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

Minimally Invasive Modified McKeown Esophagectomy

McKeown esophagectomy is a transthoracic esophagectomy with a cervical anastomosis that is an established mainstay for the management of benign and malignant esophageal pathology. It has gone through multiple modifications. The most current version utilizes robotic or minimally invasive ports through both the right chest and abdominal portions. There is decreased pain and hospital length of stay compared to the open technique. However, anastomotic leak and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury continue to occur. Advancements in management of complications has decreased mortality, making this surgical approach a relevant option for esophageal pathologies.

Anterior gastric wall anastomosis may lead to lower rate of delayed gastric emptying after minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

In minimally invasive esophagectomy, a circular stapled anastomosis is common, but no evidence exists investigating the role of the specific localization of the anastomosis. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of an esophagogastrostomy on the anterior or posterior wall of the gastric conduit on the postoperative outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All oncologic minimally invasive Ivor Lewis procedures, performed between 2017 and 2022, were included in this study. The cohort was divided in two groups: a) intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy on the anterior gastric wall of the conduit (ANT, n = 285, 65%) and b) on the posterior gastric wall (POST, n = 154, 35%). Clinicopathological parameters and short-term outcomes were compared between both groups by retrieving data from the prospective database.

RESULTS

Overall, 439 patients were included, baseline characteristics were similar in both groups, there was a higher proportion of squamous cell carcinoma in ANT (22.8% vs. 16.2%, P = 0.043). A higher rate of robotic-assisted procedures was observed in ANT (71.2% vs. 49.4%). Anastomotic leakage rate was similar in both groups (ANT 10.4% vs. POST 9.8%, P = 0.851). Overall complication rate and Clavien-Dindo > 3 complication rates were higher in POST compared to ANT: 53.2% vs. 40% (P = 0.008) and 36.9% vs. 25.7% (P = 0.014), respectively. The rate of delayed gastric emptying (20.1% vs. 7.4%, P < 0.001) and nosocomial pneumonia (22.1% vs. 14.8%, P = 0.05) was significantly higher in POST.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with an intrathoracic circular stapled anastomosis may benefit from esophagogastrostomy on the anterior wall of the gastric conduit, in terms of lower rate of delayed gastric emptying.

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.

Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus thoracoscopic-assisted Mckeown esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Thoracoscopic-assisted and robot-assisted Mckeown esophagectomy are currently two common surgical methods, but there is no clear statement on the advantages and disadvantages of the two.

METHODS

This study conducted a single-centre retrospective analysis of esophageal cancer patients diagnosed and treated at Lanzhou University Second Hospital from 1 February 2020 to 31 July 2022. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 126 patients were finally included in the RAM group and 169 patients in the TAM group.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the RAM and TAM groups in the number of lymph node dissections, operative time, the length of stay in the intensive care unit after surgery, the incidence of hoarseness, postoperative pulmonary complications, surgery-related complications, use of opioids after surgery, the length of postoperative hospital stay, and 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

RAM is a minimally invasive alternative to TAM and has similar short-term oncological efficacy.

Why pay more for robot in esophageal cancer surgery?

Esophagectomy is the gold standard for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer. Traditionally, it is performed through a laparotomy and a thoracotomy, and is associated with high rates of postoperative complications and mortality. The advent of robotic surgery has represented a technological evolution in the field of esophageal cancer treatment. Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been progressively widely adopted following the first reports on the safety and feasibility of this procedure in 2004. The robotic approach has better short-term postoperative outcomes than open esophagectomy, without jeopardizing oncologic radicality. The results of the comparison between RAMIE and conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy are less conclusive. This article will focus on the role of RAMIE in the current clinical scenario with particular attention to its possible benefits and perspectives.

Transthoracic Esophagectomy: Hand-sewn Versus Side-to-side Linear-stapled Versus Circular-stapled Anastomosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Three anastomotic techniques are mostly used to create an esophagogastric anastomosis in a transthoracic esophagectomy: hand-sewn (HS), side-to-side linear-stapled (SSLS), and circular-stapled (CS). The aim of this study was to compare surgical outcomes after HS, SSLS, and CS intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review using the MEDLINE database was performed to identify original articles analyzing outcomes after HS, SSLS, and CS esophagogastric anastomosis. The main outcome was an anastomotic leakage rate. Secondary outcomes included overall morbidity, major morbidity, and mortality. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each anastomotic technique on the different outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 101 studies comprising 12,595 patients were included; 8835 (70.1%) with CS, 2532 (20.1%) with HS, and 1228 (9.8%) with SSLS anastomosis. Anastomotic leak occurred in 10% [95% confidence interval (CI), 6%-15%], 9% (95% CI, 6%-13%), and 6% (95% CI, 5%-7%) of patients after HS, SSLS, and CS anastomosis, respectively. Risk of anastomotic leakage was significantly higher with HS anastomosis (odds ratio=1.73, 95% CI: 1.47-2.03, P<0.0001) and SSLS (odds ratio=1.68, 95% CI: 1.36-2.08, P<0.0001), as compared with CS. Overall morbidity (HS: 52% vs. SLSS: 39% vs. CS: 35%) and major morbidity (HS: 33% vs. CS: 19%) rates were significantly lower with CS anastomosis. Mortality rate was 4% (95% CI, 3%-6%), 2% (95% CI, 2%-3%), and 3% (95% CI, 3%-4%) after HS, SSLS, and CS anastomosis, respectively.

CONCLUSION

HS and SSLS intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomoses are associated with significantly higher rates of an anastomotic leak than CS anastomosis.

Double-Docking Technique, an Optimized Process for Intrathoracic Esophagogastrostomy in Robot-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

Background

Though robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy has been increasingly applied, intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy is still a technical barrier. In this retrospective study, we introduced a double-docking technique for intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy to optimize surgical exposure and facilitate intrathoracic anastomosis. Moreover, we compared the clinical outcomes between the double-docking technique and anastomosis with a single-docking procedure in robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Methods

From March 2017 to September 2020, the clinical data of 68 patients who underwent robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy were reviewed, including 23 patients who underwent the double-docking technique (double-docking group) and 45 patients who underwent single-docking robotic esophagectomy (single-docking group). All patients were diagnosed with esophageal cancer or gastro-esophageal junction by biopsy before surgery. The technical details of the double-docking technique are described in this article.

Results

There was no difference in the patient demographics data between the two groups. The median surgical time in the double-docking group was slightly shorter than in the classic group without statistical difference (380 vs. 395 min, p = 0.368). In the double-docking group, the median blood loss was 90 mL, the median number of lymph nodes harvested was 17, and the R0 resection rates were 100% (23/23). There were no differences in the surgical outcomes between the two groups.

Conclusions

Based on our experience, the double-docking technique provides good surgical exposure when fashioning anastomosis, and such a technique does not increase the surgical time. Therefore, we believe that the double-docking technique is a safe and effective method for intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy while providing good exposure and ensuring the convenience and reliability of intrathoracic anastomosis.

Outcomes of trimodality CROSS regimen in older adults with locally advanced esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal cancer followed by Surgery (CROSS regimen) is standard of care for locally-advanced esophageal cancer. We evaluated CROSS completion rates, toxicity, and postoperative outcomes between older and younger adults receiving trimodality therapy.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients with locally-advanced esophageal cancer who underwent CROSS regimen from May 2016 to January 2020 at a single academic center. Outcomes of those aged ≥70-years-old and <70 years-old were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 201 patients, 136 were <70 and 65 were ≥70 years. Older adults were more likely to be male (91% vs. 79%; p = 0.045), have higher ECOG scores (median 1 vs. 0; p = 0.003), Charlson-comorbidity index (median 6 vs. 4; p < 0.001), and undergo open procedures (20% vs. 8% p = 0.008). Most completed CROSS regimen (78% vs. 84% respectively) with similar rates of treatment discontinuation and dose reduction (all p > 0.05). Time to surgery following neoadjuvant therapy was similar between age groups, except in those ≥80-years-old as compared to <70-years-old (p < 0.05). Overall toxicity rates were similar (68% vs. 71% respectively; p = 0.676). Only rates of delirium (19% vs. 5%) and urinary retention (9% vs. 0%) were higher in older adults (both p < 0.05). Length of stay, discharge disposition, mortality, and overall survival were similar. Age was not an independent risk factor for complication, neoadjuvant toxicity or completion, surgery timing, nor worse overall or recurrence-free survival (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Trimodality CROSS regimen for esophageal cancer in older adults is feasible, with similar completion rates and postoperative outcomes as compared to their younger counterparts.

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.

Robotics and minimally invasive esophageal surgery

The robotic platform has permeated esophageal surgery both in the abdominal and thoracic approaches. The most widely studied entities include achalasia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hiatal hernia and esophageal cancer. A literature review of robotic surgeries for the management of the above mentioned disorders is presented. Data is limited to meta-analyses, case series, or small prospective trials in the different indications. One exception is a randomized controlled trial looking at outcomes in esophageal cancer being managed with a hybrid robotic versus open approach. Overall differences when comparing laparoscopic or thoracoscopic surgery to robotic are few. These differences are best highlighted in the achalasia and esophageal cancer literature. There are less intraoperative mucosal injuries in robotic Heller myotomy. A large meta analysis found a rate of 1% versus 24.5% mucosal injury rate favoring the robotic versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy methods. With respect to esophagectomy data, there is slightly less vocal cord paralysis in the robotic versus MIE data, with a P value of 0.044. However, length of stay, intraoperative bleeding and major morbidity are similar across the various indications. Robotic esophageal surgery is a safe alternative to laparoscopic/thoracoscopic techniques. Further large-scale randomized trials are needed to fully ascertain if it yields superior outcomes.

From McKeown to Ivor Lewis, the learning curve for thoracic lymphadenectomy over the first 100 robotic esophagectomy cases: a retrospective study

Background

Lymphadenectomy is an essential but challenging part of the surgical treatment for esophageal cancer. However, the previously reported learning curve for robotic esophagectomy primarily focused on only one surgical approach (McKeown or Ivor Lewis). However, both approaches must be mastered by a mature robotic surgical team to deal with different clinical conditions and satisfy patients' needs. This study aimed to show how an experienced esophageal surgical team became proficient in both McKeown and Ivor Lewis robotic esophagectomy.

Methods

A retrospective review of the first 100 cases of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) by a single surgical team was performed. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was used to distinguish the change point during the learning course. A subgroup analysis was performed according to a surgical approach (McKeown or Ivor Lewis) to determine the effect of experience from one surgical approach on learning the other RAMIE technique.

Results

According to the tendency of the CUSUM plot, the learning curve was divided into four phases. The subgroup analysis indicated the decline of the CUSUM plot in the 3rd phase originated from the start of the Ivor Lewis approach. The attending surgeon took 23 cases to achieve a significant improvement in the number of harvested thoracic lymph nodes using the McKeown approach. Regardless of the acquired experience of McKeown RAMIE, it took another 18 cases for the surgical team to achieve significant improvement in harvesting thoracic lymph nodes using the Ivor Lewis approach.

Conclusions

Twenty-three cases were needed for an experienced surgical team to improve thoracic lymphadenectomy results using McKeown RAMIE. There was another learning phase during the transition from McKeown to Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Importantly, the acquired experience from performing McKeown RAMIE could shorten how long it takes to learn Ivor Lewis RAMIE.

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.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: Meticulous surgery minimizing postoperative complications

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been reported to reduce postoperative complications especially pulmonary complications and have equivalent long-term survival outcomes as compared to open esophagectomy. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) using da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, USA) is rapidly gaining attention because it helps surgeons to perform meticulous surgical procedures. McKeown RAMIE has been preferably performed in East Asia where squamous cell carcinoma which lies in more proximal esophagus than adenocarcinoma is a predominant histological type of esophageal cancer. On the other hand, Ivor Lewis RAMIE has been preferably performed in the Western countries where adenocarcinoma including Barrett esophageal cancer is the most frequent histology. Average rates of postoperative complications have been reported to be lower in Ivor Lewis RAMIE than those in McKeown RAMIE. Ivor Lewis RAMIE may get more attention for thoracic esophageal cancer. The studies comparing RAMIE and MIE where recurrent nerve lymphadenectomy was thoroughly performed reported that the rate of recurrent nerve injury is lower in RAMIE than in MIE. Recurrent nerve injury leads to serious complications such as aspiration pneumonia. It seems highly probable that RAMIE is beneficial in performing recurrent nerve lymphadenectomy. Surgery for esophageal cancer will probably be more centralized in hospitals with surgical robots, which enable accurate lymph node dissection with less complications, leading to improved outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer. RAMIE might occupy an important position in surgery for esophageal cancer.

Recent advances in minimally invasive esophagectomy for squamous esophageal cancer

Over the past decade there has been tremendous development in the clinical application of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for the treatment of squamous esophageal carcinoma. The major challenges in the performance of MIE include limitations in visualization and manipulation within the confined, rigid thoracic cavity; the need for adequate patient positioning and anesthetic techniques to accommodate the surgical exposure; and changes in the surgical steps for achieving radical nodal dissection, especially for the superior mediastinum. The surgical procedure for MIE is more and more standardized, and there is an increasing practice of MIE worldwide. Randomized trials and meta-analyses have confirmed the advantages of MIE over open esophagectomy, including a significantly lower rate of complications and shorter hospital stays. The recent application of robotics technologies for MIE has further enhanced the quality and safety of the surgical dissection, while intraoperative nerve monitoring has contributed to a lower rate of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. With the application of new technologies, we expect further improvement in surgical outcomes for MIE in the treatment of squamous esophageal cancer.

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Consensus Statement

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly performed in various ways. The lack of international definitions and nomenclature makes accurate comparison of outcomes difficult.

METHODS

An international, multispecialty consensus-writing committee constructed definitions and nomenclature for MIE. After a PubMed search, vetting, and review with all authors, a consensus was reached.

RESULTS

The proposed definition for MIE is an operation "that removes part or all of the esophagus, does not retract, lift, spread or remove any part of the chest or abdominal wall and the surgeon's and assistant's vision of the operative field is via a monitor, the patient's tissue is manipulated only by instruments that are controlled by the operating surgeon or team, except for during the neck portion if used." A flexible nomenclature is proposed that attempts to describe current and future operations and systems.

CONCLUSIONS

Definitions and nomenclature for MIE are needed to ensure that future studies accurately compare results and outcomes of similar operations. Nomenclatures allow surgeons, researchers, and patients from different cultures to use a common language to facilitate communication and compare. This process is required in order to improve patient outcomes globally to drive adoption of best of practice, yet is lacking for MIE.

Implementation of robot-assisted Ivor Lewis procedure: Robotic hand-sewn, linear or circular technique?

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted surgery for esophageal cancer is increasingly applied. Despite this upsurge, the preferential technique to create a robot-assisted intrathoracic anastomosis has not been established.

DATA SOURCES

Bibliographic databases were searched to identify studies that performed a robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and described the technical details of the anastomotic technique. Out of 1701 articles, 16 studies were included for systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that all technique used to create a thoracoscopic anastomosis can be adopted to robotic surgery. Techniques can be divided into three categories: robotic hand-sewn, circular stapling or linear stapling and robotic hand-sewn closure of the stapler defect. With limited robotic experience, circular stapling might be the preferred technique, however requires a well-trained bedside assistant. The linear stapling technique or hand-sewn technique are more challenging but enable experienced robotic surgeons to perform a controlled anastomosis without bedside support.

Meta-analysis of risk factors and complications associated with atrial fibrillation after oesophagectomy

Background

Oesophagectomy is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. New-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) is a frequent complication following oesophagectomy. Several studies have explored whether new-onset AF is associated with adverse events after oesophagectomy.

Methods

This review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies were identified through a search of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane CENTRAL databases up to 25 November 2018. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of random-effects modelling. The I2 statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity.

Results

In total, 53 studies including 9087 patients were eligible for analysis. The overall incidence of postoperative AF was 16·5 per cent. Coronary artery disease and hypertension were associated with AF, whereas diabetes, smoking and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were not. Patients with AF had a significantly higher risk of overall postoperative adverse events than those without fibrillation (odds ratio (OR) 5·50, 95 per cent c.i. 3·51 to 8·30), including 30-day mortality (OR 2·49, 1·70 to 3·64), anastomotic leak (OR 2·65, 1·53 to 4·59) and pneumonia (OR 3·42, 2·39 to 4·90).

Conclusion

Postoperative AF is frequently observed in patients undergoing oesophagectomy for cancer. It is associated with an increased risk of death and postoperative complications.

Early Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Both robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAILE) and conventional thoracoscopic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (TAILE) are minimally invasive surgical techniques for the treatment of middle and distal esophageal cancer. However, no research studies comparing early outcomes between RAILE and TAILE have been reported.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was made of 184 patients, 76 in the RAILE group and 108 in the TAILE group, who underwent minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy between December 2014 and June 2018. Propensity score-matched analysis was performed between the two groups based on demographics, comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor location, tumor size, and pathological stage. Perioperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Two conversions to thoracotomy occurred in the RAILE group. There was no 30-day in either group. Sixty-six matched pairs were identified for each group. Within the propensity score-matched cohorts, the operative time in the RAILE group was significantly longer than that in the TAILE group (302.0 ± 62.9 vs. 274.7 ± 38.0 min, P = 0.004). There was no significant difference in the blood loss [200.0 ml (interquartile range [IQR], 100.0-262.5 ml) vs. 200.0 ml (150.0-245.0 ml), P = 0.100], rates of overall complications (28.8 vs. 24.2%, P = 0.554), length of stay [9.0 days (IQR 8.0-12.3 days) vs. 9.0 days (IQR 8.0-11.3 days), P = 0.517], the number of total dissected lymph nodes (19.2 ± 9.2 vs. 19.3 ± 9.5, P = 0.955), and detailed categories of lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

RAILE demonstrated comparable early outcomes compared with TAILE and should be considered as an alternative minimally invasive option for treating esophageal cancer.

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus the conventional minimally invasive one: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Conventional video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is safe and associated with low rates of morbidity and mortality, but the two-dimensional monitor reduces eye-hand harmony and viewing yield. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with its virtual reality simulators offers a realistic three-dimensional environment that facilitates dissection in the narrow working space, but it is expensive and requires longer operative time. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the safety and feasibility of RAMIE versus MIE in patients with esophageal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Chinese Biomedical Literature databases were systematically searched up to 21 September 2018 for case-controlled studies that compared RAMIE with MIE.

RESULT

Eight case-controlled studies involving 1862 patients (931 under RAMIE and 931 under MIE) were considered. No statistically significant difference between the two techniques was observed regarding R0 resection rate (OR = 1.1174, P = 0.8647), conversion to open (OR = 0.7095, P = 0.7519), 30-day mortality rate (OR = 0.8341, P = 0.7696), 90-day mortality rate (OR = 0.3224, P = 0.3329), in-hospital mortality rate (OR = 0.3733, P = 0.3895), postoperative complications, number of harvested lymph nodes (mean difference [MD] = 0.8216, P = 0.2039), operation time (MD = 24.3655 min, P = 0.2402), and length of stay in hospitals (LOS) (MD = -5.0228 day, P = 0.1342). The meta-analysis showed that RAMIE was associated with a significantly fewer estimated blood loss (EBL) (MD = -33.2268 mL, P = 0.0075). And the vocal cord palsy rate was higher in the MIE group compared with RAMIE, and the difference was significant (OR = 0.5696, P = 0.0447).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicated that RAMIE and MIE display similar feasibility and safety when used in esophagectomy. However, randomized controlled studies with larger sample sizes are needed to evaluate the benefit and harm in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing RAMIE.

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy for cancer: An initial experience

Background:

The morbidity related to radical oesophagectomy can be reduced by adopting minimally invasive techniques. Over 250 thoraco-laparoscopic oesophagectomy (TLE) was done in our centre over the last 15 years, before adopting robotic surgery as the latest innovation in the field of minimally invasive surgery. Here, we share our initial experience of robotic-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy (RAMIE) for carcinoma oesophagus.

Methods:

A prospective observational study conducted from February to December 2017. A total of 15 patients underwent RAMIE in this period. Data regarding demography, clinical characteristics, investigations, operating techniques, and post-operative outcome were collected in detail.

Results:

There were 10 (66.7%) male patients and the median age of all patients was 62.9 (range 36–78) years. The median body mass index was 24.4 (range 15–32.8) kg/m². Twelve (80.0%) patients had squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the oesophagus and 3 (20%) patients had adenocarcinoma (AC). Five (33.3%) patients received neoadjuvant therapy. All 15 patients underwent RAMIE. Patients with SCC underwent McKeown's procedure, and those with AC underwent Ivor Lewis procedure. Extended two-field lymphadenectomy (including total mediastinal lymphadenectomy) was done for all the patients. The median operating time was 558 (range 390–690) min and median blood loss was 145 (range 90–230) ml. There were no intra-operative adverse events, and none of them required conversion to open or total thoracolaparoscopic procedure. The most common post-operative complications were recurrent laryngeal nerve paresis (3 patients, 20.0%) and pneumonia (2 patients, 13.3%). The median hospital stay was 9 (range 7–33) days. In total, 9 (60%) patients required adjuvant treatment.

Conclusion:

Adequate experience in TLE can help minimally invasive surgeons in easy adoption of RAMIE with satisfactory outcome.

Initial experience of robot-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: 61 consecutive cases from a single Chinese institution

This study aims to report the technical details and preliminary outcomes of robot-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (RAILE) using two different types of intrathoracic anastomosis from a single institution in China. From May 2015 to October 2017, 61 patients diagnosed with mid-lower esophageal cancer were treated with RAILE. The RAILE procedure was performed in two stages. The first 35 patients underwent circular end-to-end stapled intrathoracic anastomosis (stapled group), and the remaining 26 patients had a double-layered, completely hand-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis (hand-sewn group). Patient characteristics, surgical techniques, postoperative complications, and pathology outcomes were analyzed. The mean operating time and mean blood loss were 315.6 ± 59.4 minutes and 189.3 ± 95.8 mL, respectively. There was one patient who underwent conversion to thoracotomy. The 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates were 0%. Overall complications were observed in 22 patients (36.1%) according to the Clavien-Dindo (CD) and the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) classifications, of whom 6 patients (9.8%) had anastomotic leakage (ECCG, Type II). The median length of hospitalization (LOH) was 10 days (IQR, 5 days). Complete (R0) resection was achieved in all cases. The mean tumor size was 3.2 ± 1.5 cm, and the mean number of totally dissected lymph nodes was 19.3 ± 9.2. Regarding the operative outcomes between stapled and hand-sewn groups, there were no significant differences in the operative time (325.4 ± 66.6 vs. 302.3 ± 45.9 min, P = 0.114), blood loss (172.9 ± 74.1 vs. 211.5 ± 117.0 mL, P = 0.147), conversion rate (2.9 vs. 0%, P = 1.000), overall complication rate (37.1 vs. 34.6%, P = 0.839) or LOH (10 vs. 9.5 days, P = 0.415). RAILE using both stapled and hand-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis is safe and technically feasible with satisfactory perioperative outcomes for the treatment of mid-lower thoracic esophageal cancer.

Robotic surgery for esophageal cancer: Merits and demerits

Since the introduction of robotic systems in esophageal surgery in 2000, the number of robotic esophagectomies has been gradually increasing worldwide, although robot‐assisted surgery is not yet regarded as standard treatment for esophageal cancer, because of its high cost and the paucity of high‐level evidence. In 2016, more than 1800 cases were operated with robot assistance. Early results with small series demonstrated feasibility and safety in both robotic transhiatal (THE) and transthoracic esophagectomies (TTE). Some studies report that the learning curve is approximately 20 cases. Following the initial series, operative results of robotic TTE have shown a tendency to improve, and oncological long‐term results are reported to be effective and acceptable: R0 resection approaches 95%, and locoregional recurrence is rare. Several recent studies have demonstrated advantages of robotic esophagectomy in lymphadenectomy compared with the thoracoscopic approach. Such technical innovations as three‐dimensional view, articulated instruments with seven degrees of movement, tremor filter etc. have the potential to outperform any conventional procedures. With the aim of preventing postoperative pulmonary complications without diminishing lymphadenectomy performance, a nontransthoracic radical esophagectomy procedure combining a video‐assisted cervical approach for the upper mediastinum and a robot‐assisted transhiatal approach for the middle and lower mediastinum, transmediastinal esophagectomy, was developed; its short‐term outcomes are promising.

Thus, the merits or demerits of robotic surgery in this field remain quite difficult to assess. However, in the near future, the merits will definitely outweigh the demerits because the esophagus is an ideal organ for a robotic approach.