Learning curve to lymph node resection in minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer. Innovations (Phila). 2014;9:286-291. [PMID: 25084251 DOI: 10.1097/imi.0000000000000082]

Factors influencing quality of lymphadenectomy in minimally invasive esophagectomy: a US-based analysis

NCCN guidelines suggest that at least 15 lymph nodes (LN) should be evaluated at the time of esophagectomy to consider the lymphadenectomy 'adequate'. Despite these guidelines, this may not always be achieved in practice. The purpose of this study was to determine factors associated with adequate lymphadenectomy among patients receiving minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Patients receiving MIE in the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2016 were identified. Patients with metastatic disease were excluded. The primary endpoint was adequate lymphadenectomy, defined as >15 or greater LN evaluated. Factors associated with adequate lymphadenectomy and overall survival were evaluated in univariable and multivariable analyses. Categorical variables were assessed using chi-squared, and continuous variables were assessed with rank-sum test. Survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A total of 6,539 patients underwent MIE between 2010 and 2016 (5,024 thoracoscopic-laparoscopic MIE and 1,515 robotic-assisted MIE). A total of 3,527 patients (53.9%) received adequate lymphadenectomy. Receiving MIE at an academic center (odds ratio [OR] 1.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.63, P < 0.001), institutional volume of MIE (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.008-1.011, P < 0.001), and presence of clinical nodal disease (OR 1.17, 95%CI 1.02-1.33, P = 0.025) were associated with adequate lymphadenectomy. Patients with >15 LN removed had increased overall survival (46.6 vs. 41.5 months, P < 0.001). Adequate lymphadenectomy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95%CI 0.71-0.85, P < 0.001), receiving surgery at an academic center (HR 0.87, 95%CI 0.78-0.96, P = 0.007) and private insurance status (HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.81-0.98, P = 0.02) were independently associated with improved survival. Nearly half of patients receiving MIE do not receive adequate lymphadenectomy as defined by NCCN guidelines. Receiving MIE at an academic center with high procedural volume and the presence of nodal disease were independently associated with adequate lymphadenectomy. Adequate lymphadenectomy was associated with improved survival. These findings suggest that providers performing esophagectomy should follow guideline-based recommendations for lymphadenectomy.

Learning curves in minimally invasive esophagectomy: A systematic review and evaluation of benchmarking parameters

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive techniques are increasingly used in the treatment of esophageal cancer. The learning curve for minimally invasive esophagectomy is variable and can impact patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to review the current evidence on learning curves in minimally invasive esophagectomy and identify which parameters are used for benchmarking.

METHODS

A search of the major reference databases (PubMed, Medline, Cochrane) was performed with no time limits up to February 2020. Results were screened in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were included if an assessment of the learning curve was reported on, regardless of which (if any) statistical method was used.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies comprising 3,741 patients were included. Twenty-two studies reported on a combination of thoracoscopic, hybrid, and total minimally invasive esophagectomy, 6 studies reported robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy alone, and 1 study evaluated both robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy and thoracoscopic esophagectomies. Operating time was the most frequently used parameter to determine learning curve progression (23/39 studies), with number of resected lymph nodes, morbidity, and blood loss also frequently used. Learning curves were found to plateau at 7 to 60 cases for thoracoscopic esophagectomy, 12 to 175 cases for total and thoracoscopic/hybrid esophagectomy, and 9 to 85 cases for robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy.

CONCLUSION

Multiple parameters are employed to gauge minimally invasive esophagectomy learning curve progression. However, there are no validated or approved sets of outcomes. Further work is required to determine the optimum parameters that should be used to ensure best patient outcomes and required length of proctoring.

Learning curve for minimally invasive oesophagectomy of oesophageal cancer and survival analysis

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive oesophagectomy is a technically demanding procedure, and the learning curve for this procedure should be explored. A survival analysis should also be performed.

METHODS

A total of 214 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive oesophagectomy were retrospectively reviewed. To evaluate the development of thoracoscopic-laparoscopic oesophagectomy and compare mature minimally invasive oesophagectomy and open oesophagectomy, we comprehensively studied the clinical and surgical parameters. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) plot was used to evaluate the learning curve for systemic lymphadenectomy. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was performed to explore the clinical factors affecting survival.

RESULTS

The bleeding volume, operation time, and postoperative mortality within 3 months significantly decreased after 20 patients. The rise point for node dissection was visually determined to occur at patient 57 in the CUSUM plots. Patients who underwent mature thoracoscopic-laparoscopic oesophagectomy had better surgical data and short-term benefits than patients who underwent an open procedure. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed that the maximum diameter of the tumour cross-sectional area and the number of positive nodes significantly influenced survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that thoracoscopic-laparoscopic oesophagectomy has short-term benefits. There was no evidence that it was associated with a significantly better prognosis for patients with oesophageal cancer. ClinicalTrials Gov ID: NCT04217239; January 2, 2020 retrospectively registered.

Transition from open to minimally invasive en bloc esophagectomy can be achieved without compromising surgical quality

BACKGROUND

En bloc esophagectomy results in higher lymph node (LN) retrieval than standard esophagectomy. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has gained traction due to improved short-term outcomes, but many large series report LN yields well below the international benchmark of 23. We sought to determine if an established approach to open en bloc resection can be safely transferred to MIE using LN yield as a quality benchmark.

METHODS

An open approach to en bloc esophagectomy (OE) was established over 5 years (~ 300 cases) before en bloc MIE was introduced in 2010. Patients undergoing curative-intent en bloc Ivor-Lewis and McKeown esophagectomy for cancer from 2010 to 2019 by a single surgeon with formal minimally invasive surgery training were identified from a prospectively collected database. Mann-Whitney U and χ² tests and cumulative sum analysis were used for statistical analysis. "Failure" was defined as LN yield less than AJCC's 8th edition guidelines: 10 LNs for pT1 cancers, 20 for pT2 and 30 for pT3-4.

RESULTS

A total of 269 esophageal resections met inclusion criteria [193(72%) OE; 76(28%) MIE]. Age, sex, BMI and comorbidities were comparable between groups. Tumors were larger and more often locally advanced in OE. Median LN retrieval was sufficient by international standards in both groups [OE:34(27-46); MIE:28(22-39); p = 0.01]. "Failures" occurred in 33(17%) of OE and 12(16%) MIE cases (p = 0.63). No learning effect was observed for LN yield. R0 resection rate was comparable [OE:191(99%); MIE:73(96%); p = 0.90]. Operative time was longer for MIE [275(246-300)] than OE [240(210-270) minutes], p < 0.0001, while estimated blood loss (OE:350(250-500)mL; MIE:300(200-400)mL; p = 0.02] and length of stay [OE:8(6-13); MIE7(6-9) days; p = 0.02] were higher for OE. Morbidity and mortality were comparable between groups and LN yield did not impact survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Under appropriate conditions, an established approach to open en bloc esophagectomy can be safely transferred to MIE without compromising surgical quality.

Comparisons between minimally invasive and open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with cervical anastomosis: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

As an extensive surgery, minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has advantages in reducing morbidity and improving quality of life for patients suffering from esophageal cancer. This study aims to investigate differences between MIE and open esophagectomy (OE) for considerations of the safety of procedures, rate of tumor resection, postoperative complications, and quality of life. This paper also tends to provide some references for MIE on esophageal cancer therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective data analysis was undertaken on 140 patients who either underwent MIE or OE for esophageal cancer with cervical anastomosis from March 2013 to May 2014 by our surgical team. Preoperative characteristics were analyzed for both groups. Differences in perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, lymph nodes retrieved, and R0-resection rate. Accordingly, a comparative analysis was conducted on complications namely anastomotic leakage, pulmonary infection, in-hospital mortality, and short-term (3 months) postoperative EORTC C30 Global health as well.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients (87 with MIE and 53 with OE) were enrolled and the two groups were homogeneous in terms of patient- and tumor-related data. There was no difference on postoperative ICU stay (21.15 ± 1.54 h vs 21.75 ± 1.68 h, p = 0.07) and R0-resection rate (100% vs 100%, p = 1.00). The operation time for MIE was significantly shorter (146.08 ± 17.35 min vs 200.34 ± 14.51 min, p <  0.0001), the intraoperative blood loss was remarkably saved (MIE vs OE, 83.91 ± 24.72 ml vs 174.53 ± 35.32 ml, P <  0.0001) and more lymph nodes were retrieved (MIE vs OE, 38.89 ± 4.31 vs 18.42 ± 3.66, P <  0.0001). There was no difference between the groups to postoperative complications and mortality. However, pulmonary infection in MIE was higher than in OE and the difference was not statistically significant (MIE vs OE, 20.75% vs 31.03%, P = 0.24). Complications such as in-hospital mortality and short-term (3 months) postoperative EORTC C30 Global health displayed no difference between both groups as well.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of lymph nodes and intraoperative blood loss were significantly ameliorated in MIE. A 4-5 cm longitudinal incision below the xiphoid process was made to create the gastric conduit under direct vision assisting in shortening the total operation time significantly.

Quality Improvement in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Outcome Improvement Through Data Review

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is a complex operation in which outcomes are profoundly influenced by operative experience and volume. We report the effects of experience and innovation on outcomes in minimally invasive esophagectomy.

METHODS

Esophageal resections for cancer from 2007 to 2016 at Levine Cancer Institute at Carolinas Medical Center (Charlotte, NC) were reviewed. During this time, three changes in technique were made to improve outcomes: vascular evaluation of the gastric conduit to improve anastomotic healing (beginning at case #63), one-stage approach to permit access to abdomen and chest through one draped surgical field (case #82), and adoption of a lung-protective anesthetic protocol (case #101). Mortality, operative time, complications, and length of stay were analyzed relative to these interventions using GLM regression.

RESULTS

200 patients underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy. There were no mortalities at 30 days, and no change in mortality rate at 60 and 90 days. Anastomotic leak decreased significantly after the introduction of intraoperative vascular evaluation of the gastric conduit (3.6 vs 19.4%). Operative time decreased with adoption of a one-stage approach (416 vs 536 min). Pulmonary complications decreased coincident with a change in anesthetic technique (pneumonia 6 vs 28%). Lymph node harvest increased over time. Length of stay was driven primarily by complications and decreased with operative experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative complications, operative time, and length of stay decreased with case experience and alterations in surgical and anesthetic technique. We believe that adoption of the techniques and technology described herein can reduce complications, reduce hospital stay, and improve patient outcomes.

Recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node dissection in minimally invasive esophagectomy

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has become increasingly important in the treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. However, it's still controversial about the effects of recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node dissection in MIE. Patient was placed in the lateral prone position. RLN lymph node dissection was performed in MIE. MIE can get comparable results of RLN lymph node dissection as open surgery. The number of dissected lymph nodes is 9.8±4.3 pieces and the time of lymphadenectomy is about 24 mins. RLN lymph node dissection is feasible and safe in MIE. The helpful surgical techniques include clear exposure of RLN, good collaboration with assistant, esophageal suspension, and so on.

Changes in oncological outcomes: comparison of the conventional and minimally invasive esophagectomy, a single institution experience

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is becoming the routine procedure for resectable esophageal cancer. The aim of this retrospective study is to analyze the oncologic adequacy of these two procedures at our Centre. Out of 1252 registered esophageal cancer patients at our institute from 2006 to 2015, 206 patients who underwent a surgical resection with curative intent and a complete medical record were retrospectively evaluated thru hospital medical record system (HIS). Patients were allocated into the conventional open OE, and minimally invasive MIE and Hybrid esophagectomy groups. Primary outcomes are tumor recurrence and disease-free survival over a minimum follow-up of 1 year along with assessment of adequacy of pathological specimen in terms of lymph nodes harvested and clear longitudinal <1 cm and circumferential (≥1 mm) resection margins for patients with post-neo-adjuvant residual disease. Secondary endpoint is to look for trends in the adequacy of oncologic clearance in each group over the study period. Overall, there was no statistically significant difference (p > 0.05) between groups (OE vs. MIE vs. Hybrid) for median number of lymph nodes retrieved (13 vs.14 vs.15), resection margin positive disease (55.8 vs. 35.7 vs. 44 % of patients with any residual disease N = 103,50 %), or tumor recurrence (45.2 vs. 37.3 vs. 25 %). Disease-free survival over a mean follow-up of 2.3 years was higher in the conventional group (13.8 months vs. 9.7MIE and 11.8hybrid) without any statistical significance. Learning curve for MIE to achieve a comparable mean lymph nodes harvest to OE was 1 year, while pathological complete resection stayed persistently better with minimally invasive approach. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is found to be oncologically adequate and gives results matching their conventional analogue with an increasing experience.

Three-dimensional vs two-dimensional video assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer

AIM: To define the benefits of three-dimensional video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (3D-VATE) over 2D-VATE for esophageal cancer.

METHODS: A total of 93 patients with esophageal cancer including 45 patients receiving 3D-VATE and 48 receiving 2D-VATE were evaluated. Data related to patient and cancer characteristics, operating time, intraoperative bleeding, morbidity and mortality, postoperative inflammatory markers, Numerical Rating Scale for postoperative pain, Constant-Murley rating system for shoulder recovery and oxygenation index (OI) were collected. All medical records were retrieved from a prospectively maintained oncological database at our institution. A retrospective study was performed to compare the short-term surgical outcomes between the two groups.

RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the two groups in either morbidity or mortality (P = 0.328). An enhanced surgical recovery was noted in the 3D group as indicated by shortened thoracoscopic operation time (3D vs 2D: 68 ± 13.79 min vs 83 ± 13 min, P < 0.01), minor intraoperative blood loss (3D vs 2D: 68.2 ± 10.7 mL vs 89.8 ± 10.4 mL, P < 0.01), earlier chest tube removal (3D vs 2D: 2.67 ± 1.01 vs 3.75 ± 1.15 d, P < 0.01), shorter length of hospital stay (3D vs 2D: 9.07 ± 2.00 vs 10.85 ± 3.40 d, P < 0.01), lower in-hospital expenses (3D vs 2D: 74968.4 ± 9637.8 vs 86211.1 ± 8519.7 RMB, P < 0.01), lower pain intensity (P < 0.01) and faster recovery of the left shoulder function (P < 0.01). Better preservation of the pulmonary function was also found in the 3D group as the decline of the OI post operation was significantly lower than that of the 2D group (P < 0.01). Changes of postoperative inflammatory markers, including procalcitonin [postoperative days (PODs) 4 and 7: P < 0.01], peripheral granulocytes (PODs 1, 4 and 7: P < 0.01) and hypersensitive C-reactive protein (POD 4: P < 0.01) in 3D-VATE patients were less than those in the 2D group. Moreover, utilization of the 3D technique extended the dissection of the thoracic lymph nodes (P < 0.01), with better exposure of nodes in the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (P = 0.031).

CONCLUSION: 3D-VATE could be a more viable technique over 2D-VATE in terms of short-term outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer.

Early experience and lessons learned in a new minimally invasive esophagectomy program

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is gaining increasing popularity in the treatment of esophageal cancer. In fact, while surgical and oncologic outcomes are not inferior to those achieved through a traditional open approach, patients undergoing MIE benefit from shorter length of stay, lesser pain and prompter recovery. This technique is, however, highly challenging, and the development of a MIE program, even in the setting of a tertiary center, requires time and progressive honing of surgical skills.

METHODS

We use a minimally invasive Ivor Lewis approach. The abdominal phase of the procedure includes complete celiac lymphadenectomy and tubularization of the stomach, which will constitute the neo-esophagus. The video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery portion of the operation takes place in left lateral decubitus and allows for optimal thoracic lymphadenectomy and anastomosis.

RESULTS

From October 2011 to January 2015, we treated 52 patients with the above-described procedure. The evolution of our anastomotic technique included a first group of circular stapled anastomosis with Orvil™ and 3.5-mm EEA™ (n = 16 patients), subsequently abandoned in favor of a linear anastomosis (n = 12), before going back to the Orvil™ coupled with 4.8-mm EEA™ (n = 22) in more recent times. There were also an additional two anastomoses that did not fall under any of these categories. We experienced two postoperative deaths. The overall leak rate was 14%, but fell down to 4% in the last group. Median LOS was 9 days. Lymph node retrieval was adequate throughout the whole series.

CONCLUSIONS

Developing a MIE program requires a significant learning curve before the results plateau. Only once a technique of choice is refined and mastered, the advantages granted by MIE become apparent.