Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy with Intrathoracic Anastomosis (Ivor Lewis): Promising Results in 100 Consecutive Patients (the European Experience)

A comparative assessment of ACS NSQIP-predicted and actual surgical risk outcomes of robotic transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma resection at a high volume institution

Esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence is increasing in Western nations. There has been a shift toward minimally invasive approaches for transhiatal esophagectomy (THE). This study compares the outcomes of robotic THE for esophageal adenocarcinoma resection at our institution with the predicted metrics from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP). With Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, we prospectively followed 83 patients who underwent robotic THE from 2012 to 2023. Predicted outcomes were determined using the ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator. Our outcomes were compared with these predicted outcomes and with general outcomes for transhiatal esophagectomy reported in ACS NSQIP, which includes a mix of surgical approaches. The median age of patients was 70 years, with a body mass index (BMI) of 26.4 kg/m2 and a male prevalence of 82%. The median length of stay was 7 days. The rates of any complications and in-hospital mortality were 16% and 5%, respectively. Seven patients (8%) were readmitted within a 30-day postoperative window. The median survival is anticipated to surpass 95 months. Our outcomes were generally aligned with or surpassed the predicted ACS NSQIP metrics. The extended median survival of over 95 months highlights the potential effectiveness of robotic THE in the resection of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Further exploration into its long-term survival benefits and outcomes is warranted, along with studies that provide a more direct comparison between robotic and other surgical approaches.

Fully robotic side-to-side stapled anastomosis provides less anastomotic leakage than conventional minimally invasive approach in Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluates surgical outcomes of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (ILE) for esophageal and esophagogastric cancer, with the comparison of the robotic approach (RA) and the conventional minimally invasive approach (CA).

METHODS

Selected patients who underwent minimally invasive ILE for esophageal cancer were included between January 2017 and December 2023. We retrospectively investigated the patients' background characteristics and the short-term surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

In this period, among a total of 840 esophagectomies, 81 patients (9.6%) underwent minimally invasive ILE, consisting of 24 cases with RA and 57 with CA. The major indications for ILE were adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus or esophagogastric junction and patients with prior head and neck cancer treatment. Among these thoracic approaches, there were no significant differences in the patients' indications and characteristics, including age, histology, tumor location, clinical TNM stage, and preoperative therapy. Compared with the CA group, no anastomotic leakage was observed in the RA group (17.5% vs. 0, p = .035). Rates of total postoperative complications and length of hospital stay also tended to be reduced in the RA group but did not reach significance.

CONCLUSION

In the Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with a side-to-side linear-stapled anastomosis, the fully robotic approach has the potential to powerfully reduce anastomotic leakage compared to the conventional minimally invasive approach.

Robotic-assisted esophagectomy with total mesoesophageal excision enhances R0-resection in patients with esophageal cancer: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

The focus of this research is to examine the growing use of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy. Specifically, it evaluates the immediate clinical and cancer-related results of combining robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy with a systematic approach to total mesoesophageal excision, as opposed to traditional open transthoracic esophagectomy methods that do not employ a structured total mesoesophageal excision protocol.

METHODS

A propensity score-matched analysis of 185 robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomies and 223 open transthoracic esophagectomies after standardized Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was performed. After 1:1 nearest neighbor matching to account for confounding by covariates, outcomes of 181 robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy and 181 open transthoracic esophagectomy were compared.

RESULTS

The patient characteristics showed significant differences in the age distribution and in comorbidities such as coronary heart disease, arterial hypertension, and anticoagulant intake. The R0-resection rate of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (96.7%) was significantly higher than open transthoracic esophagectomy (89.0%, P = .004). Thirty-day mortality and hospital mortality showed no significant differences. Postoperative pneumonia rate after robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (12.7%) was significantly reduced (open transthoracic esophagectomy 28.7%, P < .001). Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy had a significantly shorter intensive care unit stay (P < .001) and shorter hospital stay (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This single-center, retrospective study employing propensity score matching found that combining robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy with structured total mesoesophageal excision results in better short-term clinical and oncologic outcomes than open transthoracic esophagectomy. This finding is significant because the increased rate of R0 resection could indicate a higher likelihood of improved long-term survival. Additionally, enhanced overall postoperative recovery may contribute to better risk management in esophagectomy procedures.

Antimicrobial Prophylaxis With Ampicillin-sulbactam Compared With Cefazolin for Esophagectomy: Nationwide Inpatient Database Study in Japan

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of antimicrobial prophylaxis with ampicillin-sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) compared with cefazolin (CEZ) on the short-term outcomes after esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND

CEZ is widely used for antimicrobial prophylaxis in esophagectomy without procedure-specific evidence, whereas ABPC/SBT is preferred in some hospitals to target both aerobic and anaerobic oral bacteria.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent esophagectomy for cancer between July 2010 and March 2019 were extracted from a nationwide Japanese inpatient database. Overlap propensity score weighting was conducted to compare the short-term outcomes [including surgical site infection (SSI), anastomotic leakage, and respiratory failure] between antimicrobial prophylaxis with CEZ and ABPC/SBT after adjusting for potential confounders. Sensitivity analyses were also performed using propensity score matching and instrumental variable analyses.

RESULTS

Among 17,772 eligible patients, 16,077 (90.5%) and 1695 (9.5%) patients were administered CEZ and ABPC/SBT, respectively. SSI, anastomotic leakage, and respiratory failure occurred in 2971 (16.7%), 2604 (14.7%), and 2754 patients (15.5%), respectively. After overlap weighting, ABPC/SBT was significantly associated with a reduction in SSI [odds ratio 0.51 (95% CI: 0.43-0.60)], anastomotic leakage [0.51 (0.43-0.61)], and respiratory failure [0.66 (0.57-0.77)]. ABPC/SBT was also associated with reduced respiratory complications, postoperative length of stay, and total hospitalization costs. The proportion of Clostridioides difficile colitis and noninfectious complications did not differ between the groups. Propensity score matching and instrumental variable analyses demonstrated equivalent results.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of ABPC/SBT as antimicrobial prophylaxis for esophagectomy was associated with better short-term postoperative outcomes compared with CEZ.

Minimally invasive versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer. A pooled analysis of two European randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive techniques have shown better short term and similar oncological outcomes compared to open techniques in the treatment of gastric cancer in Asian countries. It remains unknown whether these outcomes can be extrapolated to Western countries, where patients often present with advanced gastric cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A pooled analysis of two Western randomized controlled trials (STOMACH and LOGICA trial) comparing minimally invasive gastrectomy (MIG) and open gastrectomy (OG) in advanced gastric cancer was performed. Postoperative recovery (complications, mortality, hospital stay), oncological outcomes (lymph node yield, radical resection rate, 1-year survival), and quality of life was assessed.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty-one patients were included from both trials. Of these, 162 patients (50.5%) were allocated to MIG and 159 patients (49.5%) to OG. A significant difference was seen in blood loss in favor of MIG (150 vs. 260 mL, p < 0.001), whereas duration of surgery was in favor of OG (180 vs. 228.5 min, p = 0.005). Postoperative recovery, oncological outcomes and quality of life were similar between both groups.

CONCLUSION

MIG showed no difference to OG regarding postoperative recovery, oncological outcomes or quality of life, and is therefore a safe alternative to OG in patients with advanced gastric cancer.

Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 18,187 patients

The role of robotic surgery in the curative-intent treatment of esophageal cancer patients is yet to be defined. To compare short-term outcomes between conventional minimally invasive (cMIE) and robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in esophageal cancer patients. PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were systematically searched. The included studies compared short-term outcomes between cMIE and RAMIE. Individual risk of bias was calculated using the MINORS and RoB2 scales. There were no statistically significant differences between RAMIE and cMIE regarding conversion to open procedure, mean number of harvested lymph nodes in the mediastinum, abdomen and along the right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN), 30- and 90-day mortality rates, chyle leakage, RLN palsy as well as cardiac and infectious complication rates. Estimated blood loss (MD - 71.78 mL, p < 0.00001), total number of harvested lymph nodes (MD 2.18 nodes, p < 0.0001) and along the left RLN (MD 0.73 nodes, p = 0.03), pulmonary complications (RR 0.70, p = 0.001) and length of hospital stay (MD - 3.03 days, p < 0.0001) are outcomes that favored RAMIE. A significantly shorter operating time (MD 29.01 min, p = 0.004) and a lower rate of anastomotic leakage (RR 1.23, p = 0.0005) were seen in cMIE. RAMIE has indicated to be a safe and feasible alternative to cMIE, with a tendency towards superiority in blood loss, lymph node yield, pulmonary complications and length of hospital stay. There was significant heterogeneity among studies for some of the outcomes measured. Further studies are necessary to confirm these results and overcome current limitations.

Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy

Background

Esophagectomy is the gold standard treatment for resectable esophageal cancer; however, there is insufficient evidence to indicate potential advantages over standard minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in treating thoracic esophageal cancer. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) bridges the gap between open and minimally invasive surgery. In this single-center retrospective review, we compare the clinical outcomes of EC patients treated with MIE and RAMIE.

Method

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent surgery at Qilu Hospital between August 2020 and August 2022, including 159 patients who underwent MIE and 35 patients who received RAMIE. The intraoperative, postoperative, and preoperative patient characteristics in both groups were evaluated.

Results

Except for height, the MIE and RAMIE groups showed no significant differences in preoperative features (P>0.05). Further, there were no significant differences in intraoperative indices, including TNM stage of the resected tumor, tumor tissue type, or ASA score, between the two groups. However, statistically significant differences were found in some factors; the RAMIE group had a shorter operative time, less intraoperative bleeding, and more lymph nodes removed compared to the MIE group. Patients in the RAMIE group reported less discomfort and greater chest drainage on the first postoperative day than patients in the MIE group; however, there were no differences in other features between the two datasets.

Conclusion

By comparing the clinical characteristics and outcomes of RAMIE with MIE, this study verified the feasibility and safety of RAMIE for esophageal cancer. Overall, RAMIE resulted in more complete lymph node clearance, shorter operating time, reduced surgical hemorrhage, reduced postoperative discomfort, and chest drainage alleviation in patients. To investigate the function of RAMIE in esophageal cancer, we propose undertaking a future clinical trial with long-term follow-up to analyze tumor clearance, recurrence, and survival after RAMIE.

A narrative review of anastomotic leak in the Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: expected, accepted, but preventable

Background and Objective

Anastomotic leak (AL) remains a common and highly morbid complication after Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy. Leak is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, strictures and even cancer recurrence. Unfortunately, despite advances in surgical technique and perioperative care, the reported frequency of AL has remained largely unchanged.

Methods

A PubMed search for all English-language articles that discuss Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, AL, risk factors, and outcomes was conducted from 1901 to 2023 prioritizing research from randomized trials that evaluated outcomes from patients undergoing esophagectomy.

Key Content and Findings

This narrative review will discuss the prevailing literature on AL, risk factors and outcomes with a focus on its relationship to the Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (ILE). In particular, we emphasize that the gastric conduit, as commonly created for most esophagectomy procedures, is inherently vulnerable to ischemia. We will show trends in the literature that have contributed to the high rate of postoperative complications, with a focus on the AL. In addition, we propose that the traditional Ivor Lewis procedure itself is a risk factor for AL. We review a surgical alternative that increases blood supply of the conduit, and is associated with reduced leak, no strictures, and improved surgical outcomes.

Conclusions

Multiple factors contribute to AL after esophagectomy; including several current surgical practices. We believe that some of them, especially the commonly accepted approach to the gastric conduit, can be modified to optimize tissue perfusion. With further investigation, we may reduce the incidence of short and long-term anastomotic complications and improve surgical outcomes.

Robotic Versus Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To give a comprehensive review of the literature comparing perioperative outcomes and long-term survival with robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) versus minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for esophageal cancer.

BACKGROUND

Curative minimally invasive surgical treatment for esophageal cancer includes RAMIE and conventional MIE. It remains controversial whether RAMIE is comparable to MIE.

METHODS

This review was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42021260963). A systematic search of databases was conducted. Perioperative outcomes and long-term survival were analyzed and subgroup analysis was conducted. Cumulative meta-analysis was performed to track therapeutic effectiveness.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies were included and a total of 2932 patients (92.88% squamous cell carcinoma, 29.83% neoadjuvant therapy, and 38.93% stage III-IV), 1418 underwent RAMIE and 1514 underwent MIE, were analyzed. The number of total lymph nodes (LNs) [23.35 (95% CI: 21.41-25.29) vs 21.98 (95% CI: 20.31-23.65); mean difference (MD) = 1.18; 95% CI: 0.06-2.30; P =0.04], abdominal LNs [9.05 (95% CI: 8.16-9.94) vs 7.75 (95% CI: 6.62-8.88); MD = 1.04; 95% CI: 0.19-1.89; P =0.02] and LNs along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve [1.74 (95% CI: 1.04-2.43) vs 1.34 (95% CI: 0.32-2.35); MD = 0.22; 95% CI: 0.09-0.35; P <0.001] were significantly higher in the RAMIE group. RAMIE is associated with a lower incidence of pneumonia [9.61% (95% CI: 7.38%-11.84%) vs 14.74% (95% CI: 11.62%-18.15%); odds ratio = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.58-0.93; P =0.01]. Meanwhile, other perioperative outcomes, such as operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, 30/90-day mortality, and R0 resection, showed no significant difference between the two groups. Regarding long-term survival, the 3-year overall survival was similar in the two groups, whereas patients undergoing RAMIE had a higher rate of 3-year disease-free survival compared with the MIE group [77.98% (95% CI: 72.77%-82.43%) vs 70.65% (95% CI: 63.87%-77.00%); odds ratio = 1.42; 95% CI: 1.11-1.83; P =0.006]. A cumulative meta-analysis conducted for each outcome demonstrated relatively stable effects in the two groups. Analyses of each subgroup showed similar overall outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

RAMIE is a safe and feasible alternative to MIE in the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer with comparable perioperative outcomes and seems to indicate a possible superiority in LNs dissection in the abdominal cavity, and LNs dissected along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve and 3-year disease-free survival in particular in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Further randomized studies are needed to better evaluate the long-term benefits of RAMIE compared with MIE.

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in the elderly patient: a multicenter retrospective matched-cohort study

Introduction

Several studies reported the advantages of minimally invasive esophagectomy over the conventional open approach, particularly in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality. The literature regarding the elderly population is however scarce and it is still not clear whether elderly patients may benefit from a minimally invasive approach as the general population. We sought to evaluate whether thoracoscopic/ laparoscopic (MIE) or fully robotic (RAMIE) Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy significantly reduces postoperative morbidity in the elderly population.

Methods

We analyzed data of patients who underwent open esophagectomy or MIE/RAMIE at Mainz University Hospital and at Padova University Hospital between 2016 and 2021. Elderly patients were defined as those ≥ 75 years old. Clinical characteristics and the postoperative outcomes were compared between elderly patients who underwent open esophagectomy or MIE/RAMIE. A 1-to-1 matched comparison was also performed. Patients < 75 years old were evaluated as a control group.

Results

Among elderly patients MIE/RAMIE were associated with a lower overall morbidity (39.7% vs. 62.7%, p=0.005), less pulmonary complications (32.8 vs. 56.9%, p=0.003) and a shorter hospital stay (13 vs. 18 days, p=0.03). Comparable findings were obtained after matching. Similarly, among < 75 years-old patients, a reduced morbidity (31.2% vs. 43.5%, p=0.01) and less pulmonary complications (22% vs. 36%, p=0.001) were detected in the minimally invasive group.

Discussion

Minimally invasive esophagectomy improves the postoperative course of elderly patients reducing the overall incidence of postoperative complications, particularly of pulmonary complications.

Drainless robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy-randomized controlled trial (RESPECT)

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this randomized trial is to evaluate the early removal of postoperative drains after robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy (RAMIE). Evidence is lacking about feasibility, associated pain, recovery, and morbidity.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a randomized controlled multicentric trial involving 72 patients undergoing RAMIE. Patients will be allocated into two groups. The "intervention" group consists of 36 patients. In this group, abdominal and chest drains are removed 3 h after the end of surgery in the absence of contraindications. The control group consists of 36 patients with conventional chest drain management. These drains are removed during the further postoperative course according to a standard algorithm. The primary objective is to investigate whether postoperative pain measured by NRS on the second postoperative day can be significantly reduced in the intervention group. Secondary endpoints are the intensity of pain during the first week, analgesic use, number of postoperative chest X-ray and CT scans, interventions, postoperative mobilization (steps per day as measured with an activity tracker), postoperative morbidity and mortality.

DISCUSSION

Until now, there have been no trials investigating different intraoperative chest drain strategies in patients undergoing RAMIE for oesophageal cancer with regard to perioperative complications until discharge. Minimally invasive approaches combined with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols lower morbidity but still include the insertion of chest drains. Reduction and early removal have been proposed after pulmonary surgery but not after RAMIE. The study concept is based on our own experience and the promising current results of the RAMIE procedure. Therefore, the presented randomized controlled trial will provide statistical evidence of the effectiveness and feasibility of the "drainless" RAMIE.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05553795. Registered on 23 September 2022.

Introducing robotic oesophagectomy into an Australian practice: an assessment of the early procedural outcomes and learning curve

BACKGROUND

Robotic oesophagectomy (RAMIO) is a novel procedure in Australia and New Zealand. We aimed to report the early operative and clinical outcomes achieved during the introduction of RAMIO into the practice of a single Australian surgeon and benchmark these against outcomes of patients receiving conventional minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO) by the same surgeon.

METHODS

Data on all patients undergoing RAMIO, performed by a single high-volume Australian surgeon, were collected from a prospectively maintained database. Operative, clinical and surgical quality outcomes were benchmarked on a univariable basis against those of patients receiving MIO. Learning curves were computed using quadratic and linear regression of operating times on case-numbers and compared using Cox regression modelling.

RESULTS

290 patients (237 MIO, 53 RAMIO (47% Ivor-Lewis, 53% McKeon oesophagectomy)) were included. Compared with MIO, the median thoracic operating time was 20 min longer for RAMIO (P = 0.03). Following RAMIO, there was less blood loss (P < 0.01) and a shorter length of stay (P < 0.01).There were no differences in morbidity and quality of surgery following RAMIO compared with MIO. There were no deaths following RAMIO. Having progressed from MIO, the operating times for RAMIO improved after 22 cases compared with MIO (110 cases) (HR 0.70 (0.51-0.93), P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

With careful implementation, RAMIO may be safely performed within the Australian setting and is associated with a modest increase in procedure duration, but less blood loss and shorter length of stay compared with conventional MIO.

Intrathoracic Robotic-Sewn Anastomosis During Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy for Cancer: Back to Basics?

BACKGROUND

To assess the feasibility, clinical utility, and safety of intrathoracic robotic-sewn esophageal anastomosis (IrEA) during Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for adenocarcinoma of the lower third of the esophagus, or cancer at the gastro-esophageal junction type I (Siewert classification).

METHODS

A protocol for completely robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (CrIE) and intrathoracic robotic-sewn anastomosis (IrEA) was established at the authors' institutions from January 2015 through December 2019. Overall surgery-related postoperative complications were analyzed. Overall survival and disease-free survival analysis were performed using standard methods.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 40 patients. Median operative time was 320 min (sd 62, range 235-500 min), and conversion to open rate was 0%. Anastomotic leak rate was 10%. The mean number of examined lymph nodes (ELN) was 19 (IQR 11-29), and the mean number of positive lymph nodes (PLN) was 3 (IQR 0-5). Short- and long-term surgical and oncological outcomes were comparable at a medium follow-up of 37 months. The median overall survival was 48 months while the mean disease-free survival was 29 months.

CONCLUSION

This pilot series, in which an intrathoracic robotic-sewn anastomosis (IrEA) was performed during CrIE, demonstrated the safety and feasibility of this approach. Compared to the current standard of care at a high-volume center, IrEA was associated with better postoperative surgical outcomes and similar oncological outcomes to those reported worldwide today. These results call for further validation in a prospective and controlled setting to be fully incorporated into clinical practice.

[Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Oesophagectomy - Surgical Variants of Intrathoracic Circular Stapled Oesophagogastric Anastomosis]

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic insufficiency after oesophagectomy contributes significantly to morbidity and mortality of affected patients. A safe surgical technique can reduce the incidence of such anastomotic insufficiencies.

INDICATION

In the treatment of oesophageal cancer, the German guideline recommends minimally invasive or hybrid surgical procedures. In most cases, Ivor-Lewis oesophagectomy and continuity reconstruction using a gastric sleeve are performed. Circular stapler anastomosis seems to be superior.

METHOD

The preparation of the anastomosis starts intra-abdominally with mobilisation of the stomach and sparing of the gastroepiploic vessels. After the subsequent intrathoracic mobilisation of the oesophagus, the actual anastomosis construction can take place. Here, the oesophagus is either transected with a stapler closure or openly with scissors. This is followed by a purse-string suture on the open oesophageal stump. Alternatively, partial oesophageal opening with prior purse-string suture may later facilitate insertion of the stapler anvil. The anvil is placed in the oesophageal stump via minithoracotomy or alternatively transorally using a special gastric tube system. Subsequently, the anvil is fixated using the previously performed purse-string suture. Now the gastric sleeve can be pulled into the thorax. The oesophagus and small gastric curvature are placed extrathoracically through the minithoracotomy and a circular stapler is inserted into the gastric tube via an opening of the small curvature. The anastomosis then must be placed remotely from the gastroepiploic arcade. After construction of the anastomosis, the gastric sleeve is separated using a linear stapler. Eventually, the oesophagus and small gastric curvature can be completely recovered. Optionally, an additional suturing over the anastomosis and dissection margin of the gastric sleeve can be performed.

CONCLUSION

In robot-assisted oesophagectomy, the reconstruction of continuity with a circular stapler anastomosis is quite possible and seems comparatively easier to learn. Nevertheless, variations are still possible within this procedure. However, there is no scientific evidence on the advantage for any method in a direct comparison.

Esophagectomy-prevention of complications-tips and tricks for the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative stage

Esophagectomy still remains the mainstay of treatment for localized esophageal cancer. Many progresses have been made in the technique of esophagectomy in the last decades but the overall morbidity for this operation remains formidable. Postoperative complication and mortality rate after esophagectomy are significant; anastomotic leak has an incidence of 11,4%. The occurrence of a complication is a significant negative prognostic factor for long term survival and is also linked to longer postoperative stay, a lower quality of life, increased hospital costs. Preventing the occurrence of postoperative morbidity and reducing associated postoperative mortality rate is a major goal for surgeons experienced in resective esophageal surgery. Many details of pre, intra and postoperative care for patients undergoing esophagectomy need to be shared among the professionals taking care of these patients (oncologists, dieticians, physiotherapists, surgeons, nurses, anesthesiologists, gastroenterologists) in order to improve the short and long term clinical results.

Perioperative Outcomes and Learning Curve of Robot-Assisted McKeown Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing robot-assisted McKeown esophagectomy (RAME) and the learning curves of surgeons performing RAME at a single center.

METHODS

Perioperative outcomes of RAME and video-assisted McKeown esophagectomy (VAME) were compared after eliminating confounding factors by propensity score matching (PSM). The cumulative sum (CUSUM) method was used to evaluate the learning curves of RAME for a single surgical team.

RESULTS

In general, a total of 198 patients with esophageal cancer (RAME: 45 patients, VAME: 153 patients) were included in this study, and 43 pairs of patients receiving RAME or VAME were matched using 1:1 PSM analysis. Those in the RAME group had more lymph nodes dissected in the total lymph nodes (median 29.0 vs. 26.0, P = 0.011) and the upper mediastinum (median 8.0 vs. 6.0, P < 0.001), especially the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node (median 4.0 vs. 2.0, P = 0.001). According to the trend of the CUSUM plot, the learning curve was divided into two stages at the 20th RAME procedure. After mastering the learning curve, RAME harvested a significantly higher number of upper mediastinal lymph nodes (median 9.0 vs. 6.0, P = 0.001), left RLN lymph nodes (median 5.0 vs. 3.5, P = 0.003), and right RLN lymph nodes (median 4.0 vs. 2.0, P = 0.002). Meanwhile, the incidence of postoperative pneumonia in the proficiency phase was significantly lower than that in the learning phase (4.0% vs. 25.0%, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

RAME improved left RLN lymph node dissection. Surgeons with extensive VAME experience need at least 20 cases to achieve early proficiency in RAME.

Implementation of the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group definitions: the benefits of speaking the same language

In 2015 the Esophagectomy Complication Consensus Group (ECCG) reported consensus definitions for complications after esophagectomy. This aimed to reduce variation in complication reporting, attributed to heterogeneous definitions. This systematic review aimed to describe the implementation of this definition set, including the effect on complication frequency and variation. A systematic literature review was performed, identifying all observational and randomized studies reporting complication frequencies after esophagectomy since the ECCG publication. Recruitment periods before and subsequent to the index ECCG publication date were included. Coefficients of variance were calculated to assess outcome heterogeneity. Of 144 studies which met inclusion criteria, 70 (48.6%) used ECCG definitions. The median number of separately reported complication types was five per study; only one study reported all ECCG complications. The coefficients of variance of the reported frequencies of eight of the 10 most common complications were reduced in studies which used the ECCG definitions compared with those that did not (P = 0.036). Among ECCG studies, the frequencies of postoperative pneumothorax, reintubation, and pulmonary emboli were significantly reduced in 2020-2021, compared with 2015-2019 (P = 0.006, 0.034, and 0.037 respectively). The ECCG definition set has reduced variation in esophagectomy morbidity reporting. This adds greater confidence to the observed gradual improvement in outcomes with time, and its ongoing use and wider dissemination should be encouraged. However, only a handful of outcomes are widely reported, and only rarely is it used in its entirety.

End to side circular stapled anastomosis during robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE)

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) represents an established approach for the treatment of esophageal cancer. Aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of our technique for performing the intrathoracic anastomosis during RAMIE.All the procedures were performed by the same surgeon using the same technique for performing the intrathoracic anastomosis. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were recorded. Postoperative complications were classified according to the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG); the primary outcome was the evaluation of the feasibility and safety of our technique. From 2016 to 2021, 204 patients underwent Ivor Lewis RAMIE at our Center. Two patients (0.9%) were converted during the thoracic phase. The anastomosis was completed in all the other patients forming complete anastomotic rings. The median duration for the robotic-assisted thoracoscopic phase was 224 minutes. Twenty-two of the RAMIE-Ivor Lewis patients had an anastomotic leakage (10.3%). The overall 90-day postoperative mortality was 1.9%. The procedure resulted to be feasible and safe in our cohort of patients.

Outcomes of Minimally Invasive and Robot-Assisted Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

Simple Summary

This is an invited review for the special edition, “Minimally Invasive Surgery for Cancer: Indications and Outcomes.” Indications to perform minimally invasive techniques for esophagectomy rather than the classic open technique do not exist. This review outlines the current research by comparing outcomes among minimally invasive esophagectomy, robot-assisted esophagectomy, and open esophagectomy. After determining the benefits of each technique in terms of each outcome, the discussion focuses on how surgeons may use the presented information to determine which approach is most appropriate. We hope this study provides a comprehensive review of the current state of the literature regarding minimally invasive esophagectomy, as well as a guide for surgeons who treat patients with esophageal cancer.

Abstract

With the evolution of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), questions remain regarding the benefits and indications of these methods. Given that set indications do not exist, this article aims first to review the reported outcomes of MIE, RAMIE, and open esophagectomy. Then, considerations based on the reported outcomes are discussed to guide surgeons in selecting the best approach. MIE and RAMIE offer the potential to improve outcomes for esophagectomy patients; however, surgeon experience as well as individual patient factors play important roles when deciding upon the surgical approach.

Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy Leads to Significant Reduction in Postoperative Acute Pain: A Retrospective Clinical Trial

Background

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) shows promising results regarding postoperative complications in patients with esophageal cancer. To date, no data are available regarding postoperative analgesic consumption. The aim of this work is to evaluate analgesic consumption after esophagectomy.

Methods

A total of 274 Ivor Lewis esophageal resections performed sequentially from January 2012 to December 2020 were evaluated. RAMIE cases (n = 51) were compared with the hybrid technique (laparoscopic abdominal phase followed by open thoracotomy, n = 59) and open abdominothoracic esophagectomy (OTE) (n = 164). Data were collected retrospectively. The primary endpoint was the overall postoperative morphine consumption, which represents a reliable indirect measurement of pain. Pain levels recorded on the first, third, and fifth postoperative days were assessed as secondary endpoints.

Results

A total of 274 patients were included. The postoperative opioid consumption rate for patients who underwent RAMIE (quartiles: 0.14, 0.23, 0.36 mg morphine milligram equivalents (MME)/kg body weight (bw)/day) was significantly lower than in the open group (0.19, 0.33, 0.58 mg MME/kg bw/day, p = 0.016). The overall postoperative opioid consumption for patients who underwent RAMIE was significantly lower (2.45, 3.63, 7.20 mg MME/kg bw/day; morphine milligram equivalents per kilogram body weight) compared with the open (4.85, 8.59, 14.63 MME/kg bw/day, p < 0.0001) and hybrid (4.13, 6.84, 11.36 MME/kg bw/day, p = 0.008) groups. Patients who underwent RAMIE reported lower pain scores compared with the open group on the fifth postoperative day, both at rest (p = 0.004) and while performing activities (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

This study shows that patients who underwent RAMIE experienced similar postoperative pain while requiring significantly lower amounts of opioids compared with patients who underwent open and hybrid surgery. Further studies are required to verify the results.

Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) constitutes a newly developed surgical technique for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer, aiming to further improve the high morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy. We performed a systematic review of the literature and compared the outcomes of RAMIE and open esophagectomy. RAMIE is a safe and feasible procedure, resulting in decreased cardiopulmonary morbidity, wound infections, blood loss, and hospital stays compared to open esophagectomy.

Abstract

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was introduced as a further development of the conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy, aiming to further improve the high morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the outcomes between RAMIE and open esophagectomy, which remains a popular approach for resectable esophageal cancer. Ten studies meeting our inclusion criteria were identified, including five retrospective cohort, four prospective cohort, and one randomized controlled trial. RAMIE was associated with significantly lower rates of overall pulmonary complications (odds ratio (OR): 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): [0.26, 0.56]), pneumonia (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: [0.26, 0.57]), atrial fibrillation (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: [0.29, 0.98]), and wound infections (OR: 0.20, 95% CI: [0.07, 0.57]) and resulted in less blood loss (weighted mean difference (WMD): −187.08 mL, 95% CI: [−283.81, −90.35]) and shorter hospital stays (WMD: −9.22 days, 95% CI: [−14.39, −4.06]) but longer operative times (WMD: 69.45 min, 95% CI: [34.39, 104.42]). No other statistically significant difference was observed regarding surgical and short-term oncological outcomes. Similar findings were observed when comparing totally robotic procedures only to OE. RAMIE is a safe and feasible procedure, resulting in decreased cardiopulmonary morbidity, wound infections, blood loss, and shorter hospital stays compared to open esophagectomy.

Extended lower paratracheal lymph node resection during esophagectomy for cancer - safety and necessity

BACKGROUND

The ideal extent of lymphadenectomy (LAD) in esophageal oncological surgery is debated. There is no evidence for improved survival after standardized paratracheal lymph node resection performing oncological esophagectomy. Lymph nodes from the lower paratracheal station are not standardly resected during 2-field Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of lower paratracheal lymph node (LPL) resection on perioperative outcome during esophagectomy for cancer and analyze its relevance.

METHODS

Retrospectively, we identified 200 consecutive patients operated in our center for esophageal cancer from January 2017 - December 2019. Patients with and without lower paratracheal LAD were compared regarding demographic data, tumor characteristics, operative details, postoperative complications, tumor recurrence and overall survival.

RESULTS

103 out of 200 patients received lower paratracheal lymph node resection. On average, five lymph nodes were resected in the paratracheal region and cancer infiltration was found in two patients. Those two patients suffered from neuroendocrine carcinoma and melanoma respectively. Cases with lower paratracheal lymph node yield had significantly less overall complicated procedures (p = 0.026). Regarding overall survival and recurrence rate no significant difference could be detected between both groups (p = 0.168 and 0.371 respectively).

CONCLUSION

The resection of lower paratracheal lymph nodes during esophagectomy remains debatable for distal squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the esophagus. Tumor infiltration was only found in rare cancer entities. Since resection can be performed safely, we recommend LPL resection on demand.

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy within the prospective multicenter German da Vinci Xi registry trial

Abstract

Purpose

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has become one standard approach for the operative treatment of esophageal tumors at specialized centers. Here, we report the results of a prospective multicenter registry for standardized RAMIE.

Methods

The German da Vinci Xi registry trial included all consecutive patients who underwent RAMIE at five tertiary university centers between Oct 17, 2017, and Jun 5, 2020. RAMIE was performed according to a standard technique using an intrathoracic circular stapled esophagogastrostomy.

Results

A total of 220 patients were included. The median age was 64 years. Total minimally invasive RAMIE was accomplished in 85.9%; hybrid resection with robotic-assisted thoracic approach was accomplished in an additional 11.4%. A circular stapler size of ≥28 mm was used in 84%, and the median blood loss and operative time were 200 (IQR: 80–400) ml and 425 (IQR: 335–527) min, respectively. The rate of anastomotic leakage was 13.2% (n=29), whereas the two centers with >70 cases each had rates of 7.0% and 12.0%. Pneumonia occurred in 19.5% of patients, and the 90-day mortality was 3.6%. Cumulative sum analysis of the operative time indicated the end of the learning curve after 22 cases.

Conclusions

High-quality multicenter registry data confirm that RAMIE is a safe procedure and can be reproduced with acceptable leak rates in a multicenter setting. The learning curve is comparably low for experienced robotic surgeons.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00423-022-02520-w.

[Change of strategy to minimally invasive esophagectomy-Results at a certified center]

Hintergrund

Es gibt Hinweise, dass die roboterassistierte minimal-invasive Ösophagektomie (RAMIE) die Morbidität im Vergleich zur konventionellen Operationstechnik verringern kann.

Ziel der Arbeit

Es erfolgte eine Vergleichsanalyse eines Single-Center-Strategiewechsels des Standards von offener Ösophagektomie zu RAMIE mit perioperativer, enteraler, selektiver Darmdekontamination (SDD).

Material und Methoden

Patienten- und Morbiditätsdaten nach elektiver RAMIE entsprechend dem neuen Standardmanagement zwischen Juli 2018 und September 2020 wurden retrospektiv mit einer historischen Kontrollkohorte nach offener Ösophagektomie zwischen Januar 2014 und Juni 2018 verglichen. Es erfolgte eine 1:1-Propensity-Score-Matching(PSM)-Analyse.

Ergebnisse

Insgesamt 75 Patienten konnten nach PSM in beiden Gruppen analysiert werden. Etwa zwei Drittel der Operationen erfolgte aufgrund eines Adenokarzinoms und ein Drittel bei Plattenepithelkarzinom. Im Median wurden 22 bzw. 21 Lymphknoten reseziert. Die intrathorakale Ösophagogastrostomie erfolgte in der RAMIE-Gruppe in 97 % mit einem Zirkularstapler mit ≥28 mm Durchmesser (offen: 25 mm in 90 % der Fälle). Die Operationszeit war länger (Median 490 vs. 339 min, p < 0,001), hingegen waren der Blutverlust (Median 300 vs. 500 ml, p < 0,001), die Anastomoseninsuffizienz- (8,0 % vs. 25,3 %, p = 0,004), Wundinfektions- (4,0 % vs. 17,3 %, p = 0,008) und pulmonale Komplikationsrate (29,3 % vs. 44,0 %, p = 0,045) sowie die mediane Krankenhausverweildauer (14 vs. 20 Tage, p < 0,001) und die 90-Tage-Mortalität signifikant geringer verglichen mit der offenen Kontrollkohorte (4,0 % vs. 13,3 %, p = 0,039).

Diskussion

Ein konsequenter Wechsel des perioperativen Managements u. a. mit RAMIE und SDD kann zu einer stabilen Reduktion der Morbidität ohne Einschränkungen der onkologischen Radikalität führen.

Current status of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: what is the real benefit?

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer has been performed increasingly frequently over the last few years. Robotic systems with articulated devices and tremor filtration allow surgeons to perform such procedures more meticulously than by hand. The feasibility of RAMIE has been demonstrated in several retrospective comparative studies, which showed similar short-term outcomes to conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (cMIE). Considering the number of harvested lymph nodes, RAMIE may be superior to cMIE in terms of left upper mediastinal lymph node dissection. However, whether or not the addition of a robotic system to cMIE can help improve perioperative and oncological outcomes remains unclear. Given the lack of established evidence from randomized controlled trials, we must await the results of ongoing studies to reach any meaningful conclusions. Further advancements in robotic platforms, as well as the reduction in medical expenses, will be essential to demonstrate the real benefit of RAMIE.

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and individual patient data comparing minimally invasive with open oesophagectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO) for oesophageal cancer may reduce surgical complications compared with open oesophagectomy. MIO is, however, technically challenging and may impair optimal oncological resection. The aim of the present study was to assess if MIO for cancer is beneficial.

METHODS

A systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL was performed and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MIO with open oesophagectomy were included in a meta-analysis. Survival was analysed using individual patient data. Random-effects model was used for pooled estimates of perioperative effects.

RESULTS

Among 3219 articles, six RCTs were identified including 822 patients. Three-year overall survival (56 (95 per cent c.i. 49 to 62) per cent for MIO versus 52 (95 per cent c.i. 44 to 60) per cent for open; P = 0.54) and disease-free survival (54 (95 per cent c.i. 47 to 61) per cent versus 50 (95 per cent c.i. 42 to 58) per cent; P = 0.38) were comparable. Overall complication rate was lower for MIO (odds ratio 0.33 (95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.53); P < 0.010) mainly due to fewer pulmonary complications (OR 0.44 (95 per cent c.i. 0.27 to 0.72); P < 0.010), including pneumonia (OR 0.41 (95 per cent c.i. 0.22 to 0.77); P < 0.010).

CONCLUSION

MIO for cancer is associated with a lower risk of postoperative complications compared with open resection. Overall and disease-free survival are comparable for the two techniques.

LAY SUMMARY

Oesophagectomy for cancer is associated with a high risk of complications. A minimally invasive approach might be less traumatic, leading to fewer complications and may also improve oncological outcome. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing minimally invasive to open oesophagectomy was performed. The analysis showed that the minimally invasive approach led to fewer postoperative complications, in particular, fewer pulmonary complications. Survival after surgery was comparable for the two techniques.

Technical details for a robot-assisted hand-sewn esophago-gastric anastomosis during minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Background

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIILE) provides better outcomes than open techniques, particularly in terms of post-operative recovery and pulmonary complications. However, in addition to requiring advanced technical skills, thoracoscopic access makes it hard to perform esophagogastric anastomosis safely, and the reported rates of anastomotic leak vary from 5 to 16%. Several minimally invasive esophago-gastric anastomotic techniques have been described, but to date strong evidence to support one technique over the others is still lacking. We herein report the technical details and preliminary results of a new robot-assisted hand-sewn esophago-gastric anastomosis technique.

Methods

From January 2018 to December 2020, 12 cases of laparoscopic/thoracoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with robot-assisted hand-sewn esophago-gastric anastomosis were performed. The gastric conduit was prepared and tailored taking care of vascularization with a complete resection of the gastric fundus. The anastomosis consisted of a robot-assisted, hand-sewn four layers of absorbable monofilament running barbed suture (V-lock). The posterior outer layer incorporated the gastric and esophageal staple lines.

Results

The post-operative course was uneventful in nine cases. Two patients developed chyloperitoneum, one patient a Sars-Cov-2 infection, and one patient a late anastomotic stricture. In all cases, there were no anastomotic leaks or delayed gastric conduit emptying. The median post-operative stay was 13 days (min 7, max 37 days); the longest in-hospital stay was recorded in patients who developed chyloperitoneum.

Conclusion

Despite the small series, we believe that our technique looks to be promising, safe, and reproducible. Some key points may be useful to guarantee a low complications rate after MIILE, particularly regarding anastomotic leaks and delayed emptying: the resection of the gastric fundus, the use of robot assistance, the incorporation of the staple lines in the posterior aspect of the anastomosis, and the use of barbed suture. Further cases are needed to validate the preliminary, but very encouraging, results.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08715-4.

Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Early Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial: the RAMIE Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in the treatment for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

RAMIE has emerged as an alternative to traditional open or thoracoscopic approaches. Efficacy and safety of RAMIE and MIE in the surgical treatment for ESCC remains uncertain given the lack of high-level clinical evidence.

METHODS

The RAMIE trial was designed as a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial that compare the efficacy and safety of RAMIE and MIE in the treatment of resectable ESCC. From August 2017 to December 2019, eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either RAMIE or MIE performed by experienced thoracic surgeons from six high-volume centers in China. Intent-to-treat analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Significantly shorter operation time was taken in RAMIE (203.8 vs. 244.9 mins, P<0.001). Compared to MIE, RAMIE showed improved efficiency of thoracic lymph node dissection in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy (15 vs. 12, P=0.016), as well as higher achievement rate of lymph node dissection along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) (79.5% vs. 67.6%, P=0.001). No difference was found in blood loss, conversion rate, and R0 resection. The 90-day mortality was 0.6% in each group. Overall complications were similar in RAMIE (48.6%) compared to MIE (41.8%) (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.92-1.46; P=0.196). Besides, the rate of major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ III) was also comparable (12.2% vs. 10.2%, P=0.551). RAMIE showed similar incidences of pulmonary complications (13.8% vs. 14.7%; P=0.812), anastomotic leakage (12.2% vs. 11.3%; P=0.801) and vocal cord paralysis (32.6% vs. 27.1%, P=0.258) to MIE.

CONCLUSIONS

Early results demonstrate that both RAMIE and MIE are safe and feasible for the treatment of ESCC. RAMIE can achieve shorter operative duration as well as better lymph node dissection in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy. Long-term results are pending for further follow-up investigations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT03094351.

Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, a review of the technique

Esophageal resection is a key component of the multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy is gaining widespread approval amongst few centers with promising early data. There is significant variability in the operative approach utilized by different centers and this review describes, step-by-step, the operative technique at a high-volume tertiary center. The cornerstone of management is individualized surgical approach, based on patient, tumor and technical factors. Although our approach is based on aforementioned factors, our preferred approach is an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and this review focuses on that. The procedure is broken down into three key parts, starting with an abdominal exploration and creation of the gastric conduit, placement of jejunostomy tube, moving to thoracic mobilization and creation of the side-side 6 cm stapled esophagogastric anastomosis with a final abdominal portion to assure proper positioning of the conduit and reducing redundancy. This approach is fully robotic and a side to side anastomosis facilitates the creation of a widely patent anastomosis therefore minimizing the risk of anastomotic leaks and strictures. Our experience with minimally invasive esophagectomy, as has been previously published, is associated with a 5.1% of anastomotic leak and 7.6% of anastomotic stricture. The robotic platform further optimizes this technique and helps us safely accomplish a side to side stapled anastomosis. Superior instrument dexterity in a restricted thoracic space is facilitated by intracorporeal suturing and robotic stapling. Thus, it obviates the need for a larger thoracotomy incision, which is typically needed for an EEA anastomosis, and that is traditionally associated with higher stricture rate.

Risk of chyle leak after robotic versus video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

We investigate the incidence and risk factors for post-operative outcomes including chyle leak following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE).

METHODS

Patients undergoing MIE from May 2016 until August 2020 were prospectively followed. Outcomes of robotic and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) esophagectomy were analyzed.

RESULTS

347 esophagectomies were performed: 70 cases were done robotically by 2 surgeons and 277 by VATS by 14 surgeons. Patients had similar demographics, surgical technique, length of stay (LOS), and re-operation rates. Overall complication rates between robotic and VATS MIE were statistically similar (61% vs. 50%; p = 0.082). The majority of complications for either VATS (41.5%) or robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) (51.4%) were grade II. Nineteen patients developed a chyle leak. Patients with a chyle leak were similar in age, gender, and hospital LOS (all p > 0.05), but were more likely to undergo a three-hole or robotic esophagectomy (both p < 0.05) as well as have higher rehabilitation requirements on discharge (26% vs. 10%; p = 0.05). Among the two surgeons who each performed > 20 robotic esophagectomies (n = 70), nine chyle leaks occurred. Rates varied by surgeon (7 vs. 2; p = 0.003). Lower leak rates occurred in the surgeon with more robotic esophagectomy experience (n = 47 vs. 23). Patients were similar in age, and gender (p > 0.05), but those with a chyle leak were more likely to undergo three-hole esophagectomies, prophylactic thoracic duction ligations, undergo the abdominal portion via laparotomy, and not have a prophylactic omental flap (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Robotic and VATS esophagectomy have similar rates of re-operation, length of stay, discharge needs and complications. Differences in outcomes between VATS and Robotic esophagectomy appears to be related to surgeon experience with the robot but may also be associated with techniques such as anastomotic height, omental flap utilization and performance of laparoscopy.

The Circular Stapled Esophagogastric Anastomosis in Esophagectomy: No Differences in Anastomotic Insufficiency and Stricture Rates Between the 25 mm and 28 mm Circular Stapler

BACKGROUND

For patients undergoing an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with a circular stapled anastomosis, the optimal diameter of the used circular stapler to restore continuity is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the 25 mm stapled versus the 28 mm stapled esophagogastric anastomosis after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, focusing on anastomotic insufficiency and postoperative anastomotic strictures.

METHODS

Between February 2008 and June 2019, 349 consecutive patients underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with gastric conduit reconstruction and circular stapled anastomosis. Patient characteristics and postoperative results, such as anastomotic insufficiency rates, postoperative anastomotic stricture rates, time to anastomotic stricture rate, and the number of dilatations, were recorded in a prospective database and analyzed.

RESULTS

In 222 patients (64%), the 25 mm circular stapler was used and in 127 patients (36%) the 28 mm circular stapler was used. There were no differences in baseline characteristics. Anastomotic insufficiency rates were comparable between the 25 mm (12%) and the 28 mm groups (11%) (p = 0.751). There were no differences between postoperative anastomotic strictures in the 25 mm (14%) and the 28 mm groups (14%) (p = 0.863). Within patients with postoperative anastomotic strictures, a median number of 2 dilatations were observed in each group (p = 0.573) without differences in the time to first diagnosis (p = 0.412).

CONCLUSION

There were no differences in anastomotic insufficiency and postoperative anastomotic stricture rates between the 25 mm and the 28 mm circular stapled esophagogastric anastomosis after Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Both the 25 mm and 28 mm stapler can be safely used to create a circular stapled esophagogastric anastomosis to restore continuity after esophagectomy.

RAMIE: tradition drives innovation-feasibility of a robotic-assisted intra-thoracic anastomosis

Due to the difficulties in the intra-thoracic esophagogastric anastomosis creation, totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE) did not encountered a large diffusion, preferring hybrid techniques or cervical anastomosis. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has gained popularity due to an easy reproducibility of the open anastomotic technique. In this feasibility study, we described the RAMIE technique introduced in our Center, providing innovative details for a mechanical end-to-end anastomosis. With patient in prone position, esophagectomy is conducted through the meso-esophagus plan. Robotic hand-sewn purse-string is realized above Azygos vein. A 4-cm thoracotomy in the fifth intercostal space is performed by enlarging the trocar incision. The tubulization is performed to create an access pouch for the introduction of the circular stapler. After the creation of the end-to-end anastomosis, the access pouch is resected and a robotic over-sewn is realized. From January 2020 until July 2020, ten patients were enrolled. No restriction in term of age, BMI, ASA grade or previous surgery were applied. Median operative time was 700 min. R0 resection was achieved in all cases with a good lymph node harvesting. No anastomotic leak or stricture were observed. One chyle leak was treated conservatively. Median length of stay was 8 days and 90 days mortality was 0%. This study evidenced how robotic surgery allowed us to perform the same anastomosis of our open technique with good oncological results and morbidity and length of stay comparable with our previous results. Of note, longer operative time has been recorded. Further studies after the completion of the learning curve are necessary to address more definite conclusions.

A structured training pathway to implement robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: the learning curve results from a high-volume center

To ensure safe implementation of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), the learning process should be optimized. This study aimed to report the results of a surgeon who implemented RAMIE in a German high-volume center by following a tailored and structured training pathway that involved proctoring. Consecutive patients who underwent RAMIE during the course of the program were included from a prospective database. A single surgeon, who had prior experience in conventional MIE, performed all RAMIE procedures. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) learning curves were plotted for the thoracic operating time and intraoperative blood loss. Perioperative outcomes were compared between patients who underwent surgery before and after a learning curve plateau occurred. Between 2017 and 2018, the adopting center adhered to the structured training pathway, and a total of 70 patients were included in the analysis. The CUSUM learning curves showed plateaus after 22 cases. In consecutive cases 23 to 70, the operating time was shorter for both the thoracic phase (median 215 vs. 249 minutes, P = 0.001) and overall procedure (median 394 vs. 440 minutes, P = 0.005), intraoperative blood loss was less (median 210 vs. 400 milliliters, P = 0.029), and lymph node yield was higher (median 32 vs. 23 nodes, P = 0.001) when compared to cases 1 to 22. No significant differences were found in terms of conversion rates, postoperative complications, length of stay, completeness of resection, or mortality. In conclusion, the structured training pathway resulted in a short and safe learning curve for RAMIE in this single center's experience. As the pathway seems effective in implementing RAMIE without compromising the early oncological outcomes and complication rates, it is advised for surgeons who are wanting to adopt this technique.

Technical details of the abdominal part during full robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy

The full robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is an upcoming approach in the treatment of esophageal and junctional cancer. Potential benefits are seen in angulated precise maneuvers in the abdominal part as well as in the thoracic part, but due to the novelty of this approach the optimal setting of the trocars, the instruments and the operating setting is still under debate. Hereafter, we present a technical description of the 'Mainz technique' of the abdominal part of RAMIE carried out as Ivor Lewis procedure. Postoperative complication rate and duration of the abdominal part of 100 consecutive patients from University Medical Center in Mainz are illustrated. In addition, the abdominal phase of the full RAMIE is discussed in general.

Specific complications and limitations of robotic esophagectomy

Regardless of the approach to esophagectomy, it is an operation that may be associated with significant risk to the patient. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has the same potential for short- and long-term complications as does open and minimally invasive esophagectomy. These complications include among others, the risk for anastomotic leak, gastric tip necrosis, vocal cord palsy, and chylothorax. Moreover, there are additional risks that are unique to the robotic platform such as hardware or software malfunction. These risks are heavily influenced by numerous factors including the patient's comorbidities, whether neoadjuvant therapy was administered, and the extent of the surgical team's experience. The limitations of RAMIE are therefore based on the careful assessment of the patient for operability, the tumor for resectability and the team for surgical ability. This article will tackle the topic of complications and limitations of RAMIE by examining each of these issues. It will also describe the recommended terminology for reporting post-esophagectomy complications.

The Influence of Pretherapeutic and Preoperative Sarcopenia on Short-Term Outcome after Esophagectomy

Simple Summary

Although introducing minimally invasive surgery reduced postoperative morbidity after esophagectomy esophageal cancer still is a malignancy with poor prognosis. This study aimed to investigate whether preoperative sarcopenia has an influence on short-term postoperative outcome after esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients. Our findings suggest that preoperative sarcopenia is no independent prognostic factor for postoperative outcome after esophagectomy but that patients’ nutritional status consists of more factors than only body mass index (BMI) and muscle mass. Prehabilitation and preoperative optimization of the patients’ nutritional status seems to be an important factor for short-term postoperative outcome after esophagectomy.

Abstract

By introducing minimally invasive surgery the rate of postoperative morbidity in esophageal cancer patients could be reduced. But esophagectomy is still associated with a relevant risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality. Patients often present with nutritional deficiency and sarcopenia even at time of diagnosis. This study focuses on the influence of skeletal muscle index (SMI) on postoperative morbidity and mortality. Fifty-two patients were included in this study. SMI was measured using computer tomographic images at the time of diagnosis and before surgery. Then, SMI and different clinicopathological and demographic features were correlated with postoperative morbidity. There was no correlation between SMI before neoadjuvant therapy (p = 0.5365) nor before surgery (p = 0.3530) with the short-term postoperative outcome. Regarding cholesterol level before surgery there was a trend for a higher risk of complications with lower cholesterol levels (p = 0.0846). Our findings suggest that a low preoperative SMI does not necessarily predict a poor postoperative outcome in esophageal cancer patients after esophagectomy but that there are many factors that influence the nutritional status of cancer patients. To improve nutritional status, cancer patients at our clinic receive specialized nutritional counselling during neoadjuvant treatment as well as after surgery.

Initial introduction of robot-assisted, minimally invasive esophagectomy using the microanatomy-based concept in the upper mediastinum

Background

We have recently standardized upper mediastinal lymph node dissection (UMLND) using a microanatomy-based concept in thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position (TEPP), and introduced robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) using the same concept as in TEPP while aiming at solo surgery. The purpose of this study was to investigate the outcomes of RAMIE using the microanatomy-based concept in the initial introduction phase.

Methods

We have performed more than 500 TEPP procedures as minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). After performing about 400 cases of MIE, we established a microanatomy-based standardization of UMLND. In October 2018, we introduced RAMIE, and have performed 75 procedures in 20 months. Two groups were analyzed: a group after microanatomy-based standardization in TEPP (100 cases after completing 400 cases of TEPP) and a RAMIE group (75 cases). Finally, 51 paired cases were matched using a propensity score. Furthermore, the change in postoperative short-term outcome for RAMIE in the initial introduction phase was analyzed.

Results

Although there were no significant differences between the two groups in the number of upper mediastinal lymph nodes dissected, there was a significant decrease (P = 0.036) in intraoperative blood loss volume with RAMIE, representing a definite benefit for patients. The thoracoscopic operative time for RAMIE decreased by almost 100 min following less than 50 cases of experience, reaching the same level as that for recent TEPP, but with only one-tenth the operator experience. There were no significant differences in the total postoperative morbidity rate including the recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy rate.

Conclusion

RAMIE has been introduced safely and smoothly using the microanatomy-based concept established in TEPP.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy: clinical evidence and surgical techniques

Background

Surgical esophagectomy plays a crucial role in the curative and palliative treatment of esophageal cancer. Thereby, minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly applied all over the world. Combining minimal invasiveness with improved possibilities for meticulous dissection, robot-assisted minimal invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been implemented in many centers.

Purpose

This review focuses on the development of MIE as well as RAMIE and their value based on evidence in current literature.

Conclusion

Although MIE and RAMIE are highly complex procedures, they can be performed safely with improved postoperative outcome and equal oncological results compared with open esophagectomy (OE). RAMIE offers additional advantages regarding surgical dissection, lymphadenectomy, and extended indications for advanced tumors.