Long-term outcomes after robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus minimally invasive esophagectomy in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Recently, robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has gained popularity worldwide. Some studies have compared the long-term results of RAMIE and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). However, there are no reports on the long-term outcomes of RAMIE in Japan. This study compared the long-term outcomes of RAMIE and MIE.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 86 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent RAMIE or MIE at our hospital from June 2010 to December 2016. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed, incorporating co-variables such as confounders or risk factors derived from the literature and clinical practice. These variables included age, sex, body mass index, alcohol consumption, smoking history, American Society of Anesthesiologists stage, comorbidities, tumor location, histology, clinical TNM stage, and preoperative therapy. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence rates.

RESULTS

Before PSM, the RAMIE group had a longer operation time (min) than the MIE group (P = 0.019). RAMIE also exhibited significantly lower blood loss volume (mL) (P < 0.001) and fewer three-field lymph node dissections (P = 0.028). Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo: CD ≥ 2) were significantly lower in the RAMIE group (P = 0.04), and postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter than the MIE group (P < 0.001). After PSM, the RAMIE and MIE groups consisted of 26 patients each. Blood loss volume was significantly smaller (P = 0.012), postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 2) were significantly lower (P = 0.021), and postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (P < 0.001) in the RAMIE group than those in the MIE group. The median observation period was 63 months. The 5-year OS rates were 73.1% and 80.8% in the RAMIE and MIE groups, respectively (P = 0.360); the 5-year DFS rates were 76.9% and 76.9% in the RAMIE and MIE groups, respectively (P = 0.749). Six of 26 patients (23.1%) in each group experienced recurrence, with a median recurrence period of 41.5 months in the RAMIE group and 22.5 months in the MIE group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with MIE, RAMIE led to no differences in long-term results, suggesting that RAMIE is a comparable technique.

Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAILE): A review of surgical techniques and clinical outcomes

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.

Clinical comparative study of glasses-free 3D and 2D thoracoscopic surgery in minimally invasive esophagectomy

Objective

To investigate the safety and efficacy of glasses-free three-dimensional (3D) thoracoscopic surgery in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE).

Methods

The clinical data of 98 patients, including 81 men and 17 women aged 45-77 years, with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma who underwent minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy from January 2017 to December 2019 [3 years, with clinical follow-up time: 1 year~4 years (2017.01-2020.12)] were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to different surgical methods including a glasses-free 3D thoracoscopic group (G-3D group: 38 patients) and a two-dimesional (2D) thoracoscopic group (2D group: 60 patients). The clinical outcome of the two groups were compared.

Results

The operation time of the thoracoscopic part in the G-3D group was significantly shorter than that in the 2D group (P<0.05). The total number of lymph node dissection in the G-3D group was more than that in the 2D group (P<0.05). The thoracic indwelling time, postoperative hospital stay, severe pulmonary infection, arrhythmia, anastomotic leakage, chylothorax, and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury were not significantly different between the two groups (P>0.05). There was also no significant difference between the two groups on the progression-free survival (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Glasses-free 3D thoracoscopic surgery for esophageal cancer is a safe and effective surgical procedure. Compared with 2D thoracoscopic MIE, glasses-free 3D thoracoscopic MIE for esophageal cancer has higher safety, more lymph node dissection, and higher operation efficiency through the optimized surgical operations. We believe that glasses-free 3D thoracoscopy for MIE is worthy of clinical promotion.