Technical and early outcomes of Ivor Lewis minimally invasive oesophagectomy for gastric tube construction in the thoracic cavity

A Novel Method for Thoracoscopic Overlap Esophagogastric Reconstruction With Pleural Closure following Minimally Invasive Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy for Esophagogastric Junction Cancer

BACKGROUND

Intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis following minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy is a technically demanding surgical technique that can result in serious intrathoracic infections when anastomotic leakage occurs. Herein, we report a novel side-overlap esophagogastric anastomosis with pleural closure for esophagogastric junction cancer.

METHODS

The 3 key points of our novel technique were the following: (1) overlap esophagogastric anastomosis and closure of the entry hole were all performed using a linear stapler; (2) the pleura was closed to separate the anastomotic site from the thoracic cavity; and (3) the mediastinal drain was inserted transhiatally from the abdominal cavity.

RESULTS

This modified anastomosis procedure was performed on 8 consecutive patients at our institution. The median overall/thoracoscopic operating time and estimated blood loss were 652.5/241.5 min and 89 mL, respectively. No mortality or serious postoperative complications occurred, and the median postoperative hospital stay was 22 days (range, 17 to 37 d).

CONCLUSION

This novel thoracoscopic overlap esophagogastric reconstruction procedure with pleural closure is safe and feasible.

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.

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic-thoracoscopic technique. Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence comparing conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (CMIE) via laparoscopy and thoracoscopy with robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is scarce. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare surgical outcomes after CMIE and RAMIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify original articles analyzing outcomes after CMIE and RAMIE. Main surgical outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, anastomotic leak rates, pneumonia, overall morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day mortality. Oncologic outcomes included lymph node yield and R0 resections rates. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 6,249 patients were included for analysis; 5,275 (84%) underwent CMIE and 974 (16%) RAMIE. Robotic esophagectomy had longer operative time and less intraoperative blood loss. Anastomotic leakage rates were similar with both approaches. Patients undergoing RAMIE had significantly lower rates of postoperative pneumonia (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35-0.61, P < .0001) and overall morbidity (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58-0.79, P < .0001). Median LOS was similar in both procedures (RAMIE: 12.1 versus CMIE: 11.9 days, P = .64). Similar mortality rates were found after RAMIE and CMIE (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.34-1.38, P = .29). Lymph node yield was similar in both procedures, but RAMIE was associated with higher rates of R0 resection (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.53-5.26, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing robotic esophagectomy have less intraoperative blood loss, lower rates of postoperative pneumonia, reduced overall morbidity, and higher rates of R0 resections, as compared with those undergoing a laparoscopic-thoracoscopic esophageal resection.

Modified reverse-puncture anastomotic technique vs. traditional technique for total minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy

Background

Total endoscopic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy is a challenging, complex, and costly operation. These disadvantages restrict its wide application. The aim of this study was to compare the modified reverse-puncture anastomotic technique and traditional technique for total minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.

Methods

In this cohort retrospective study, all patients with medial and lower squamous cell carcinoma of esophagus from February 2014 and June 2018 were divided into two groups according to the surgical method, which were modified reverse-puncture anastomotic technique group and traditional technique group. The operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, complications, and cost of the two groups were compared.

Results

Forty-eight patients in the modified reverse-puncture anastomotic technique group while 54 patients in the traditional technique group were included. The operation time was 293.4 ± 57.2 min in the modified reverse-puncture anastomotic technique group, which was significantly shorter than that in the traditional technique group (353.4 ± 64.1 min) (P < 0.05). The intraoperative bleeding volume of modified reverse-puncture anastomotic technique group was 157.3 ± 107.4 ml, while it was 191.9 ± 123.6 ml in traditional technique group (P = 0.14). There were similar complications between the two groups. The cost of modified reverse-puncture anastomotic and traditional technique in our hospital were and 72 ± 13 and 83 ± 41 thousand Yuan, respectively (P = 0.08).

Conclusion

The good short-term outcomes that were achieved suggested that the use of modified reverse-puncture anastomotic technique is safe and feasible for total endoscopic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.

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.

Clinical observation of modified gastric tube in middle and lower thoracic esophageal carcinoma surgery

Background

A clinical case-control study was conducted to analyze the short-term efficacy of modified gastric tube in surgery for middle (mid)- and lower- thoracic esophageal carcinoma compared with the conventional gastric tube and its effect on postoperative pulmonary function.

Methods

A total of 70 patients with mid- and lower-thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy between October 2012 and September 2018 in our hospital were recruited in the study. They were randomly divided into a modified gastric tube group (n = 35) and a conventional gastric tube group (n = 35). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of intraoperative lymph node dissection, gastrointestinal decompression time and postoperative hospital stay were recorded. The operation results and complications were recorded, and the pulmonary function was recorded at 3 days before surgery and 6 weeks after surgery.

Results

The operation time in the modified gastric tube group was significantly lower than that in the gastric tube group (P < 0.05). There were no anastomotic leakage or death occurred in the modified gastric tube group. There was 1 case of anastomotic leakage in the conventional gastric tube group. The pulmonary function in both groups was improved at 6 weeks after surgery, but there was no significant difference between both groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Modified gastric tube has a good clinical application value compared with gastric tube for patients with mid- and lower-thoracic esophageal cancer. It is easy and safe, and can shorten the operation time without aggravation of pulmonary function after surgery.

Minimally invasive esophageal resection and intrathoracic anastomosis for lower thoracic esophageal cancer with single position

There are various esophagectomy approaches for lower thoracic esophageal cancer, and the minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) approach shows the advantages of less discomfort, shorter length of stay and a faster recovery to baseline status than open approaches. The current study reports a case of lower thoracic esophageal cancer was treated using a single-position, minimally invasive surgical technique with laparoscopy and thoracoscopy. A 68-year-old man, whose gastroscopy identified the esophageal carcinoma, came to our medical center due to dysphagia for over 1 year. The patient underwent tumor radical resection and intrathoracic anastomosis by laparoscopy and thoracoscopy with single position. The patient has recovered well after the surgery.

Transthoracic Extracorporeal Gastric Conduit Preparation for Minimally Invasive Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy

OBJECTIVE

During totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), the gastric conduit is typically constructed via laparoscopy. Trauma from laparoscopic instruments, inability to palpate the gastroepiploic arcade, and challenges in optimal positioning of the stomach for intra-abdominal stapling have led to the widespread use of laparotomy as part of hybrid MIE procedures. Our objective was to evaluate the safety of transthoracic extracorporeal gastric conduit preparation. We hypothesize that this alternative technique is equivalent in safety to the laparoscopic approach.

METHODS

This is a retrospective comparison of laparoscopic and transthoracic extracorporeal gastric conduit preparation with regard to anastomotic and respiratory outcomes.

RESULTS

During a 3-year period, 30 patients underwent MIE with a right intrathoracic anastomosis (extracorporeal conduit, 15; laparoscopic conduit, 15). Mean age (58.6 vs 67 years, P = 0.59), tumor location (gastroesophageal junction vs middle and lower esophageal, P = 0.27), and histology (adenocarcinoma vs other 26.7%, P = 0.68) were similar between groups. Anastomotic technique and operating surgeon were the same for all patients. Patients in the laparoscopic gastric conduit group were more likely to have undergone induction chemoradiotherapy (40% vs 80%, P = 0.030). There was no significant difference between groups with respect to anastomotic complications, including anastomotic leak and anastomotic stricture (20% vs 13.3%, P = 0.70). Transthoracic gastric conduit preparation was not associated with increased respiratory complications (8% vs 12%, P = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Transthoracic gastric conduit preparation is a simple, minimally invasive alternative laparotomy for gastric conduit preparation during MIE. No additional incision is required. The technique may help surgeons overcome shortcomings of the laparoscopic approach without impacting perioperative risk.

Laparoscopic gastric tube formation with pyloromyotomy for reconstruction in patients with esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

To analyze the benefit and feasibility of this procedure compared with those of open method.

METHODS

Abdominal procedure includes laparoscopic gastric mobilization, celiac axis lymph node dissection, formation of the gastric tube, and pyloromyotomy. The actual procedure performed during open surgery is the same as those of laparoscopic surgery except for the main incision. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) was performed on 54 patients with esophageal cancer. The short-term outcomes, including postoperative complications were analyzed and compared with 44 cases of open method.

RESULTS

Although the total operative time was not different between 2 groups (349.8 minutes vs. 374.8 minutes, P = 0.153), the operation time of abdominal procedure was shorter in laparoscopic group (90.6 minutes vs. 162.1 minutes, P < 0.001). Operation related complications and hospital stay were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The number of transfused patients was significantly smaller in laparoscopic group (11.1% vs. 27.9%, P = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic gastric tubing with pyloromyotomy is a feasible and safe treatment option for patients with esophageal cancer.

Outcomes in the management of esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer rates have continued to rise in the Western World. Esophageal cancer will be responsible for an estimated 15,450 deaths in the United States in 2014 alone. Esophageal resection with or without preoperative therapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Advances in surgical technique and perioperative care have improved short-term outcomes considerably by decreasing operative mortality. Despite these advances though, esophagectomy remains a procedure associated with considerable morbidity from a wide range of complications. Prompt recognition and treatment of complications can lower overall morbidity and mortality. Unfortunately, long-term outcomes remain poor as the vast majority of patients present with loco-regionally advanced or metastatic disease. Surgery by itself provides poor loco-regional control and fails to address micrometastatic disease. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation provides a modest survival advantage compared to surgical resection alone. Future gains in understanding the molecular biology of esophageal cancer will hopefully lead to improved therapeutics and resultant outcomes.