1
|
Patel NM, Patel PH, Yeung KTD, Monk D, Mohammadi B, Mughal M, Bhogal RH, Allum W, Abbassi-Ghadi N, Kumar S. Is Robotic Surgery the Future for Resectable Esophageal Cancer?: A Systematic Literature Review of Oncological and Clinical Outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 2024; 31:4281-4297. [PMID: 38480565 PMCID: PMC11164768 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-024-15148-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/24/2023] [Accepted: 02/19/2024] [Indexed: 06/13/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Radical esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer is a major surgical intervention, associated with considerable postoperative morbidity. The introduction of robotic surgical platforms in esophagectomy may enhance advantages of minimally invasive surgery enabled by laparoscopy and thoracoscopy, including reduced postoperative pain and pulmonary complications. This systematic review aims to assess the clinical and oncological benefits of robot-assisted esophagectomy. METHODS A systematic literature search of the MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane databases was performed for studies published up to 1 August 2023. This review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocols and was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42022370983). Clinical and oncological outcomes data were extracted following full-text review of eligible studies. RESULTS A total of 113 studies (n = 14,701 patients, n = 2455 female) were included. The majority of the studies were retrospective in nature (n = 89, 79%), and cohort studies were the most common type of study design (n = 88, 79%). The median number of patients per study was 54. Sixty-three studies reported using a robotic surgical platform for both the abdominal and thoracic phases of the procedure. The weighted mean incidence of postoperative pneumonia was 11%, anastomotic leak 10%, total length of hospitalisation 15.2 days, and a resection margin clear of the tumour was achieved in 95% of cases. CONCLUSIONS There are numerous reported advantages of robot-assisted surgery for resectable esophageal cancer. A correlation between procedural volume and improvements in outcomes with robotic esophagectomy has also been identified. Multicentre comparative clinical studies are essential to identify the true objective benefit on outcomes compared with conventional surgical approaches before robotic surgery is accepted as standard of practice.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil Manish Patel
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- The Upper Gastrointestinal Surgical Oncology Research Group, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Pranav Harshad Patel
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- The Upper Gastrointestinal Surgical Oncology Research Group, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - Kai Tai Derek Yeung
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - David Monk
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic London Hospital, London, UK
| | - Borzoueh Mohammadi
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic London Hospital, London, UK
| | - Muntzer Mughal
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic London Hospital, London, UK
| | - Ricky Harminder Bhogal
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
- The Upper Gastrointestinal Surgical Oncology Research Group, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK
| | - William Allum
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Nima Abbassi-Ghadi
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust, Guildford, Surrey, UK
| | - Sacheen Kumar
- Department of Upper GI Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
- The Upper Gastrointestinal Surgical Oncology Research Group, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.
- Department of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic London Hospital, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Marano A, Salomone S, Pellegrino L, Geretto P, Robella M, Borghi F. Robot-assisted esophagectomy with robot-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis (Ivor Lewis): surgical technique and early results. Updates Surg 2022:10.1007/s13304-022-01439-7. [PMID: 36510101 PMCID: PMC9744375 DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01439-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/08/2022] [Accepted: 12/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Esophagectomy is the selected treatment for nonmetastatic esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancer, although high perioperative morbidity and mortality incur. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) effectively reduces cardiopulmonary complications compared to open esophagectomy and offers a technical advantage, especially for lymph node dissection and intrathoracic anastomosis. This article aims at describing our initial experience of Ivor Lewis RAMIE, focusing on the technique's main steps and robotic-sewn esophagogastrostomy. Prospectively collected data from all consecutive patients who underwent Ivor Lewis RAMIE for cancer was reviewed. Reconstruction was performed with a gastric conduit pull-up and a robotic-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were recorded as prescribed by the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG). Thirty patients underwent Ivor Lewis RAMIE with complete mediastinal lymph node dissection and robot-sewn anastomosis. No intraoperative complications nor conversion occurred. Pulmonary complications totaled 26.7%. Anastomotic leakage (ECCG, type III) and conduit necrosis (ECCG, type III) both occurred in one patient (3.3%). Chylothorax appeared in 2 patients (6.7%) (ECCG, Type IIA). Anastomotic stricture, successfully treated with endoscopic dilatations, occurred in 8 cases (26.7%). Median overall postoperative stay was 11 days (range, 6-51 days). 30 day and 90 day mortality was 0%. R0 resection was performed in 96.7% of patients with a median number of 47 retrieved lymph nodes. RAMIE with robot-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis appears to be feasible, safe and effective, with favorable perioperative results. Nevertheless, further high-quality studies are needed to define the best anastomotic technique for Ivor Lewis RAMIE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessandra Marano
- grid.413179.90000 0004 0486 1959Department of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Via Michele Coppino 26, 12100 Cuneo, Italy
| | - Sara Salomone
- grid.413179.90000 0004 0486 1959Department of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Via Michele Coppino 26, 12100 Cuneo, Italy
| | - Luca Pellegrino
- grid.419555.90000 0004 1759 7675Department of Oncologic Surgery, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO - IRCCS - Str. Prov. 142, Km 3,95, Candiol, TO Italy
| | - Paolo Geretto
- grid.413179.90000 0004 0486 1959Department of Surgery, General and Oncologic Surgery Unit, Santa Croce e Carle Hospital, Via Michele Coppino 26, 12100 Cuneo, Italy
| | - Manuela Robella
- grid.419555.90000 0004 1759 7675Department of Oncologic Surgery, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO - IRCCS - Str. Prov. 142, Km 3,95, Candiol, TO Italy
| | - Felice Borghi
- grid.419555.90000 0004 1759 7675Department of Oncologic Surgery, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO - IRCCS - Str. Prov. 142, Km 3,95, Candiol, TO Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Shen T, Zhang Y, Cao Y, Li C, Li H. Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAILE): A review of surgical techniques and clinical outcomes. Front Surg 2022; 9:998282. [PMID: 36406371 PMCID: PMC9672456 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.998282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/19/2022] [Accepted: 10/10/2022] [Indexed: 08/30/2023] Open
Abstract
In the past 20 years, robotic system has gradually found a place in esophagectomy which is a demanding procedure in the deep and narrow thoracic cavity containing crucial functional structures. Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (ILE) is a mainstream surgery type for esophagectomy and is widely accepted for its capability in lymphadenectomy and relatively mitigated trauma. As a minimally invasive technique, robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAILE) has been frequently compared with the video-assisted procedure and the traditional open procedure. However, high-quality evidence elucidating the advantages and drawbacks of RAILE is still lacking. In this article, we will review the surgical techniques, both short and long-term outcomes, the learning curve, and explicate the current progress and clinical efficacy of RAILE.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Hecheng Li
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiaotong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zhang H, Zuo Z, Yan X, Wang F, Yang L, Qiu G, Chen LQ, Wang Y. Double purse-string suture technique for circular-stapled anastomosis during robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Front Surg 2022; 9:957093. [PMID: 35965865 PMCID: PMC9365067 DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.957093] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/30/2022] [Accepted: 07/04/2022] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Background With the advantage of the robotic suturing capacity, the purse-string suture is technically simple and convenient. This study aimed to present our technical aspects and initial results of robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy using two purse-string sutures for circular-stapled anastomosis. Methods After stomach mobilization, gastric conduit formation, esophagus mobilization and two-field lymphadenectomy, the first robotic hand-sewn purse-string suture was applied to the esophageal muscular layer with an adequate margin above the tumor. A longitudinal incision in the anterior wall of the esophagus was made and the circular stapler anvil was inserted. The esophagus was transected by scissors 1 cm caudal to the first purse-string suture and the purse-string tied to secure the anvil. Then the second robotic hand-sewn purse-string suture was applied to the whole-layer of the proximal end of the esophagus and tied. Finally, the anvil was connected to the body of the stapler and fired. Results The clinical data of ten patients who underwent robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with an intrathoracic circular-stapled end-to-side anastomosis from February 2022 to April 2022 were collected. There were seven male and three female patients and had a mean age of 63.2 ± 7.6 years. Tissue donuts were complete in all cases and all operations were successfully performed without conversions. The mean overall operative time was 358.2 ± 40.3 min. The mean estimated blood loss was 83.2 ± 15.6 ml. The median length of hospital stay was 11.5 ± 4.1 days. All the patients had an uneventful postoperative period. Conclusion Two purse-string sutures are necessary to obtain a tight seal of the esophageal tissue around the anvil to avoid potential anastomotic leak and are an essential process for the safety of circular-stapled anastomosis during robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanlu Zhang
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Zeping Zuo
- Department of Anesthesiology, Laboratory of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, National-Local Joint Engineering Research Center of Translational Medicine of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Xiuji Yan
- Department of Plastic and Burns Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Fuqiang Wang
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Lin Yang
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Guanghao Qiu
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Long-Qi Chen
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
- Correspondence: Long-Qi Chen Yun Wang
| | - Yun Wang
- Department of Thoracic Surgery, West China Hospital of Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
- Correspondence: Long-Qi Chen Yun Wang
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Di Franco G, Lorenzoni V, Palmeri M, Furbetta N, Guadagni S, Gianardi D, Bianchini M, Pollina LE, Melfi F, Mamone D, Milli C, Di Candio G, Turchetti G, Morelli L. Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy with the da Vinci Xi: can the costs of advanced technology be offset by clinical advantages? A case-matched cost analysis versus open approach. Surg Endosc 2022; 36:4417-4428. [PMID: 34708294 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-021-08793-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2021] [Accepted: 10/17/2021] [Indexed: 02/05/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robot-assisted pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) has shown some advantages over open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) but few studies have reported a cost analysis between the two techniques. We conducted a structured cost-analysis comparing pancreatoduodenectomy performed with the use of the da Vinci Xi, and the traditional open approach, and considering healthcare direct costs associated with the intervention and the short-term post-operative course. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty RPD and 194 OPD performed between January 2011 and December 2020 by the same operator at our high-volume multidisciplinary center for robot-assisted surgery and for pancreatic surgery, were retrospectively analyzed. Two comparable groups of 20 patients (Xi-RPD-group) and 40 patients (OPD-group) were obtained matching 1:2 the RPD-group with the OPD-group. Perioperative data and overall costs, including overall variable costs (OVCs) and fixed costs, were compared. RESULTS No difference was reported in mean operative time: 428 min for Xi-RPD-group versus 404 min for OPD, p = 0.212. The median overall length of hospital stay was significantly lower in the Xi-RPD-group: 10 days versus 16 days, p = 0.001. In the Xi-RPD-group, consumable costs were significantly higher (€6149.2 versus €1267.4, p < 0.001), while hospital stay costs were significantly lower: €5231.6 versus €8180 (p = 0.001). No significant differences were found in terms of OVCs: €13,483.4 in Xi-RPD-group versus €11,879.8 in OPD-group (p = 0.076). CONCLUSIONS Robot-assisted surgery is more expensive because of higher acquisition and maintenance costs. However, although RPD is associated to higher material costs, the advantages of the robotic system associated to lower hospital stay costs and the absence of difference in terms of personnel costs thanks to the similar operative time with respect to OPD, make the OVCs of the two techniques no longer different. Hence, the higher costs of advanced technology can be partially compensated by clinical advantages, particularly within a high-volume multidisciplinary center for both robot-assisted and pancreatic surgery. These preliminary data need confirmation by further studies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gregorio Di Franco
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56125, Pisa, Italy.,Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | | | - Matteo Palmeri
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56125, Pisa, Italy.,Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Niccolò Furbetta
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56125, Pisa, Italy.,Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Simone Guadagni
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56125, Pisa, Italy.,Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Desirée Gianardi
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56125, Pisa, Italy.,Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Matteo Bianchini
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56125, Pisa, Italy.,Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | | | - Franca Melfi
- Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Domenica Mamone
- Pharmaceutical Unit: Medical Device Management, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Carlo Milli
- Board of Directors, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | - Giulio Di Candio
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56125, Pisa, Italy.,Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
| | | | - Luca Morelli
- General Surgery Unit, Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery, University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 56125, Pisa, Italy. .,Multidisciplinary Center of Robotic Surgery, University Hospital of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. .,EndoCAS (Center for Computer Assisted Surgery), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
| |
Collapse
|