Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer training curriculum-a worldwide Delphi consensus study

The training pathway for residents: 'Robotic Curriculum for young Surgeons' (RoCS) does not impair patient outcome during implementation into clinical routine

The "Robotic Curriculum for young Surgeons" (RoCS) was launched 03/2020 to address the increasing importance of robotics in surgical training. It aims to provide residents with foundational robotic skills by involving them early in their training. This study evaluated the impact of RoCS' integration into clinical routine on patient outcomes. Two cohorts were compared regarding the implementation of RoCS: Cohort 1 (before RoCS) included all robot-assisted procedures between 2017 and 03/2020 (n = 174 adults) retrospectively; Cohort 2 (after RoCS) included all adults (n = 177) who underwent robotic procedures between 03/2020 and 2021 prospectively. Statistical analysis covered demographics, perioperative parameters, and follow-up data, including mortality and morbidity. Subgroup analysis for both cohorts was organ-related (upper gastrointestinal tract (UGI), colorectal (CR), hepatopancreaticobiliary system (HPB)). Sixteen procedures were excluded due to heterogeneity. In-hospital, 30-, 90-day morbidity and mortality showed no significant differences between both cohorts, including organ-related subgroups. For UGI, no significant intraoperative parameter changes were observed. Surgery duration decreased significantly in CR and HPB procedures (p = 0.018 and p < 0.001). Estimated blood loss significantly decreased for CR operations (p = 0.001). The conversion rate decreased for HPB operations (p = 0.005). Length of hospitalization decreased for CR (p = 0.015) and HPB (p = 0.006) procedures. Oncologic quality, measured by histopathologic R0-resections, showed no significant changes. RoCS can be safely integrated into clinical practice without compromising patient safety or oncologic quality. It serves as an effective training pathway to guide robotic novices through their first steps in robotic surgery, offering promising potential for skill acquisition and career advancement.

Development and evaluation of a societal core robotic surgery accreditation curriculum for the UK

Standardised proficiency-based progression is the cornerstone of safe robotic skills acquisition, however, is currently lacking within surgical training curricula. Expert consensuses have defined a modular pathway to accredit surgeons. This study aimed to address the lack of a formal, pre-clinical core robotic skills, proficiency-based accreditation curriculum in the UK. Novice robotic participants underwent a four-day pre-clinical core robotic skills curriculum incorporating multimodal assessment. Modifiable-Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (M-GEARS), VR-automated performance metrics (APMs) and Objective Clinical Human Reliability Analysis (OCHRA) error methodology assessed performance at the beginning and end of training. Messick's validity concept and a curriculum evaluation model were utilised. Feedback was collated. Proficiency-based progression, benchmarking, tool validity and reliability was assessed through comparative and correlational statistical methods. Forty-seven participants were recruited. Objective assessment of VR and dry models across M-GEARS, APMs and OCHRA demonstrated significant improvements in technical skill (p < 0.001). Concurrent validity between assessment tools demonstrated strong correlation in dry and VR tasks (r = 0.64-0.92, p < 0.001). OCHRA Inter-rater reliability was excellent (r = 0.93, p < 0.001 and 81% matched error events). A benchmark was established with M-GEARS and for the curriculum at 80%. Thirty (63.82%) participants passed. Feedback was 5/5 stars on average, with 100% recommendation. Curriculum evaluation fulfilled all five domains of Messick's validity. Core robotic surgical skills training can be objectively evaluated and benchmarked to provide accreditation in basic robotic skills. A strategy is necessary to enrol standardised curricula into national surgical training at an early stage to ensure patient safety.

A senior surgical resident can safely perform complex esophageal cancer surgery after surgical mentoring program-experience of a European high-volume center

Previous studies have shown that surgical residents can safely perform a variation of complex abdominal surgeries when provided with adequate training, proper case selection, and appropriate supervision. Their outcomes are equivalent when compared to experienced board-certified surgeons. Our previously published training curriculum for robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy already demonstrated a possible reduction in time to reach proficiency. However, esophagectomy is a technically challenging procedure and comes with high morbidity rates of up to 60%, making it difficult to provide opportunities to train surgical residents. We aimed to investigate if a surgical resident could safely perform complex esophageal surgery when a structured modular teaching curriculum is applied. A structured teaching program based on our previously published modular step-up approach was applied by two experienced board-certified esophageal surgeons. Our IRB-approved (Institutional Review Board) database was searched to identify all Ivor-Lewis esophagectomies performed by the selected surgical resident from August 2019 to July 2021. The cumulative sum method was used to analyze the learning curve of the surgical resident. Outcomes of patients operated by the resident were then compared to our overall cohort of open, hybrid, and robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomies from May 2016 to May 2020. The total cohort included 567 patients, of which 65 were operated by the surgical resident and 502 patients were operated by experienced esophageal cancer surgeons as the control group. For baseline characteristics, a significant difference for BMI (Body mass index) was observed, which was lower in the resident's group (25.5 kg/m2 vs. 26.8 kg/m2 (P = 0.046). A significant difference of American Society of Anesthesiologists- and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-scores was seen, and a subgroup analysis including all patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists I and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group 0 was performed revealing no significant differences. Postoperative complications did not differ between groups. The anastomotic leak rate was 13.8% in the resident's cohort and 12% in the control cohort (P = 0.660). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIb) occurred in 16.9% of patients in both groups. Oncological outcome, defined by harvested lymph nodes (35 vs. 32.33, P = 0.096), proportion of lymph node compliant performed operations (86.2% vs. 88.4%, P = 0.590), and R0-resection rate (96.9% vs. 96%, P = 0.766), was not compromised when esophagectomies were performed by the resident. The resident completed the learning curves after 39 cases for the total operating time, 38 cases for the thoracic operating time, 26 cases for the number of harvested lymph nodes, 29 cases for anastomotic leak rate, and finally 58 cases for the comprehensive complication index. For postoperative complications, no significant difference was seen between patients operated in the resident group versus the control group, with a third of patients being discharged with a textbook outcome in both cohorts. Furthermore, no difference in oncological quality of the resection was found, emphasizing safety and feasibility of our training program. A structured modular step-up for training a surgical resident to perform complex esophageal cancer surgery can successfully maintain patient safety and outcomes.

European Robotic Surgery Consensus (ERSC): Protocol for the development of a consensus in robotic training for gastrointestinal surgery trainees

BACKGROUND

The rapid adoption of robotic surgical systems across Europe has led to a critical gap in training and credentialing for gastrointestinal (GI) surgeons. Currently, there is no existing standardised curriculum to guide robotic training, assessment and certification for GI trainees. This manuscript describes the protocol to achieve a pan-European consensus on the essential components of a comprehensive training programme for GI robotic surgery through a five-stage process.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In Stage 1, a Steering Committee, consisting of international experts, trainees and educationalists, has been established to lead and coordinate the consensus development process. In Stage 2, a systematic review of existing multi-specialty robotic training curricula will be performed to inform the formulation of key position statements. In Stage 3, a comprehensive survey will be disseminated across Europe to capture the current state of robotic training and identify potential challenges and opportunities for improvement. In Stage 4, an international panel of GI surgeons, trainees, and robotic theatre staff will participate in a three-round Delphi process, seeking ≥ 70% agreement on crucial aspects of the training curriculum. Industry and patient representatives will be involved as external advisors throughout this process. In Stage 5, the robotic training curriculum for GI trainees will be finalised in a dedicated consensus meeting, culminating in the production of an Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) document.

REGISTRATION DETAILS

The study protocol has been registered on the Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/br87d/).

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.

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

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

Analysis of training pathway to reach expert performance levels based on proficiency-based progression in robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE)

BACKGROUND

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was first introduced in 2003 and has since then shown to significantly improve the postoperative course. Previous studies have shown that a structured training pathway based on proficiency-based progression using individual skill levels as measures of reach of competence can enhance surgical performance. The aim of this study was to evaluate and help understand our pathway to reach surgical expert levels using a proficiency-based approach introducing RAMIE at our German high-volume center.

METHODS

All patients undergoing RAMIE performed by two experienced surgeons for esophageal cancer since the introduction of the robotic technique in 2017 was included in this analysis. Intraoperative outcomes and postoperative outcomes were included in the analysis. The cumulative sum method was used to analyze how many cases are needed to reach expert levels for different performance characteristics and skill sets during robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy.

RESULTS

From 06/2017 to 03/2022, a total of 154 patients underwent RAMIE at our facility and were included in the analysis. An advancement in performance level was observed for total operating time after 70 cases and for thoracic operative time after 79 cases. Lymph node yield showed an increase up until case 60 in the CUSUM analysis. Length of hospital stay stabilized after case 55. The CCI score inflection point was at case 55 in both CUSUM and regression analyses. Anastomotic leak rate stabilized at case 38 and showed another inflection point after case 83.

CONCLUSION

Our data and analysis showed the progression from proficient to expert performance levels during the implementation of RAMIE at a European high-volume center. Further analysis of surgeons, especially with a different training status has yet to reveal if the caseloads found in this study are universally applicable. However, skill acquisition and respective measures of such are diverse and as a great range of number of cases was observed, we believe that the learning curve and ascent in performance levels cannot be defined by one parameter alone.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Robot-assisted pelvic floor reconstructive surgery: an international Delphi study of expert users

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery has gained popularity for the reconstruction of pelvic floor defects. Nonetheless, there is no evidence that robot-assisted reconstructive surgery is either appropriate or superior to standard laparoscopy for the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures or that it is sustainable. The aim of this project was to address the proper role of robotic pelvic floor reconstructive procedures using expert opinion.

METHODS

We set up an international, multidisciplinary group of 26 experts to participate in a Delphi process on robotics as applied to pelvic floor reconstructive surgery. The group comprised urogynecologists, urologists, and colorectal surgeons with long-term experience in the performance of pelvic floor reconstructive procedures and with the use of the robot, who were identified primarily based on peer-reviewed publications. Two rounds of the Delphi process were conducted. The first included 63 statements pertaining to surgeons' characteristics, general questions, indications, surgical technique, and future-oriented questions. A second round including 20 statements was used to reassess those statements where borderline agreement was obtained during the first round. The final step consisted of a face-to-face meeting with all participants to present and discuss the results of the analysis.

RESULTS

The 26 experts agreed that robotics is a suitable indication for pelvic floor reconstructive surgery because of the significant technical advantages that it confers relative to standard laparoscopy. Experts considered these advantages particularly important for the execution of complex reconstructive procedures, although the benefits can be found also during less challenging cases. The experts considered the robot safe and effective for pelvic floor reconstruction and generally thought that the additional costs are offset by the increased surgical efficacy.

CONCLUSION

Robotics is a suitable choice for pelvic reconstruction, but this Delphi initiative calls for more research to objectively assess the specific settings where robotic surgery would provide the most benefit.

ESDE-MIE fellowship: a descriptive analysis of the first experiences

Esophageal resection is a high-risk and technically demanding procedure, with a long proficiency-gain curve. The European Society Diseases of the Esophagus (ESDE)-Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) training program was launched in 2018 for European surgeons willing to train and to begin a career undertaking MIE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the first experience of the ESDE-MIE fellowship and relate this to the initially predetermined core principles and objectives of the program. Between October 2021 and May 2022, the participating fellows, in collaboration with the ESDE Educational Committee, initiated a survey to assess the outcome and experience of these fellowships. Data from each individual fellowship were analysed and reported in a descriptive manner. Between 2018 and 2022, in total, five fellows have completed the ESDE-MIE fellowship program. Despite the COVID-19 outbreak just the year after its launch, predetermined clinical and research goals were achieved in all cases. Each of the fellows were able to assist in a median of 40 (IQR 27-69) MIE and/or Robot assisted (RA)MIE procedures, of a total median of 115 (IQR 83-123) attended Upper GI cases. After the fellowship, MIE has been fully adopted by the fellows who returned to their home institutions as Upper GI surgeons. The fellowship was concluded by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) Multidisciplinary Joint Committee (MJC) certification in Upper GI Surgery, which was successfully obtained by all who took part. Based on the experience of the first five fellows, the ESDE-MIE training fellowship meets with the expected needs even despite the COVID-19 outbreak in 2019. Furthermore, these fellows have returned home and integrated MIE into their independent surgical practice, affirming the ability of this program to train the next generation of MIE surgeons, even in the most challenging of circumstances.

[Surgical Treatment of Esophageal Cancer-New Technologies, Modern Concepts]

Das Ösophaguskarzinom wird in Deutschland meist in spezialisierten Zentren entsprechend den Leitlinien multimodal und interdisziplinär therapiert. In den kommenden Jahren wird die Zentralisierung der Ösophaguschirurgie in Deutschland durch die Festlegung neuer Mindestmengen weiter voranschreiten. Dieser Artikel soll neue Technologien für die chirurgische Therapie des Ösophaguskarzinoms und zudem aktuelle onkologische Konzepte aus der Sicht eines High-volume-Centers vorstellen.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) vs. hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy: propensity score matched short-term outcome analysis of a European high-volume center

INTRODUCTION

Transthoracic esophagectomy is a highly complex and sophisticated procedure with high morbidity rates and a significant mortality. Surgical access has consistently become less invasive, transitioning from open esophagectomy to hybrid esophagectomy (HE) then to totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), and most recently to robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), with each step demonstrating improved patient outcomes. Aim of this study with more than 600 patients is to complete a propensity-score matched comparison of postoperative short-term outcomes after highly standardized RAMIE vs. HE in a European high volume center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Six hundred and eleven patients that underwent transthoracic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between May 2016 and May 2021 were included in the study. In January 2019, we implemented an updated robotic standardized anastomotic technique using a circular stapler and ICG (indocyanine green) for RAMIE cases. Data were retrospectively analyzed from a prospectively maintained IRB-approved database. Outcomes of patients undergoing standardized RAMIE from January 2019 to May 2021 were compared to our overall cohort from May 2016-April 2021 (HE) after a propensity-score matching analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Six hundred and eleven patients were analyzed. 107 patients underwent RAMIE. Of these, a total of 76 patients underwent a robotic thoracic reconstruction using the updated standardized circular stapled anastomosis (RAMIE group). A total of 535 patients underwent HE (Hybrid group). Seventy patients were propensity-score matched in each group and analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in baseline characteristics. RAMIE patients had a significantly shorter ICU stay (p = 0.0218). Significantly more patients had no postoperative complications (Clavien Dindo 0) in the RAMIE group [47.1% vs. 27.1% in the HE group (p = 0.0225)]. No difference was seen in lymph node yield and R0 resection rates. Anastomotic leakage rates when matched were 14.3% in the hybrid group vs. 4.3% in the RAMIE group (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

Our analysis confirms the safety and feasibility of RAMIE and HE in a large cohort after propensity score matching. A regular postoperative course (Clavien-Dindo 0) and a shorter ICU stay were seen significantly more often after RAMIE compared to HE. Furthermore it shows that both procedures provide excellent short-term oncologic outcomes, regarding lymph node harvest and R0 resection rates. A randomized controlled trial comparing RAMIE and HE is still pending and will hopefully contribute to ongoing discussions.

Chirurgische Therapie des Ösophaguskarzinoms – neue Technologien, moderne Konzepte

Das Ösophaguskarzinom wird in Deutschland meist in spezialisierten Zentren entsprechend den Leitlinien multimodal und interdisziplinär therapiert. In den kommenden Jahren wird die Zentralisierung der Ösophaguschirurgie in Deutschland durch die Festlegung neuer Mindestmengen weiter voranschreiten. Dieser Artikel soll neue Technologien für die chirurgische Therapie des Ösophaguskarzinoms und zudem aktuelle onkologische Konzepte aus der Sicht eines High-volume-Centers vorstellen.

[Surgical treatment of esophageal cancer-New technologies, modern concepts]

In Germany esophageal cancer is mostly treated in specialized centers according to national and international guidelines in a multimodal and interdisciplinary setting. In the next few years centralization of esophageal surgery will continue in Germany due to new national regulations on minimum case volumes. This article highlights new technologies for surgical treatment of esophageal cancer and also depicts the current oncological concepts from the perspective of a high-volume center.