therapies has driven increased rates of surgical treatment for early-stage disease. Although the increased use of esophagectomy for more advanced disease is encouraging, significant variation persists at the patient and facility levels. Cancer 2017;123:410-419. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Improved Functional Results After Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Intrathoracic Versus Cervical Anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Both cervical esophagogastric anastomosis (CEA) and intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis (IEA) are used to restore gastrointestinal integrity following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). No prospective randomized data on functional outcome, postoperative morbidity, and mortality between these techniques are currently available.

METHODS

A comparison was conducted including all consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma of the distal esophagus or gastroesophageal junction undergoing MIE with CEA or MIE with IEA from October 2009 to July 2014 in 3 high-volume esophageal cancer centers. Functional outcome, postoperative morbidity, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

MIE with CEA was performed in 146 patients and MIE with IEA in 210 patients. The incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was 14.4% after CEA and 0% after IEA (p < 0.001). Dysphagia, dumping, and regurgitation were reported less frequently after IEA compared with CEA (p < 0.05). Dilatation of benign strictures occurred in 43.8% after CEA and this was 6.2% after IEA (p < 0.001). If a benign stricture was identified, it was dilated a median of 4 times in the CEA group and only once in the IEA group (p < 0.001). Anastomotic leakage for which reoperation was required occurred in 8.2% after CEA and in 11.4% after IEA (not significant). Median ICU stay, hospital stay, in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, and 90-day mortality were similar between the groups (not significant).

CONCLUSIONS

MIE with IEA was associated with better functional results than MIE with CEA with less dysphagia, less benign anastomotic strictures requiring fewer dilatations, and a lower incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. Other postoperative morbidity and mortality did not differ between the groups.

Mortality after esophagectomy is heavily impacted by center volume: retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample

BACKGROUND

The effects of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality after esophageal resection are disputed in the literature. We sought to analyze treatment effects in patient subpopulations that undergo esophagectomy for cancer based on hospital volume.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 1998 to 2011. Patients who underwent open or laparoscopic transhiatal and transthoracic esophageal resection were identified using ICD-9 codes. Patients <18 years and those with peritoneal disease were excluded. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used with mortality as the independent variable to evaluate the effect of low (<6), intermediate (6-19), and high (≥20) hospital volume of esophagectomies. These analyses were repeated in different subsets of patients to determine whether hospital volume affected mortality depending on the subpopulation evaluated. Subgroups were created depending on age, race, gender, operative approach, comorbidities, and tumor pathology.

RESULTS

A total of 23,751 patients were included. The overall perioperative mortality rate was 7.7 % (low volume: 11.4 %; intermediate volume: 8.39 %, high volume: 4.01 %), and multivariate analysis revealed that high hospital volume had a protective effect (OR 0.54, 95 % CI 0.45-0.65). On subgroup analyses for low- and intermediate-volume hospitals, mortality was uniformly elevated for the subpopulations when comparing to high-volume hospitals (p < 0.05). There was no difference in mortality between low- and medium-volume hospitals and between subgroups.

CONCLUSION

No lower mortality risk subgroup could be identified in this nationwide collective. This analysis emphasizes that perioperative mortality after esophagectomy for cancer is lower in high-volume hospitals.

Endoscopic Closure for Full-Thickness Gastrointestinal Defects: Available Applications and Emerging Innovations

Full-thickness gastrointestinal defects such as perforation, anastomotic leak, and fistula are severe conditions caused by various types of pathologies. They are more likely to require intensive care and a long hospital stay and have high rates of morbidity and mortality. After intentional full-thickness opening of hollow organs for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, safe and secure closure is urgently required. The currently available advanced endoscopic closing techniques have a major role in the treatment of full-thickness gastrointestinal defects. Appropriate usage of these techniques requires taking into account their advantages and limitations during practical application. We reviewed the available endoscopic modalities, including endoscopic clips, stents, vacuum-assisted closure, gap filling, and suturing devices, discussed their advantages and limitations when treating full-thickness gastrointestinal defects, and explored emerging innovations, including a novel endoluminal surgical platform for versatile suturing and a cell-laden scaffold for effective gap filling. Although these emerging technologies still require further pre-clinical and clinical trials to assess their feasibility and efficacy, the available modalities may be replaced and refined by these new techniques in the near future.

Hybrid minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy after neoadjuvant chemoradiation yields excellent long-term survival outcomes with minimal morbidity

BACKGROUND

There is a clear survival benefit to neoadjuvant chemoradiation prior to esophagectomy for patients with stages II-III esophageal cancer. A minimally invasive esophagectomy approach may decrease morbidity but is more challenging in a previously radiated field and therefore patients who undergo neoadjuvant chemoradiation may experience more postoperative complications.

METHODS

A prospective database of all esophageal cancer patients who underwent attempted hybrid minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was maintained between 2006 and 2015. The clinical characteristics, neoadjuvant treatments, perioperative complications, and survival outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

Overall 30- and 90-day mortality rates were 0.8% (1/131) and 2.3% (3/131), respectively. The majority of patients 58% (76/131) underwent induction treatment without significant adverse impact on mortality, major complications, or hospital stay. Overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 85.9%, 65.3%, and 53.9%. Five-year survival by pathologic stage was stage I 68.9%, stage II 54.0%, and stage III 29.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

The hybrid minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy approach results in low perioperative morbidity and mortality and is well tolerated after neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Good long-term overall survival rates likely resulted from combined concurrent neoadjuvant chemoradiation in the majority of patients, which did not impact the ability to safely perform the operation or postoperative complications rates. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:838-847. © 2016 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Surgical anatomy of the supracarinal esophagus based on a minimally invasive approach: vascular and nervous anatomy and technical steps to resection and lymphadenectomy

Background

During esophageal dissection and lymphadenectomy of the upper mediastinum by thoracoscopy in prone position, we observed a complex anatomy in which we had to resect the esophagus, dissect vessels and nerves, and take down some of these in order to perform a complete lymphadenectomy. In order to improve the quality of the dissection and standardization of the procedure, we describe the surgical anatomy and steps involved in this procedure.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated twenty consecutive and unedited videos of thoracoscopic esophageal resections. We recorded the vascular anatomy of the supracarinal esophagus, lymph node stations and the steps taken in this procedure. The resulting concept was validated in a prospective study including five patients.

Results

Seventy percent of patients in the retrospective study had one right bronchial artery (RBA) and two left bronchial arteries (LBA). The RBA was divided at both sides of the esophagus in 18 patients, with preservation of one LBA or at least one esophageal branch in all cases. Both recurrent laryngeal nerves were identified in 18 patients. All patients in the prospective study had one RBA and two LBA, and in four patients the RBA was divided at both sides of the esophagus and preserved one of the LBA. Lymphadenectomy was performed of stations 4R, 4L, 2R and 2L, with a median of 11 resected lymph nodes. Both recurrent laryngeal nerves were identified in four patients. In three patients, only the left recurrent nerve could be identified. Two patients showed palsy of the left recurrent laryngeal nerve, and one showed neuropraxia of the left vocal cord.

Conclusions

Knowledge of the surgical anatomy of the upper mediastinum and its anatomical variations is important for standardization of an adequate esophageal resection and paratracheal lymphadenectomy with preservation of any vascularization of the trachea, bronchi and the recurrent laryngeal nerves.

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.

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.

Incidence and impact of postoperative atrial fibrillation after minimally invasive esophagectomy

Atrial fibrillation (AF) following open esophagectomy has been associated with increased rates of pulmonary and anastomotic complications, and mortality. This study seeks to evaluate effects of AF after minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). A retrospective review of patients consecutively treated with MIE for esophageal carcinoma, dysplasia. and benign disease from November 2006 to November 2011 was performed. One hundred twenty-one patients underwent MIE. Median age was 65 years (range 26-88) with 85% being male. Thirty-eight (31.4%) patients developed AF postoperatively. Of these 38 patients, 7 (18.4%) had known AF preoperatively. Patients with postoperative AF were significantly older than those without postoperative AF (68.7 vs. 62.8 years, P = 0.008) and more likely to be male (94.7% vs. 80.7%, P = 0.04). Neoadjuvant chemoradiation showed a trend toward increased risk of AF (73.7% vs 56.6%, P = 0.07). Sixty-day mortality was 2 of 38 (5.3%) in patients with AF and 4 of 83 (6.0%) in the no AF cohort (P = 1.00). The group with AF had increased length of hospitalization (13.4 days vs. 10.6 days P = 0.02). No significant differences in rates of pneumonia (31.6% vs. 21.7% P = 0.24), stricture (13.2% vs. 26.5% P = 0.10), or leak requiring return to operating room (13.2% vs. 8.4% P = 0.51) were noted between groups. We did not find an increased rate of AF in our MIE cohort compared with prior reported rates in open esophagectomy populations. AF did result in an increased length of stay but was not a predictor of other short-term morbidities including anastomotic leak, pulmonary complications, stenosis, or 60-day mortality.

Thoracolaparoscopic dissection of esophageal lymph nodes without esophagectomy is feasible in human cadavers and safe in a porcine survival study

High-risk early esophageal adenocarcinoma (i.e. submucosal invasion >500 nm, poor differentiation, and/or presence of lymphovascular invasion) is currently treated with esophagectomy with lymph node (LN) dissection given the high rates of LN metastases. However, esophagectomy is associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic radical resection followed by thoracolaparoscopic LN dissection without concomitant esophagectomy could be an alternative. The study aim was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of thoracolaparoscopic dissection of esophageal LNs in a preclinical setting. (i) In human cadavers, thoracolaparoscopic dissection of LNs involved in drainage of the esophagus was performed. Subsequently, esophagectomy was performed to be able to detect retained LNs. Outcome parameters included the number of dissected LNs, the number of retained LNs in the esophagectomy specimen (ES), and technical success. (ii) In swine, thoracolaparoscopic LN dissection was also performed. After the procedure, the swine survived for 28 days. Thereafter, the swine were sacrificed and esophagectomy was performed. Outcome parameters included the presence of ischemia and/or stenosis in the ES and other complications. (i) In five human cadavers, a median of 26 LNs (interquartile range 22-46) were dissected. In two ES, one retained LN was found: one high paraesophageal, one low paraesophageal. Technical success rate was 100%. (ii) None of the seven porcine ES showed signs of ischemia or stenosis. One swine died because of ventricular fibrillation during surgery; during follow up no complications were observed. Thoracolaparoscopic dissection of LNs involved in the drainage of the esophagus is feasible in human cadavers and swine. The porcine survival study suggests that the esophageal vascularity is not severely compromised by the procedure. As anatomy differs between swine and humans, safety of the procedure will have to be investigated thoroughly before applying this new technique as the treatment of choice.

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.

Short-term outcomes of robotic radical esophagectomy for esophageal cancer by a nontransthoracic approach compared with conventional transthoracic surgery

Transthoracic esophagectomy (TTE) is believed to have advantages for mediastinal lymphadenectomy in the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer despite its association with a greater incidence of pulmonary complications and postoperative mortality. Transhiatal esophagectomy is regarded as less invasive, though insufficient in terms of lymph node dissection. With the aim of achieving lymph dissection equivalent to that of TTE, we have developed a nontransthoracic esophagectomy (NTTE) procedure combining a video-assisted cervical approach for the upper mediastinum and a robot-assisted transhiatal approach for the middle and lower mediastinum. We prospectively studied 22 accumulated cases of NTTE and verified feasibility by analyzing perioperative and histopathological outcomes. We compared this group's short-term outcomes with outcomes of 139 equivalent esophageal cancer cases operated on at our institution by conventional TTE (TTE group). In the NTTE group, there were no procedure-related events and no midway conversions to the conventional surgery; the mean operation time was longer (median, 524 vs. 428 minutes); estimated blood loss did not differ significantly between the two groups (median, 385 mL vs. 490 mL); in the NTTE group, the postoperative hospital stay was shorter (median, 18 days vs. 24 days). No postoperative pneumonia occurred in the NTTE group. The frequencies of other major postoperative complications did not differ significantly, nor were there differences in the numbers of harvested mediastinal lymph nodes (median, 30 vs. 29) or in other histopathology findings. NTTE offers a new radical procedure for resection of esophageal cancer combining a cervical video-assisted approach and a transhiatal robotic approach. Although further accumulation of surgical cases is needed to corroborate these results, NTTE promises better prevention of pulmonary complications in the management of esophageal cancer.

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.

Immediate Postoperative Oral Nutrition Following Esophagectomy: A Multicenter Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Immediate start of oral intake is beneficial following colorectal surgery. However, following esophagectomy the safety and feasibility of immediate oral intake is unclear, thus these patients are still kept nil by mouth. This study therefore aimed to determine the feasibility and safety of oral nutrition immediately after esophagectomy.

METHODS

A multicenter, prospective trial was conducted in 3 referral centers between August 2013 and May 2014, including 50 patients undergoing a minimally invasive esophagectomy. Oral nutrition was started postoperatively immediately (clear liquids on postoperative day [POD] 0, liquid nutrition on POD 1 to 6, solid food from POD 7). Nonoral enteral nutrition was started when <50% of caloric need was met on postoperative day POD 5 or when oral intake was impossible. A comparison was made with a retrospective cohort (n = 50) with a per-protocol delayed start of oral intake until POD 4 to 7.

RESULTS

The median caloric intake at POD 5 was 58% of required. In 38% of the patients nonoral nutrition was started, mainly due to complications (36%). The pneumonia rate was 28% following immediate oral intake and 40% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The aspiration pneumonia rate was 4% in both groups. The anastomotic leakage rate was 14% after immediate oral intake versus 24% following delayed oral intake (p = 0.202). The 90-day mortality rate was 2% in both groups. Hospital stay and intensive care unit stay were significantly shorter following immediate oral intake.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate start of oral nutrition following esophagectomy seems to be feasible and does not increase complications compared to a retrospective cohort and literature. However, if complications arise an alternative nutritional route is required. This explorative study shows that a randomized controlled trial is needed.

Lymph node dissection in esophageal carcinoma: Minimally invasive esophagectomy vs open surgery

AIM: To compare lymph node dissection results of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and open surgery for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data from patients who underwent MIE or open surgery for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma from January 2011 to September 2014. Number of lymph nodes resected, positive lymph node (pN+) rate, lymph node sampling (LNS) rate and lymph node metastatic (LNM) rate were evaluated.

RESULTS: Among 447 patients included, 123 underwent MIE and 324 underwent open surgery. The number of lymph nodes resected did not significantly differ between the MIE and open surgery groups (21.1 ± 4.3 vs 20.4 ± 3.8, respectively, P = 0.0944). The pN+ rate of stage T3 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the open surgery group was higher than that in the MIE group (16.3% vs 11.4%, P = 0.031), but no differences was observed for stages T1 and T2 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The LNS rate at left para-recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) site was significantly higher for open surgery than for MIE (80.2% vs 43.9%, P < 0.001), but no differences were noted at other sites. The LNM rate at left para-RLN site in the open surgery group was significantly higher than that in the MIE group, regardless of pathologic T stage.

CONCLUSION: For stages T1 and T2 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, the lymph node dissection result after MIE was comparable to that achieved by open surgery. However, the efficacy of MIE in lymphadenectomy for stage T3 esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, particularly at left para-RLN site, remains to be improved.

Management of Locally Advanced Adenocarcinoma of the Esophagus and Gastroesophageal Junction: Finally a Consensus

Opinion statement: Adenocarcinoma of the esophagus is increasing in incidence in Western nations leading to increased interest in and opportunity to study optimal management. Randomized trials have now robustly demonstrated the preoperative therapy with chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy alone improves survival outcome for the bulk of curable patients, those with locally advanced T1N1M0 and T2-3 N0-1 M0 disease. Evidence suggests but does not confirm that radiation-containing regimens are more beneficial. Clinical staging is designed to exclude patients with T1N0M0 disease who may be treated with surgery alone and those with metastatic disease who may not benefit from intensive local therapy. The approach to clinical staging includes endoscopy with ultrasound and fine needle aspirate to assess local and regional disease, supplemented by CT and PET scanning primarily to exclude metastatic disease. Minimally invasive approaches to esophagectomy may be used with the goal of reducing complications, but there is no evidence that mortality or ultimate outcome is improved.

Total (Transthoracic and Transabdominal) Robotic Radical Three-Stage Esophagectomy-Initial Indian Experience

This study aims to evaluate the safety and technical feasibility of total robot-assisted three-stage esophagectomy. From July 2011 to June 2014, 35 histologically proven resectable carcinoma esophagus patients underwent robot-assisted transthoracic and transperitoneal three-stage esophagectomy. In the initial ten cases, total docking time, thoracic docking time, total operative time, thoracic-phase operative time, and blood loss were 67.9 ± 13.24, 32.2 ± 9.74, 429.2 ± 57.65, and 96.6 ± 20.33 min and 433.20 ± 48.72 ml, respectively. In the subsequent 25 cases, all parameters decreased significantly (33.20 ± 4.16, 13.76 ± 3.43, 321.13 ± 13.75, and 57.04 ± 9.15 min and 256.32 ± 17.52 ml, respectively). Median numbers of lymph node dissected were 32. One case was converted to open method, and there was no in-hospital or 30-day mortality. Two cases required ventilator support for 1 day, with ICU stay for 1 day in 15 patients and 2 days in five patients. Two patients had major complications. Median hospital stay was 8 days. All had microscopic negative resection margins. Robot-assisted three-stage esophagectomy has the benefits of minimally invasive surgery and immediate oncological outcomes are comparable to conventional open surgery. Therefore, it is a safe and feasible technique for the treatment of esophageal cancer in selected patients.

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.

Early Experience of Robot-Assisted Esophagectomy With Circular End-to-End Stapled Anastomosis

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection is a critical element in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Esophagectomy is technically challenging and is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Efforts to reduce these rates have spurred the adoption of minimally invasive techniques. This study describes a single-institution experience of robot-assisted esophagectomy with circular end-to-end stapled anastomosis.

METHODS

Between December 2013 and April 2015, a series of consecutive patients underwent robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with circular end-to-end anastomosis (RAILE-EEA) at a tertiary care center with curative intent. We retrospectively reviewed their electronic medical records using real-time prospectively collected data. The operative and postoperative outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent RAILE-EEA during the study period. The abdominal mobilization was performed laparoscopically, and the thoracic portion was robotic. The median total operative time was 455 minutes (range, 318-765 minutes), the 90-day operative mortality was 0%, and morbidity was present in 11 of 20 patients (55%). Atrial fibrillation was the most common event and was observed in 3 patients (15%). There were no anastomotic leaks. The median estimated blood loss was 275 mL, and the conversion rate was 0%. Complete (R0) resection was achieved in all cases. The mean number of lymph nodes was 23.2 (± 2.26). The median follow-up time was 330 days (range, 108-600 days), and the overall 1-year survival was 84%.

CONCLUSIONS

RAILE-EEA in our institution suggests a safe, effective, and reproducible alternative with satisfactory postoperative outcomes for the treatment of esophageal cancer. It provided good local control, adequate lymphadenectomy, low morbidity, and low 90-day operative mortality.

Vocal Fold Paralysis after Esophagectomy for Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

(1) To recognize factors that contribute to vocal fold paralysis (VFP) after esophagectomy. (2) To describe the morbidity associated with VFP after esophagectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care academic medical center.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

The medical records of 91 patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignancy were reviewed (2008-2014). Twenty-two patients with postoperative VFP were compared with 69 patients without VFP with regard to preoperative variables, surgical approach (transcervical vs other), and postoperative outcomes. A subset analysis of cervical approaches was performed, including those where an otolaryngologist assisted.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in preoperative variables between patients with and without VFP. Cervical approaches were associated with increased VFP (P < .0001). Recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) identification was associated with increased VFP (P = .0001). RLN dissection by head and neck surgeons was associated with decreased VFP (P = .0223). Patients with VFP had longer lengths of stay (P = .0078), higher rates of tracheotomy (P = .0439), and required more outpatient swallow evaluations (P = .0017). Mean time to diagnosis of VFP was 45.6 days (median, 7.5 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical approaches are associated with increased VFP in patients undergoing esophagectomy for malignancy. When cervical approaches and mobilization are required, the inclusion of an experienced cervical surgeon to identify the RLN may improve the rate of postoperative VFP. Patients with VFP after esophagectomy experience significantly more morbidity. Due to the potential delay in diagnosis and treatment of postoperative VFP, routine assessment of inpatient vocal fold function may be beneficial.

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.

Short and Long-Term Outcomes of Epidural or Intravenous Analgesia after Esophagectomy: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

As a well-established technique for postoperative pain relief, the benefits of epidural analgesia (EDA) have been under debate recently. This study aimed to determine whether EDA could improve perioperative outcomes and survival in patients undergoing esophagectomy.

METHODS

From January 2010 to December 2012, 587 consecutive cases undergoing McKeown-type esohpageactomy were retrospectively identified from a prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

After propensity-matching, incorporating baseline characteristics, 178 cases were included in each group, and patients characteristics distributions were well-balanced between two groups. Compared with intravenous analgesia, the use of EDA significantly decreased the incidence of pneumonia from 32% to 19.7% (P = 0.008), and anastomotic leakage from 23.0% to 14.0% (P = 0.029). The change in CRP level of EDA group was significantly decreased (preoperative, 6.2 vs. 6.2; POD 1, 108.1 vs. 121.3; POD 3, 131.5 vs. 137.8; POD 7, 69.3 vs. 82.1 mg/L; P = 0.044). EDA patients had a significantly longer duration of indwelling urinary catheter (P<0.001), and lower levels in both systolic (P = 0.001) and diastolic blood pressure (P<0.001). There weren't significant differences in overall survival (log-rank P = 0.47) and recurrence (Gray-test P = 0.46) between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings revealed that EDA could attenuate inflammatory response and reduce the incidence of pneumonia and anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy, at the price of delayed urinary catheter removal and lower blood pressure. EDA remains an important component of multimodal perioperative management after esophagectomy.

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.

Perioperative outcomes associated with robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in patient's undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCR) for the treatment of esophageal cancer has been associated with increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive procedures utilizing robotic techniques have been shown to reduce perioperative complications and length of hospitalization (LOH). The purpose of this study is to compare perioperative outcomes between patients undergoing NCR and robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAIL) versus upfront RAIL.

METHODS

A database of esophagectomy patients was queried to identify RAIL patients. Differences in perioperative outcomes were analyzed between NCR and non NCR patients.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients were identified who underwent RAIL Seventy-seven patients (87%) had NCR and 22 patients did not (13%). The median age was 66 (range, 44-83). The median age of the patients treated with NCR was younger {69 [44-83] vs. 64 [46-81] years respectively, P=0.05}. The patients who underwent NCR had a higher BMI then those who went straight to esophagectomy (31 vs. 27; P=0.001). There were no conversions to open laparotomy or thoracotomy in either group. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean operative times and estimated blood loss (EBL) between both groups. Complications occurred in 17 (19.1%) patients. There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of any complications between patients receiving NCR and those that did not receive NCR (P=0.11). There were no deaths in either group. The total number of days in hospital and total number of intensive care unit (ICU) days were also similar in both groups (P=0.25). There was no statistically significant difference in the mean number of lymph nodes harvested in the patients treated with NCR compared with those treated without NCR.

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated that RAIL is a safe and feasible option for patients with esophageal cancer. The administration of NCR to RAIL did not result in an increase in perioperative morbidity and mortality. The number of lymph nodes harvested and the completeness of resection was also similar between patients who received NCR and those who did not. Longer follow-up is required in order to determine long term oncologic outcome.