State of the art in esophagectomy: robotic assistance in the abdominal phase

Total RAMIE with three-field lymph node dissection by a simultaneous two-team approach using a new docking method for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Thoracic esophageal cancer surgery using robotic approaches for the thoracic and abdominal parts has recently been reported as total robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). We herein present the first report of a new technique for esophageal cancer: total RAMIE with three-field lymph node dissection (3FLND) by a simultaneous two-team approach using a new docking method.

METHODS

We reviewed 20 patients who underwent total RAMIE with 3FLND by a simultaneous two-team approach at the National Cancer Center East Hospital from March 2023 to September 2023. Short-term surgical outcomes and the safety and efficacy of this technique were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean operative time for abdominal surgery with this new docking technique was 135 ± 19.6 min. The total operative time was 488 ± 42.9 min, and the time from the end of abdominal manipulation to the end of surgery was 80.1 ± 15.6 min. The intraoperative blood loss was 116.7 ± 64.4 mL. The incidence of anastomotic leakage, postoperative vocal cord paralysis, and postoperative pneumonia was 10%, 5%, and 10%, respectively. The median postoperative hospital stay was 14 days (range 11-63 days). No in-hospital deaths occurred, and R0 resection was possible in all cases. The average number of lymph nodes dissected was 87.7.

CONCLUSION

These results demonstrate that total RAMIE with a simultaneous two-team approach using the new docking method can be safely introduced. The simultaneous cervical and abdominal manipulation with the new docking method allowed total RAMIE without prolonging the operating time, suggesting that it may be a valuable approach for esophageal cancer surgery.

Reducing the Risks of Esophagectomies: A Retrospective Comparison of Hybrid versus Full-Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) Approaches

This retrospective analysis aimed to assess and compare the short-term perioperative outcomes and morbidity of hybrid and full-Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) surgical techniques. A total of 168 robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy procedures performed at Muenster University Hospital were included in the study, with 63 cases in the hybrid group and 105 cases in the full-robotic group. Demographic factors, comorbidities, and tumor stages showed no significant differences between the two groups. However, the full-RAMIE technique demonstrated superiority in terms of overall operative time, postoperative pain levels, and patient morphine consumption. Additionally, the full-RAMIE group exhibited better perioperative outcomes, with significantly shorter ICU stays and fewer occurrences of pneumonias and severe complications. While there was a trend favoring the full-RAMIE technique in terms of severe postoperative complications and anastomotic insufficiencies, further research is required to establish it as the gold standard surgical technique for Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Hybrid laparoscopic versus fully robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: an international propensity-score matched analysis of perioperative outcome

BACKGROUND

Currently, little is known regarding the optimal technique for the abdominal phase of RAMIE. The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in both the abdominal and thoracic phase (full RAMIE) compared to laparoscopy during the abdominal phase (hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE).

METHODS

This retrospective propensity-score matched analysis of the International Upper Gastrointestinal International Robotic Association (UGIRA) database included 807 RAMIE procedures with intrathoracic anastomosis between 2017 and 2021 from 23 centers.

RESULTS

After propensity-score matching, 296 hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE patients were compared to 296 full RAMIE patients. Both groups were equal regarding intraoperative blood loss (median 200 ml versus 197 ml, p = 0.6967), operational time (mean 430.3 min versus 417.7 min, p = 0.1032), conversion rate during abdominal phase (2.4% versus 1.7%, p = 0.560), radical resection (R0) rate (95.6% versus 96.3%, p = 0.8526) and total lymph node yield (mean 30.4 versus 29.5, p = 0.3834). The hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE group showed higher rates of anastomotic leakage (28.0% versus 16.6%, p = 0.001) and Clavien Dindo grade 3a or higher (45.3% versus 26.0%, p < 0.001). The length of stay on intensive care unit (median 3 days versus 2 days, p = 0.0005) and in-hospital (median 15 days versus 12 days, p < 0.0001) were longer for the hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE group.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid laparoscopic RAMIE and full RAMIE were oncologically equivalent with a potential decrease of postoperative complications and shorter (intensive care) stay after full RAMIE.

Qualitative Study on the Information Needs of Patients Undergoing Da Vinci Robotic Surgery

To explore the information needs and experiences of patients who underwent Da Vinci robotic surgery and to establish a reference for providing information support to these patients. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 patients who underwent robotic surgery. Thematic analysis was subsequently executed on the data obtained from the interviews to identify the themes. Thematic analysis generated two main themes with six supporting sub-themes. The main themes were (1) surgical information acquisition experience and (2) the need for personalization to obtain satisfactory information. Patients who received Da Vinci robotic surgery had insufficient understanding of the surgical methods and possessed high demand for surgical-related information. Although patients' understanding of robotic surgery might be improved through multi-channel information support, due to the differences in patient access to information, personalized experiences would occur during this process. Professional information support could effectively enhance their positive psychological experiences with surgery.

Using the da Vinci X® - System for Esophageal Surgery

Robotic esophageal surgery is becoming more widely adopted. Several publications on the feasibility, short-term outcomes and technical aspects are available. Most of these articles used either the da Vinci® SI system or in newer series the Xi System. The da Vinci® X system is generally considered less suited for multiquadrant access like in esophageal surgery, hence only limited data is available. Here we describe our initial experience with 16 Ivor-Lewis robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomies (RAMIE) in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. The da Vinci® X system was installed in our department in 2019; the robotic program comprises colorectal, pancreatic and esophageal surgery. The first two patients were operated in the presence of a proctor. An operative standard was established including fluorescence angiography (Firefly®). Technical aspects with focus on the characteristics of the da Vinci® X system, operating room setup, and short-term outcomes are discussed.

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.