Robotic Heller myotomy: a safe operation with higher postoperative quality-of-life indices

Surgical management of achalasia

Achalasia is a chronic esophageal motility disorder comprised of ineffective esophageal peristalsis and incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter. This disease had historically been managed through medical means as well as endoscopic dilations. However, surgical interventions are now considered standard of care, including minimally invasive Heller myotomy, which was popularized in 1990s, followed by per oral endoscopic myotomy in the 2010s. Both surgical approaches provide acceptable resolution of dysphagia symptoms. Classification of the achalasia as well as other patient-level factors may drive the clinical decision-making between the two approaches, as well as surgical training and surgeon preference.

Robotic versus laparoscopic heller myotomy for esophageal achalasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The surgical treatment for esophageal achalasia has evolved over the years, with laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and partial fundoplication becoming widely used worldwide. More recently, an increased interest in the robotic Heller myotomy (RHM) has arisen.

PURPOSE

Compare short-term and functional outcomes of RHM vs. LHM.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were queried. Primary outcome was esophageal perforation (EP). Risk ratio (RR), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were effect size and relative inference measures. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42024512644.

RESULTS

Fourteen observational studies (12962 patients) were included. Of those, 2503 (19.3%) underwent RHM. The patient age ranged from 34 to 66 years and 51.7% were males. EP occurred in 259 patients (1.99%). The cumulative incidence of EP was 1.67% for RHM and 2.07% for LHM. Compared to LHM, RHM was associated with a reduced risk of EP (RR: 0.31; 95% CI 0.16-0.59). No differences were found in term of dysphagia requiring reoperation or additional endoscopic procedures (RR: 0.47; 95% CI 0.20-1.09) and postoperative Eckardt score (SMD: -0.42; 95% CI -0.94, 0.11). Blood loss, conversion to open, operative time, and hospital length of stay were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

RHM may be associated with a reduced risk of EP compared to LHM. However, because of selection bias, diverse surgeon expertise, variations in surgical technique, and prior endoscopic procedures these findings should not be viewed as conclusive while the superiority of one approach over the other remains to be established.

Robotics vs Laparoscopy in Foregut Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Analyzing Hiatal Hernia Repair and Heller Myotomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery remains the mainstay of treating foregut pathologies. Several studies have shown improved outcomes with the robotic approach. A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic hiatal hernia repairs (HHR) and Heller myotomy (HM) repairs is needed.

STUDY DESIGN

PubMed, EMBASE, and SCOPUS databases were searched for studies published between January 2010 and November 2022. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions tool. Assessed outcomes included intra- and postoperative outcomes. We pooled the dichotomous data using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model to report odds ratio (OR) and 95% CIs and continuous data to report mean difference and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Twenty-two comparative studies enrolling 196,339 patients were included. Thirteen (13,426 robotic and 168,335 laparoscopic patients) studies assessed HHR outcomes, whereas 9 (2,384 robotic and 12,225 laparoscopic patients) assessed HM outcomes. Robotic HHR had a nonsignificantly shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) (mean difference -0.41, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.05), fewer conversions to open (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.49), and lower morbidity rates (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.23). Robotic HM led to significantly fewer esophageal perforations (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.83), reinterventions (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.47) a nonsignificantly shorter LOS (mean difference -0.31, 95% CI -0.62 to 0.00). Both robotic HM and HHR had significantly longer operative times.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic and robotic HHR and HM repairs have similar safety profiles and perioperative outcomes. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to compare the 2 methods, given the low-to-moderate quality of included studies.

Robotic-assisted vs. Laparoscopic Heller's Myotomy for Achalasia in Children

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted Heller-Dor procedure has been proposed as an alternative minimally invasive approach to traditional laparoscopy for the treatment of achalasia in children. Our aim is to compare the effectiveness, safety and associated costs between both procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective single center study was conducted among consecutive children operated for achalasia (Heller-Dor operation) between 2005 and 2021, who were divided into two groups according to the surgical approach: laparoscopic (LAP-group) or robotic (ROB-group). Demographics, clinical features, surgery time, length of hospital stay (LOS), postoperative complications, long-term outcomes and economic data were compared between both groups.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients were included (12 in LAP-group; 12 in ROB-group), with no demographic or clinical differences between them. ROB-group patients presented lower intraoperative blood loss (23 ± 15 vs. 95 ± 15 ml; p < 0.001), shorter surgery time (178 ± 25 vs. 239 ± 55 min; p = 0.009) and shorter LOS, with a median of 2 days (Q1-Q3: 2-3) when compared to LAP-group (4 days [Q1-Q3:3-5]; p = 0.008). Three post-operative complications were reported, all in LAP-group (2 esophageal perforations and 1 esophageal tightness). After a median follow-up of 11 years, ROB-group patients presented fewer recurrences (0 vs 5; p = 0.039), less reintervention rate (0 % vs 41.7 %; p < 0.039) and lower associated economic costs (28,660$ vs. 60,360$; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This is the first comparative study of robotic and laparoscopic treatment of achalasia in children. Initial outcomes of robotic-assisted Heller-Dor procedure suggests some intraoperative (less blood loss and surgical time) and postoperative advantages (fewer complications and reinterventions). However, long-term studies with larger numbers of patients are needed.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective comparative study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Robotic Heller's cardiomyotomy for achalasia: early outcomes for a high-volume UK centre

INTRODUCTION

Heller's cardiomyotomy (HCM) is the gold standard treatment for achalasia. Laparoscopic HCM has been shown to be effective with low rates of symptom recurrence, though oesophageal mucosal perforation rates remain high. The aim of this prospective case series is to assess the short-term complication rates and perioperative outcomes for the first cohort of patients undergoing robotic-assisted HCM for achalasia in a single high-volume UK centre.

METHODS

Data were collected from a prospective cohort of patients who underwent robotic HCM at a single high-volume UK centre. Outcomes were assessed using the Eckhard score, which was calculated after their routine postoperative clinic appointments.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients underwent robotic HCM during the study period; this is the second largest reported case series in the European literature. There were no intraoperative oesophageal perforations. Six patients were discharged as day cases, six patients were discharged on the first postoperative day and one patient's hospital stay was two nights. There was a single perioperative complication of urinary retention. All patients reported improvement of symptoms following their operation, and all had a postoperative Eckhard score of less than 3, indicating their achalasia was in remission.

CONCLUSIONS

This cohort has demonstrated that robotic HCM has an exceptional safety profile and results in high levels of symptom resolution, even early in the learning curve. The robotic approach may be superior to laparoscopy as it allows more precise identification and dissection of the oesophageal muscle fibres, which likely reduces the risk of inadvertent mucosal damage or incomplete myotomy.

Achalasia-associated megaoesophagus presenting with dyspnoea and cough

We present an unusual case of achalasia presenting with dyspnoea and persistent cough. These symptoms persisted for months, leading to the patient undergoing a chest X-ray by her general practitioner which showed right basal consolidation and a density extending along the right mediastinum. CT scan was done which revealed megaoesophagus with a diameter of 7 cm causing tracheal compression, as well as right basal consolidation, consistent with aspiration. Further history revealed 6-month history of progressive swallowing difficulty, retrosternal chest pain and shortness of breath which worsened when eating solid foods. After thorough workup, a diagnosis of idiopathic achalasia (type II) was made. She was treated with laparoscopic Heller cardiomyotomy and Dor fundoplication with significant improvement at follow-up. Dyspnoea and respiratory symptoms are unusual presenting symptoms, suggesting a need to consider achalasia in a wider range of presentations. Successful treatment of achalasia depends on timely diagnosis and intervention prior to oesophageal failure.

Prospective cohort study investigating quality of life outcomes following multi-speciality robotic-assisted surgery

INTRODUCTION

Despite recent evidence on the surgical outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), other patient centre outcomes, including quality of life (QOL), are lacking. This study aims to examine changes in QoL trajectories following RAS across different surgical specialities.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted for patients undergoing urologic, cardiothoracic, colorectal or benign gynaecological RAS, between June 2016 and January 2020 at a tertiary referral hospital in Australia. QoL was measured using the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey at pre-operative, 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Physical and mental summary scores and utility index were primary outcomes, and sub-domains were secondary outcomes.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED

Mixed-effects linear regressions were used to determine changes in QoL trajectories.

RESULTS

Of the 254 patients undergoing RAS, 154 underwent urologic, 36 cardiothoracic, 24 colorectal and 40 benign gynaecological surgery. Overall, the average age was 58.8 years and most patients were male (75.1%). Physical summary scores significantly decreased from pre-operative to 6 weeks' post-operative in urologic and colorectal RAS; with all surgical specialities at least returning to pre-operative levels within 6 months postoperatively. Mental summary scores consistently increased from pre-operative to 6 months postoperatively for colorectal and gynaecological RAS.

CONCLUSIONS

RAS contributed to positive changes in QoL, with physical health returning to the pre-operative level and mental health improvements across specialities, in the short term. While degrees of post-operative changes varied amongst specialities, significant improvements demonstrate benefits in RAS.

Single-center experience of transitioning from video-assisted laparoscopic to robotic Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication for esophageal motility disorders

BACKGROUND

Video-assisted laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) has become the standard treatment option for achalasia. While robotic surgery offering some specific advantages such as better three-dimensional (3D) stereoscopic vision, hand-eye consistency, and flexibility and stability with the endowrist is expected to be shorter in learning curve than that of LHM for surgeons who are proficient in LHM. The aim of this study was to describe a single surgeon's experience related to the transition from video-assisted laparoscopic to robotic Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational study based on the recorded data of the first 66 Heller myotomy performed with laparoscopic Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication (LHMD, 26 cases) and with the robotic Heller myotomy with Dor fundoplication (RHMD, 40 cases) by the same surgeon in Department of Thoracic Surgery of The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University in China. The operation time and intraoperative blood loss were analyzed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Corresponding statistical tests were used to compare outcomes of both serials of cases.

RESULTS

The median operation time was shorter in the RHMD group compared to the LHMD group (130 [IQR 123-141] minutes vs. 163 [IQR 153-169]) minutes, p < 0.001). In the RHMD group, one patient (2.5%) experienced mucosal perforation, whereas, in the LHMD group, the incidence of this complication was significantly higher at 19.2% (5 patients) (p = 0.031). Based on cumulative sum analyses, operation time decreased starting with case 20 in the LHMD group and with case 18 in the RHMD group. Intraoperative blood loss tended to decline starting with case 19 in the LHMD group and with case 16 in the RHMD group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both RHMD and LHMD are effective surgical procedures for symptom relief of achalasia patients. RHMD demonstrates superior outcomes in terms of operation time and mucosal perforation during surgery compared to LHMD. Proficiency with RHMD can be achieved after approximately 16-18 cases, while that of LHMD can be obtained after around 19-20 cases.

Clinical and functional outcome following robotic Heller-myotomy with partial fundoplication in patients with achalasia

Robotic-assisted myotomy with partial fundoplication for patients with achalasia has been established as a safe and effective procedure with similar short-term results and lower rates of intraoperative esophageal perforations. Our aim was to investigate a defined patient cohort undergoing robotic-assisted and laparoscopic surgery providing pre- and postoperative symptom score and high-resolution manometry to evaluate the clinical and functional outcome.All patients underwent clinical, endoscopic, radiological and manometric investigation to verify the diagnosis of achalasia. High-resolution manometry was performed preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively and categorized according to the Chicago Classification (v4.0). We used the Eckardt Score to evaluate symptomatic outcome. All patients underwent either robotic-assisted or laparoscopic myotomy with partial anterior fundoplication (180° Dor) using the DaVinci Xi surgical system (Intuitive, Sunnyvale, California, USA). From a total amount of 101 patients, we analyzed the data of 78 (47 robotic and 31 laparoscopic) procedures between 2015 and 2020. All patients showed a significant decrease of the Eckardt Score in the robotic group (median 6 vs. 2) as well as in the laparoscopic group (median 7.5 vs. 3). The postoperative LESP and 4 s-IRP was significantly reduced in all patients in the robotic group [median LESP (mmHg) 34.16 vs. 16.9; median 4 s-IRP (mmHg) 28.85 vs. 14.55], as well as in the laparoscopic group [median LESP (mmHg) 35.34 vs. 17.3; median 4 s-IRP (mmHg) 25.6 vs. 15.9]. There was no significant difference for these parameters between the groups. There was no event of intraoperative esophageal perforation in the robotic cohort, whereas there were 2 in the laparoscopic group. Our data support the safe and effective robotic approach for the surgical treatment of achalasia. Not only the clinical outcome but also the functional results measured by high-resolution manometry are similar to the laparoscopic procedure. Further investigations in larger prospective multicenter studies are needed.

From laparoscopic to robotic-assisted Heller myotomy for achalasia in a single high-volume visceral surgery center: postoperative outcomes and quality of life

Background

Laparoscopic (LSC) Heller myotomy (HM) is considered the standard procedure for the treatment of achalasia. Robotic platforms, established over the last years, provide important advantages to surgeons, such as binocular 3-dimensional vision and improvement of fine motor control. However, whether perioperative outcomes and long-term results of robotic-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) HM are similar or even superior to LSC technique, especially concerning long-term follow-up, is still debated. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate intra- and postoperative results as well as long-term quality of life after RAL compared to LSC surgery for achalasia in a single high-volume visceral surgery center.

Methods

Between August 2007 and April 2020, 43 patients undergoing minimally invasive HM for achalasia in a single high-volume Swiss visceral surgery center, were included in the present study. Intra- and postoperative outcome parameters were collected and evaluated, and a long-term follow-up was performed using the gastroesophageal-reflux disease health-related quality of life (GERD-Hr-QuoL) questionnaire.

Results

A total of 11 patients undergoing RAL and 32 undergoing LSC HM were analyzed. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were similar. A trend (p = 0.052) towards a higher number of patients with ASA III score treated with RAL was detectable. Operation time was marginally, but significantly, shorter in LSC (140 min, IQR: 136–150) than in RAL (150 min, IQR: 150–187, p = 0.047). Postoperative complications graded Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 were only observed in one patient in each group. Length of hospital stay was similar in both groups (LSC: 11 days, IQR: 10–13 vs. RAL: 11 days, IQR: 10–14, p = 0.712). Long-term follow-up (LSC: median 89 months, vs. RAL: median 28 months, p = 0.001) showed comparable results and patients from both groups expressed similar levels of satisfaction (p = 0.181).

Conclusions

LSC and RAL HM show similar peri- and postoperative results and a high quality of life, even in long-term (> 24 months) follow-up. Prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter trials are needed to overcome difficulties associated to small sample sizes in a rare condition and to confirm the equality or demonstrate the superiority of robotic-assisted procedures for achalasia. Meanwhile, the choice of the treatment technique could be left to the operating surgeon’s preferences.

Robotic Heller-Dor procedure for oesophageal achalasia: Fluorescence-guided intraoperative assessment of myotomy. A retrospective single-centre experience

BACKGROUND

The robotic Heller-Dor (RHD) procedure for oesophageal achalasia (EA) is safe and effective. We aim to evaluate the intraoperative use of fluorescence imaging, as an alternative means to intraoperative endoscopy, to assess myotomy at the end of the procedure.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients affected with EA underwent RHD. The myotomy was assessed intraoperatively by endoscopy in group A (17 patients), and by fluorescence imaging in group B (17 patients). Perioperative and long-term results were compared.

RESULTS

In group A, one mucosal tear was identified during intraoperative endoscopy. In group B, indocyanine green (ICG) helped identify residual muscle fibres in three cases. No perforation of the oesophageal mucosa occurred in group B.

CONCLUSIONS

Fluorescence-imaging improved the identification of residual muscle fibres and made it possible to verify the integrity of the mucosa without the use of intraoperative endoscopy. A significant reduction in operative times has been related to the use of this technique.

Robotic surgery for the treatment of achalasia

OBJECTIVE

To describe the experience of the robotic approach for achalasia surgery in a tertiary center.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with achalasia who underwent robotic surgery between May 2010 and April 2019 were analyzed. The study variables were collected in a prospective database and a descriptive analysis was performed.

RESULTS

45 patients (55.6% male) with a mean age of 44 years were included. The main symptom at diagnosis was dysphagia. 19 patients (42.2%) received endoscopic treatment prior to surgery, mostly pneumatic dilation (84.2%). Heller's myotomy associated with Toupet fundoplication was the surgical technique of choice, with a mean operative time of 211 min. The average stay was 5 days. There were 2 postoperative perforations (4.4%). Perioperative mortality was 0%. The mean follow-up was 64 months. At 3 and 5 years, a significant decrease in the Eckardt score was observed and the manometric study showed a decrease in the lower esophageal sphincter pressure at rest of 58% and 70%, respectively, with persistence of hypomotility of the esophageal body. Pathological gastroesophageal reflux was diagnosed in two patients (5.4%) and 4 (10.8%) presented recurrence of symptoms, requiring endoscopic pneumatic dilations. In 2 cases, the dilations were not effective, so an endoscopic myotomy was considered.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, robotic surgery is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of achalasia.

The Evolution of the Treatment of Esophageal Achalasia: From the Open to the Minimally Invasive Approach

BACKGROUND

Achalasia is a primary esophageal motility disorder characterized by lack of esophageal peristalsis and partial or absent relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter in response to swallowing. This study aimed to provide an overview of the evolution of the surgical treatment for esophageal achalasia, from the open to the minimally invasive approach.

METHODS

Literature review.

RESULTS

No curative treatment exists for this disorder. At the beginning of the 20th century, surgical esophagoplasties and cardioplasties were mostly done to treat achalasia. The description of the esophageal myotomy by Heller changed the treatment paradigm and rapidly became the treatment of choice. For many years the esophagomyotomy was done with either an open transthoracic or transabdominal approach. With the advancements of minimally invasive surgery, thoracoscopic and laparoscopic operations became available. The ability to add a fundoplication for the prevention of reflux made the laparoscopic Heller myotomy with partial fundoplication the operation of choice.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical management of esophageal achalasia has significantly evolved in the last century. Currently, minimally invasive Heller myotomy with partial fundoplication is the standard surgical treatment of achalasia.

Overall Complications Following Robotic Heller Myotomy Are Lower Compared With Laparoscopy

BACKGROUND

The use of robotics in foregut surgery has become more prevalent in the United States over the last 10 years. We sought to find the differences in the clinical outcomes of robotic surgery compared with traditional laparoscopy in patients undergoing Heller myotomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective population-based analysis was performed using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database for the span of 2010 to 2015. All patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic Heller myotomy were included. Weighted multivariable random intercept linear and logistic regression models were used to assess the impact of robotic surgery on patient outcomes compared with laparoscopy.

RESULTS

There was a total of 11,562 patients with a median age of 54.2 years. Robotic Heller myotomy has a significantly decreased risk of overall complications for all centers (odds ratio=0.46; 95% confidence interval=0.29, 0.74). A subset analysis was performed looking specifically at high-volume centers (>20 operations per year), and overall complications remained lower in the robotic group. However, in high-volume centers, the robotic cohort did have a higher rate of esophageal perforation (2.7% vs. 0.8%, P<0.001). There was a higher length of stay in the laparoscopic Heller cohort (3.0 vs. 2.6 d, P=0.06) but higher overall charges in the robotic Heller cohort ($42,900 vs. $34,300, P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic Heller myotomy is associated with lower overall complications and improved outcomes compared with laparoscopic Heller myotomy, even in high-volume centers. Robotic Heller myotomy is associated with a higher rate of esophageal perforations in high-volume centers despite the reduction in overall complications.

Robotic esophagomyotomy for achalasia: technical note and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The treatment of achalasia has undergone continuous evolution with the advancement of technology. Since the beginning of the new millennium, the employment of robotics has led to technical facilitation with the execution of the myotomy and consequently to improvement of outcomes and decrease perioperative morbidity.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We provide a detailed description of the surgical procedure and the perioperative management together with a literature search of Electronic PubMed/Medline database and Cochrane Library. English written studies on robotic assisted myotomy (case reports, reviews, single arm and comparative studies) were included.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Between 2001 and 2020, 10 case reports, 13 single arm studies, 10 comparative studies, 2 meta-analysis, 11 reviews and 2 technical notes on robotic assisted esophagomyotomy for achalasia were published.

CONCLUSIONS

As reported by the studies available in the literature and evaluated in this manuscript, robotic assisted cardiomyotomy seems not only feasible but also a safer operation compared with traditional laparoscopic Heller myotomy, due to a significant lower incidence of intraoperative esophageal perforation. Also if large and randomized controlled studies are advocated, robotic assisted esophagocardiomyotomy might be considered superior to laparoscopic Heller myotomy that, until now, is mostly considered the gold standard in the surgical treatment of achalasia.

Heller myotomy perforation: robotic visualization decreases perforation rate and revisional surgery is a perforation risk

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has improved surgical access to the foregut. While the benefits of MIS versus open surgery are well accepted, the relative benefits of laparoscopic versus robotic approaches continue to be debated. Procedure-specific comparisons are difficult to obtain for Heller myotomy, due to the relative rarity of the procedure in most practices. A retrospective review of prospectively collected perioperative data of a single surgical practice from 2001 to 2019 was conducted for the rate of perforation during Heller myotomy laparoscopically compared to robotically. From 2001 through February 2012, a laparoscopic approach was employed and from October 2008 to 2019, a robotic approach was employed. All perforations were recorded, as well as secondary outcomes of perforation location (gastric or esophageal), postoperative imaging for evidence of leak, length of stay, and complications. Chi-square and simple t test were employed for data analysis. During the 11 years of laparoscopic Heller myotomy, 14 cases resulted in 7 instances of perforation (50%). During the 11 years of robotic Heller myotomy, 45 cases resulted in 11 instances of perforation (24%) (p value = 0.06). All perforations in both groups were tiny, recognized, and repaired immediately. The length of stay (LOS) was longer in the laparoscopic perforation group (3.4 days) compared to the laparoscopic non-perforation group (1.2 days) (p value = 0.06). LOS for robotic was not significantly longer in the perforation group (2.8 days) compared to the robotic non-perforation group (1.5 days) (p value = 0.18). First time Heller myotomies showed a higher rate of perforation with laparoscopic (50%) vs robotic (14%) (p value = 0.009) approach. In subgroup analysis of revisional procedures, all ten were performed robotically (p value < 0.001) with a 60% perforation rate (p value = 0.001) and one associated, radiographically confirmed leak. Primary laparoscopic Heller myotomy related to more than four times the frequency of perforation than did primary robotic myotomy. We propose that the robotic platform provided the surgeon with superior ability to avoid perforation. Interestingly, the robotic group in this study dealt with more complex redo cases. In fact, reoperation in the area of the hiatus was a separate risk factor for perforation during robotic Heller myotomy. We recommend further prospective trials be done to better evaluate the benefits of robotic platform in regard to revisional foregut surgery.

Robotic surgery for the treatment of achalasia

OBJECTIVE

To describe the experience of the robotic approach for achalasia surgery in a tertiary center.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with achalasia who underwent robotic surgery between May 2010 and April 2019 were analyzed. The study variables were collected in a prospective database and a descriptive analysis was performed.

RESULTS

45 patients (55.6% male) with a mean age of 44 years were included. The main symptom at diagnosis was dysphagia. 19 patients (42.2%) received endoscopic treatment prior to surgery, mostly pneumatic dilation (84.2%). Heller's myotomy associated with Toupet fundoplication was the surgical technique of choice, with a mean operative time of 211minutes. The average stay was 5 days. There were 2 postoperative perforations (4.4%). Perioperative mortality was 0%. The mean follow-up was 64 months. At 3 and 5 years, a significant decrease in the Eckardt score was observed and the manometric study showed a decrease in the lower esophageal sphincter pressure at rest of 58% and 70%, respectively, with persistence of hypomotility of the esophageal body. Pathological gastroesophageal reflux was diagnosed in two patients (5.4%) and 4 (10.8%) presented recurrence of symptoms, requiring endoscopic pneumatic dilations. In 2 cases, the dilations were not effective, so an endoscopic myotomy was considered.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, robotic surgery is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of achalasia.

Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted Heller myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic Heller myotomy has been proposed as an alternative minimally invasive approach to traditional laparoscopy for the treatment of achalasia. This systematic review aims to compare the safety and post-operative outcomes of the two procedures.

METHODS

Systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE through Ovid, Scopus and Cochrane to identify clinical trials and retrospective analyses. Outcome measures used for meta-analysis included operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, 30-day readmission, intraoperative oesophageal perforation, conversion, mortality, morbidity, symptom relief beyond 1 year, re-intervention for recurrent symptoms and gastroesophageal reflux during follow-up rates.

RESULTS

Seven studies were selected with a total of 3214 patients. The only factor to be statistically different is intraoperative oesophageal perforation rate, which is lower in robotic-assisted Heller myotomy compared to laparoscopic (odds ratio = 0.1139; 95% confidence interval [0.0334, 0.3887]; p = 0.0005).

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest a robotic approach is associated with improved patient safety.

Endoscopic and Surgical Treatments for Achalasia: Who to Treat and How?

Achalasia is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by failure of relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) and altered motility of the esophagus. The traditional, highly effective, surgical approach to relieve obstruction at the LES includes cardiomyotomy. Fundoplication is added to decrease risk of postoperative reflux. Per oral endoscopic myotomy is a new endoscopic procedure that allows division of the LES via transoral route. It has several advantages including less invasiveness, cosmesis, and tailored approach to the length on the myotomy. However, it is associated with increased rate of post-procedural reflux. Various endoscopic interventions are used to address this problem.

Endoscopic ultrasound: a powerful tool to modify treatment algorithms in opioid-induced achalasia

BACKGROUND

Opioid use in the U.S. has increased dramatically over the last 15 years, recently being declared a public health emergency. Opioid use is associated with esophageal dysmotility lending to a confusing clinical picture compared to true achalasia. Patients exhibit symptoms and elicit diagnostic results consistent with esophageal motility disorders, in particular type III achalasia. Modified therapeutic strategies and outcomes become challenging. Differentiating true achalasia from opioid-induced achalasia is critical. Conventional surgical interventions, i.e., myotomy, are ineffective in the absence of true achalasia. We assess the utility of esophageal muscle layer mapping with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in distinguishing primary from opioid-induced achalasia.

METHODS

From 2016 to 2019, patients with abnormal manometry and suspected achalasia underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy and EUS mapping of esophageal round muscle layer thickness. Maximum round layer thickness and length of round muscle layer thickness > 1.8 mm were collected and compared between opioid users and non-opioid users using Wilcoxon Rank sum test.

RESULTS

45 patients were included: 12 opioid users, 33 non-opioid users. Mean age 56.8 years (range 24-93), 53.3% male patients. Mean BMI in the opioid-induced achalasia group was 30.2 kg/m², mean BMI in the primary achalasia group 26.8 kg/m² (p = 0.11). In comparing endoscopic maximum round layer thickness between groups, non-opioid patients had a thicker round muscle layer (2.7 mm vs 1.8 mm, p = 0.05). Length of abnormally thickened esophageal muscle (greater than 1.8 mm) also differed between the two groups; patients on opioids had a shorter length of thickening (4.0 cm vs 0.0 cm, p = 0.04). Intervention rate was higher in the non-opioid group (p = 0.79). Of the patients that underwent therapeutic intervention, symptom resolution was higher in the non-opioid group (p = 0.002), while re-intervention post-procedure for persistent symptomatology was elevated in the opioid subset (p = 0.06). Patients in the opioid group were less likely to undergo invasive treatment (Heller). As of 2017 all interventions in the opioid group have been endoscopic.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic ultrasound is an essential tool that has improved our treatment algorithm for suspected achalasia in patients with chronic opioid usage. Incorporation of EUS findings into treatment approach may prevent unnecessary surgery in opioid users.

Robotic versus laparoscopic approach to treat symptomatic achalasia: systematic review with meta-analysis

Minimally invasive Heller myotomy is considered the gold standard surgical approach for symptomatic achalasia because it is a safe and effective procedure. Over the last years, several studies comparing the laparoscopic and robotic approach for Heller myotomy have been published. Although the robotic approach appears to have some advantages over standard laparoscopy, data on this topic are still controversial and no definite conclusions have been drawn. This metanalysis has been designed to systematically evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of the robot-assisted Heller myotomy as compared to the standard laparoscopic approach. According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic search on both laparoscopic and robotic Heller myotomy was performed in all the major electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE), using the following search string: (achalasia OR Dor) AND robotic. Six articles were included in the final analysis. A metaregression analysis was performed to assess the possible effects of demographic variables (age, gender, body mass indes (BMI)) and previous abdominal surgery or endoscopic intervention on the analyzed outcomes. No statistical difference was observed in operative times (mean difference (MD) = 20.79, P = 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.05,51,62), estimated blood loss (MD = -17.10, P = 0.13, 95% CI -40.48,5.08), conversion rate to open surgery (risk difference (RD) = -0.01, P = 0.33, 95% CI -0.05,0.02), length of hospital stay (MD = -0.73, P = 0.15, 95% CI -1.71,0.25) and long-term recurrence (odds ratio (OR) = 0.59, P = 0.45, 95% CI 0.15,2.33). On the contrary, the robotic approach was found to be associated with a significantly significant lower rate of intraoperative esophageal perforations (OR = 0.13, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.04, 0.45). Our results suggest that the robotic approach is safer than the laparoscopic Heller myotomy, encouraging the use of robot-assisted surgery. However, our analysis is limited because of the exiguous number of comparative studies and because most of the included studies were statistically underpowered, given the small sample size. Moreover, a high degree of heterogeneity was observed in most of published studies. Taking in consideration the additional costs of robot-assisted procedures, larger Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are advocated to confirm the safety and effectiveness of the robotic approach, and its advantages over standard laparoscopic surgery. In conclusion, well-designed prospective trials and RCTs with homogeneous parameters are needed to draw definitive conclusions about the best surgical approach to pursue in treating symptomatic achalasia.

Optimal surgical intervention for achalasia: laparoscopic or robotic approach

Laparoscopic esophageal myotomy is the standard surgical intervention for achalasia. Compared to standard laparoscopic techniques, use of the robot has theoretical advantages of improved visualization and dexterity. We evaluated the University of Arizona's experience with the two alternatives to compare outcomes. Patients who underwent either laparoscopic or robot-assisted myotomy were identified from a retrospective database from 1/1/2006 to 12/31/2015. Patient demographics, prior treatment, intra-operative complications, operative time, post-operative length of stay and complications, and long-term results were compared between the two groups. We identified 35 laparoscopic and 37 robot-assisted Heller myotomies performed by multiple surgeons. Patient demographics were similar between the two groups with no statistical difference in age, gender, previous operations, pre-operative Botox or dilation treatment, or pre-op Eckardt score. In univariate analysis, the patients with the robotic procedure received a longer myotomy (5.85 cm vs. 5.56 cm for esophageal and 2.92 cm vs. 2.68 cm for gastric) and had a lower post-operative Eckardt score (0.51 vs. 1.09). A trend toward lower incidence of recurrent achalasia symptoms was found in the robotic group (0 patient vs. 4 patients) compared with those who had laparoscopic surgery (p < 0.05). Multivariate analysis showed that a longer gastric myotomy was associated with a lower recurrence rate (p = 0.0002). Both laparoscopic and robot-assisted Heller myotomy can provide definitive treatment of achalasia with good results and few complications. The mechanical advantage provided by the robotic approach may improve outcomes by providing a more complete myotomy and durable long-term result.

Robotic technological aids in esophageal surgery

Robotic technology is an emerging technology that has been developed in order to overcome some limitations of the standard laparoscopic approach, offering a stereoscopic three-dimensional visualization of the surgical field, increased maneuverability of the surgical tools with consequent increased movement accuracy and precision and improved ergonomics. It has been used for the surgical treatment of most benign esophageal disorders. More recently, it has been proposed also for patients with operable esophageal cancer. The current evidence shows that there are no real benefits of the robotic technology over conventional laparoscopy in patients undergoing a fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), hiatal closure for giant hiatal hernia, or Heller myotomy for achalasia. A few small studies suggest potential advantages in patients undergoing redo surgery for failed fundoplication or Heller myotomy, but large comparative studies are needed to better clarify the role of the robotic technology in these patients. Robot-assisted esophagectomy seems to be safe and effective in selected patients; however, there are no data showing superiority of this approach over both conventional laparoscopic and open surgery. The short-term and long-term oncologic results of ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are awaited to validate this approach for the treatment of esophageal cancer.

3D Vision Provides Shorter Operative Time and More Accurate Intraoperative Surgical Performance in Laparoscopic Hiatal Hernia Repair Compared With 2D Vision

Background. The aim of this study is to evaluate if 3-dimensional high-definition (3D) vision in laparoscopy can prompt advantages over conventional 2D high-definition vision in hiatal hernia (HH) repair. Study design. Between September 2012 and September 2015, we randomized 36 patients affected by symptomatic HH to undergo surgery; 17 patients underwent 2D laparoscopic HH repair, whereas 19 patients underwent the same operation in 3D vision. Results. No conversion to open surgery occurred. Overall operative time was significantly reduced in the 3D laparoscopic group compared with the 2D one (69.9 vs 90.1 minutes, P = .006). Operative time to perform laparoscopic crura closure did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. We observed a tendency to a faster crura closure in the 3D group in the subgroup of patients with mesh positioning (7.5 vs 8.9 minutes, P = .09). Nissen fundoplication was faster in the 3D group without mesh positioning ( P = .07). Conclusions. 3D vision in laparoscopic HH repair helps surgeon’s visualization and seems to lead to operative time reduction. Advantages can result from the enhanced spatial perception of narrow spaces. Less operative time and more accurate surgery translate to benefit for patients and cost savings, compensating the high costs of the 3D technology. However, more data from larger series are needed to firmly assess the advantages of 3D over 2D vision in laparoscopic HH repair.

[Robotics in the operating room : Out of the niche into widespread application]

In the last few years robotic surgery has progressed from being confined to a small niche to a widespread application in routine visceral surgery; however, evidence for superiority of robotic surgery compared to laparoscopy from randomized studies with a sufficient number of patients is still lacking in most fields of visceral surgery. For complex operations that necessitate an extensive reconstruction phase, such as pancreatectomy, gastrectomy and esophagectomy, there is a potential benefit for the permanent and justified use of robotic surgery. Even in operations where delicate nerve preparation and radical surgical resection are simultaneously necessary, such as rectal resection, robotic surgery may provide certain benefits. In the long term there is a great potential for the integration of innovative techniques, such as navigation or other medical imaging procedures into robotic surgery, which can currently only partially be estimated. Care must be taken to avoid premature euphoria; however, due to the assumed great potential there is an urgent need for randomized studies to evaluate the possible benefits of robotic surgical techniques in visceral surgery in order to generate evidence for the welfare of patients.

Esophageal surgery in minimally invasive era

The widespread popularity of new surgical technologies such as laparoscopy, thoracoscopy and robotics has led many surgeons to treat esophageal diseases with these methods. The expected benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) mainly include reductions of postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and pain and better cosmetic results. All of these benefits could potentially be of great interest when dealing with the esophagus due to the potentially severe complications that can occur after conventional surgery. Moreover, robotic platforms are expected to reduce many of the difficulties encountered during advanced laparoscopic and thoracoscopic procedures such as anastomotic reconstructions, accurate lymphadenectomies, and vascular sutures. Almost all esophageal diseases are approachable in a minimally invasive way, including diverticula, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, achalasia, perforations and cancer. Nevertheless, while the limits of MIS for benign esophageal diseases are mainly technical issues and costs, oncologic outcomes remain the cornerstone of any procedure to cure malignancies, for which the long-term results are critical. Furthermore, many of the minimally invasive esophageal operations should be compared to pharmacologic interventions and advanced pure endoscopic procedures; such a comparison requires a difficult literature analysis and leads to some confounding results of clinical trials. This review aims to examine the evidence for the use of MIS in both malignancies and more common benign disease of the esophagus, with a particular emphasis on future developments and ongoing areas of research.

Heller myotomy for achalasia. From the open to the laparoscopic approach

The last three decades have witnessed a progressive evolution in the surgical treatment of esophageal achalasia, with a shift from open to a minimally invasive Heller myotomy. The laparoscopic approach is currently the standard of care with better short-term outcomes and similar long-term functional results when compared to open surgery. More recently, the laparoscopic single-site approach and the use of the robot have been proposed to further improve the surgical outcome in achalasia patients.

Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) vs laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) for the treatment of Type III achalasia in 75 patients: a multicenter comparative study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Type III achalasia is characterized by rapidly propagating pressurization attributable to spastic contractions. Although laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) is the current gold standard management for type III achalasia, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) is conceivably superior because it allows for a longer myotomy. Our aims were to compare the efficacy and safety of POEM with LHM for type III achalasia patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of 49 patients who underwent POEM for type III achalasia across eight centers were compared to 26 patients who underwent LHM at a single institution. Procedural data were abstracted and pre- and post-procedural symptoms were recorded. Clinical response was defined by improvement of symptoms and decrease in Eckardt stage to ≤ 1. Secondary outcomes included length of myotomy, procedure duration, length of hospital stay, and rate of adverse events.

RESULTS

Clinical response was significantly more frequent in the POEM cohort (98.0 % vs 80.8 %; P = 0.01). POEM patients had significantly shorter mean procedure time than LHM patients (102 min vs 264 min; P < 0.01) despite longer length of myotomy (16 cm vs 8 cm; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference between POEM and LHM in the length of hospital stay (3.3 days vs 3.2 days; P = 0.68), respectively. Rate of adverse events was significantly less in the POEM group (6 % vs 27 %; P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

POEM allows for a longer myotomy than LHM, which may result in improved clinical outcomes. POEM appears to be an effective and safe alternative to LHM in patients with type III achalasia.

Clinical application of endoscopic ultrasonography for esophageal achalasia

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has been widely used for evaluating the nature of diseases of various organs. The possibility of applying EUS for esophageal motility diseases has not been well discussed despite its versatility. At present, peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia and related diseases has brought new attention to esophageal diseases because POEM provides a more direct approach to the inner structures of the esophageal wall. In the present study, we discuss the clinical utility of EUS in evaluating and treating esophageal motility diseases such as esophageal achalasia and related diseases.

Robotic-assisted Heller myotomy: a modern technique and review of outcomes

Achalasia is a debilitating esophageal motility disorder characterized by incomplete relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter and lack of peristalsis. Manometry is the gold standard for diagnosis and laparoscopic Heller myotomy has been the gold standard for definitive therapy. However, current advances in surgical technology have introduced the robotic platform as a viable approach for this procedure. The safety and efficacy has been clearly established with comparable operative times to laparoscopy in experienced hands. Importantly, the rate of resolution of dysphagia postoperatively is over 80% which is comparable to laparoscopic outcomes. Moreover, some literature suggests lower esophageal perforation rates utilizing the robotic platform. Nevertheless, costs remain one of the largest barriers to widespread use of the robotic platform and future studies should aim to identify strategies in cost reduction.

Robotic general surgery: current practice, evidence, and perspective

BACKGROUND

Robotic technology commenced to be adopted for the field of general surgery in the 1990s. Since then, the da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical Inc, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) has remained by far the most commonly used system in this domain. The da Vinci surgical system is a master-slave machine that offers three-dimensional vision, articulated instruments with seven degrees of freedom, and additional software features such as motion scaling and tremor filtration. The specific design allows hand-eye alignment with intuitive control of the minimally invasive instruments. As such, robotic surgery appears technologically superior when compared with laparoscopy by overcoming some of the technical limitations that are imposed on the surgeon by the conventional approach.

PURPOSE

This article reviews the current literature and the perspective of robotic general surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

While robotics has been applied to a wide range of general surgery procedures, its precise role in this field remains a subject of further research. Until now, only limited clinical evidence that could establish the use of robotics as the gold standard for procedures of general surgery has been created. While surgical robotics is still in its infancy with multiple novel systems currently under development and clinical trials in progress, the opportunities for this technology appear endless, and robotics should have a lasting impact to the field of general surgery.

European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery

Following an extensive literature search and a consensus conference with subject matter experts the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. Robotic surgery is still at its infancy, and there is a great potential in sophisticated electromechanical systems to perform complex surgical tasks when these systems evolve. 2. To date, in the vast majority of clinical settings, there is little or no advantage in using robotic systems in general surgery in terms of clinical outcome. Dedicated parameters should be addressed, and high quality research should focus on quality of care instead of routine parameters, where a clear advantage is not to be expected. 3. Preliminary data demonstrates that robotic system have a clinical benefit in performing complex procedures in confined spaces, especially in those that are located in unfavorable anatomical locations. 4. There is a severe lack of high quality data on robotic surgery, and there is a great need for rigorously controlled, unbiased clinical trials. These trials should be urged to address the cost-effectiveness issues as well. 5. Specific areas of research should include complex hepatobiliary surgery, surgery for gastric and esophageal cancer, revisional surgery in bariatric and upper GI surgery, surgery for large adrenal masses, and rectal surgery. All these fields show some potential for a true benefit of using current robotic systems. 6. Robotic surgery requires a specific set of skills, and needs to be trained using a dedicated, structured training program that addresses the specific knowledge, safety issues and skills essential to perform this type of surgery safely and with good outcomes. It is the responsibility of the corresponding professional organizations, not the industry, to define the training and credentialing of robotic basic skills and specific procedures. 7. Due to the special economic environment in which robotic surgery is currently employed special care should be taken in the decision making process when deciding on the purchase, use and training of robotic systems in general surgery. 8. Professional organizations in the sub-specialties of general surgery should review these statements and issue detailed, specialty-specific guidelines on the use of specific robotic surgery procedures in addition to outlining the advanced robotic surgery training required to safely perform such procedures.

Robotic thoracic surgery: The state of the art

Minimally invasive thoracic surgery has come a long way. It has rapidly progressed to complex procedures such as lobectomy, pneumonectomy, esophagectomy, and resection of mediastinal tumors. Video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) offered perceptible benefits over thoracotomy in terms of less postoperative pain and narcotic utilization, shorter ICU and hospital stay, decreased incidence of postoperative complications combined with quicker return to work, and better cosmesis. However, despite its obvious advantages, the General Thoracic Surgical Community has been relatively slow in adapting VATS more widely.

The introduction of da Vinci surgical system has helped overcome certain inherent limitations of VATS such as two-dimensional (2D) vision and counter intuitive movement using long rigid instruments allowing thoracic surgeons to perform a plethora of minimally invasive thoracic procedures more efficiently.

Although the cumulative experience worldwide is still limited and evolving, Robotic Thoracic Surgery is an evolution over VATS. There is however a lot of concern among established high-volume VATS centers regarding the superiority of the robotic technique. We have over 7 years experience and believe that any new technology designed to make minimal invasive surgery easier and more comfortable for the surgeon is most likely to have better and safer outcomes in the long run. Our only concern is its cost effectiveness and we believe that if the cost factor is removed more and more surgeons will use the technology and it will increase the spectrum and the reach of minimally invasive thoracic surgery.

This article reviews worldwide experience with robotic thoracic surgery and addresses the potential benefits and limitations of using the robotic platform for the performance of thoracic surgical procedures.

Robotic surgery

BACKGROUND

Proficiency in minimally invasive surgery requires intensive and continuous training, as it is technically challenging for unnatural visual and haptic perceptions. Robotic and computer sciences are producing innovations to augment the surgeon's skills to achieve accuracy and high precision during complex surgery. This article reviews the current use of robotically assisted surgery, focusing on technology as well as main applications in digestive surgery, and future perspectives.

METHODS

The PubMed database was interrogated to retrieve evidence-based data on surgical applications. Internal and external consulting with key opinion leaders, renowned robotics laboratories and robotic platform manufacturers was used to produce state-of-the art business intelligence around robotically assisted surgery.

RESULTS

Selected digestive procedures (oesophagectomy, gastric bypass, pancreatic and liver resections, rectal resection for cancer) might benefit from robotic assistance, although the current level of evidence is insufficient to support widespread adoption. The surgical robotic market is growing, and a variety of projects have recently been launched at both academic and corporate levels to develop lightweight, miniaturized surgical robotic prototypes.

CONCLUSION

The magnified view, and improved ergonomics and dexterity offered by robotic platforms, might facilitate the uptake of minimally invasive procedures. Image guidance to complement robotically assisted procedures, through the concepts of augmented reality, could well represent a major revolution to increase safety and deal with difficulties associated with the new minimally invasive approaches.

From Heller to POEM (1914-2014): a 100-year history of surgery for Achalasia

BACKGROUND

The year 2014 marks the 100th anniversary of Dr. Heller's description of the surgical treatment of patients with achalasia with a cardiomyotomy. This 100-year-old operation, which is today performed laparoscopically with the addition of a partial fundoplication, is considered the treatment of choice for patients with achalasia.

PURPOSE

Our goals are to revisit the accounts from the beginning of the twentieth century in which surgeons tried to identify the pathophysiology of achalasia and proposed several operative techniques and to follow the evolution of the surgical treatment until modern days.

Robot-assisted oesophageal and gastric surgery for benign disease: antireflux operations and Heller's myotomy

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted general surgery operations are being performed more frequently. This review investigates whether robotic assistance results in significant advantages or disadvantages for the operative treatment of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and achalasia.

METHODS

The electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PubMed) were searched for original English language publications for antireflux surgery and Heller's myotomy between January 1990 and December 2013.

RESULTS

Thirty-three publications included antireflux operations and 20 included Heller's myotomy. The publications indicate that the safety and effectiveness of robotic surgery is similar to that of conventional minimally invasive surgery for both operations. The six randomized trials of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic antireflux surgery showed no significant advantages but significantly higher costs for the robotic method. Gastric perforation during non-redo robotic fundoplication occurred in four trials.

CONCLUSIONS

No consistent advantage for robot-assisted antireflux surgery has been demonstrated, and there is an increased cost with current robotic technology. A reported advantage for robotic in reducing the perforation rate during Heller's myotomy for achalasia remains unproven. Gastric perforation during robotic fundoplication may be due to the lack of haptic feedback combined with the superhuman strength of the robot.

Thoracoscopic versus robotic approaches: advantages and disadvantages

The overall advantages of thoracoscopy over thoracotomy in terms of patient recovery have been fairly well established. The use of robotics, however, is a newer and less proven modality in the realm of thoracic surgery. Robotics offers distinct advantages and disadvantages in comparison with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Robotic technology is now used for a variety of complex cardiac, urologic, and gynecologic procedures including mitral valve repair and microsurgical treatment of male infertility. This article addresses the potential benefits and limitations of using the robotic platform for the performance of a variety of thoracic operations.

Robotics: The next step?

Robotic systems were introduced 15 years ago to support complex endoscopic procedures. The technology is increasingly used in gastro-intestinal surgery. In this article, literature on experimental- and clinical research is reviewed and ergonomic issues are discussed.

METHODS

literature review was based on Medline search using a large variety of search terms, including e.g. robot(ic), randomized, rectal, oesophageal, ergonomics. Review articles on relevant topics are discussed with preference.

RESULTS

There is abundant evidence of supremacy in performing complex endoscopic surgery tasks when using the robot in an experimental setting. There is little high-level evidence so far on translation of these merits to clinical practice.

DISCUSSION

Robotic systems may appear helpful in complex gastro-intestinal surgery. Moreover, dedicated computer based technology integrated in telepresence systems opens the way to integration of planning, diagnostics and therapy. The first high tech add-ons such as near infrared technology are under clinical evaluation.

The first nationwide evaluation of robotic general surgery: a regionalized, small but safe start

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the most commonly performed robotic-assisted general surgery (RAGS) procedures in a nationwide database and compare them with their laparoscopic counterparts.

METHODS

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried from October 2008 to December 2010 for patients undergoing elective, abdominal RAGS procedures. The two most common, robotic-assisted fundoplication (RF) and gastroenterostomy without gastrectomy (RG), were individually compared with the laparoscopic counterparts (LF and LG, respectively).

RESULTS

During the study, 297,335 patients underwent abdominal general surgery procedures, in which 1,809 (0.6 %) utilized robotic-assistance. From 2009 to 2010, the incidence of RAGS nearly doubled from 573 to 1128 cases. The top five RAGS procedures by frequency were LG, LF, laparoscopic lysis of adhesions, other anterior resection of rectum, and laparoscopic sigmoidectomy. Eight of the top ten RAGS were colorectal or foregut operations. RG was performed in 282 patients (0.9 %) and LG in 29,677 patients (99.1 %). When comparing RG with LG there was no difference in age, gender, race, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), postoperative complications, or mortality; however, length of stay (LOS) was longer in RG (2.5 ± 2.4 vs. 2.2 ± 1.5 days; p < 0.0001). Total cost for RG was substantially higher ($60,837 ± 28,887 vs. $42,743 ± 23,366; p < 0.0001), and more often performed at teaching hospitals (87.2 vs. 50.9 %; p < 0.0001) in urban areas (100 vs. 93.0 %; p < 0.0001). RF was performed in 272 patients (3.5 %) and LF in 7,484 patients (96.5 %). RF patients were more often male compared with LF (38.2 vs. 32.3 %; p < 0.05); however, there was no difference in age, race, CCI, LOS, or postoperative complications. RF was more expensive than LF ($37,638 ± 21,134 vs. $32,947 ± 24,052; p < 0.0001), and more often performed at teaching hospitals (72.4 vs. 54.9 %; p < 0.0001) in urban areas (98.5 vs. 88.7 %; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide study of RAGS exemplifies its low but increasing incidence across the country. RAGS is regionalized to urban teaching centers compared with conventional laparoscopic techniques. Despite similar postoperative outcomes, there is significantly increased cost associated with RAGS.

Robot-assisted gastroesophageal surgery: usefulness and limitations

Robot-assisted surgery overcomes some of the limitations of traditional laparoscopic surgery. We present our experience and lessons learned in two surgical units dedicated to gastro-esophageal surgery. From June 2009 to January 2013, we performed 130 robot-assisted gastroesophageal procedures, including Nissen fundoplication (29), paraesophageal hernia repair (18), redo for failed antireflux surgery (11), esophagectomy (19), subtotal (5) or wedge (4) gastrectomy, Heller myotomy for achalasia (22), gastric bypass for morbid obesity (12), thoracoscopic leiomyomectomy (4), Morgagni hernia repair (3), lower-third esophageal diverticulectomy (1) and two diagnostic procedures. There were 80 men and 50 women with a median age of 54 years (interquartile range: 46-65). Ten patients (7.7 %) had severe postoperative complications: eight after esophagectomy (three leaks-two cervical and one thoracic-managed conservatively), one stapler failure, one chylothorax, one case of gastric migration to the thorax, one case of biliary peritonitis, and one patient with a transient ventricular dyskinesia. One redo procedure needed reoperation because of port-site bleeding, and one patient died of pulmonary complications after a giant paraesophageal hernia repair; 30-day mortality was, therefore, 0.8 %. There were six elective and one forced conversions (hemorrhage), so total conversion was 5.4 %. Median length of stay was 4 days (IQ range 3-7). Robot-assisted gastroesophageal surgery is feasible and safe, and may be applied to most common procedures. It seems of particular value for Heller myotomy, large paraesophageal hernias, redo antireflux surgery, transhiatal dissection, and hand-sewn intrathoracic anastomosis.