Minimally Invasive and Robotic Esophagectomy: A Review

Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAILE): A review of surgical techniques and clinical outcomes

In the past 20 years, robotic system has gradually found a place in esophagectomy which is a demanding procedure in the deep and narrow thoracic cavity containing crucial functional structures. Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (ILE) is a mainstream surgery type for esophagectomy and is widely accepted for its capability in lymphadenectomy and relatively mitigated trauma. As a minimally invasive technique, robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAILE) has been frequently compared with the video-assisted procedure and the traditional open procedure. However, high-quality evidence elucidating the advantages and drawbacks of RAILE is still lacking. In this article, we will review the surgical techniques, both short and long-term outcomes, the learning curve, and explicate the current progress and clinical efficacy of RAILE.

Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy versus Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) constitutes a newly developed surgical technique for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer, aiming to further improve the high morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy. We performed a systematic review of the literature and compared the outcomes of RAMIE and open esophagectomy. RAMIE is a safe and feasible procedure, resulting in decreased cardiopulmonary morbidity, wound infections, blood loss, and hospital stays compared to open esophagectomy.

Abstract

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was introduced as a further development of the conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy, aiming to further improve the high morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the outcomes between RAMIE and open esophagectomy, which remains a popular approach for resectable esophageal cancer. Ten studies meeting our inclusion criteria were identified, including five retrospective cohort, four prospective cohort, and one randomized controlled trial. RAMIE was associated with significantly lower rates of overall pulmonary complications (odds ratio (OR): 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): [0.26, 0.56]), pneumonia (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: [0.26, 0.57]), atrial fibrillation (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: [0.29, 0.98]), and wound infections (OR: 0.20, 95% CI: [0.07, 0.57]) and resulted in less blood loss (weighted mean difference (WMD): −187.08 mL, 95% CI: [−283.81, −90.35]) and shorter hospital stays (WMD: −9.22 days, 95% CI: [−14.39, −4.06]) but longer operative times (WMD: 69.45 min, 95% CI: [34.39, 104.42]). No other statistically significant difference was observed regarding surgical and short-term oncological outcomes. Similar findings were observed when comparing totally robotic procedures only to OE. RAMIE is a safe and feasible procedure, resulting in decreased cardiopulmonary morbidity, wound infections, blood loss, and shorter hospital stays compared to open esophagectomy.

Perioperative safety and short-term efficacy of functional minimally invasive esophagectomy

Background

Standard minimally invasive McKeown three-field esophagectomy (SMIE) results in high perioperative risk and poor postoperative quality of life owing to considerable surgical damage and numerous postoperative complications. We created a modified procedure, functional minimally invasive esophagectomy (FMIE), which preserves the azygos arch, bronchial artery, pulmonary branch of the vagus nerve, and the mediastinal pleura. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FMIE and to determine whether it has limited invasiveness.

Methods

Between 2018 and 2020, FMIE was performed for 48 patients who were compared with 76 SMIE cases; 44 paired cases were matched using propensity score matching.

Results

Operation time, extubation time, and postoperative hospital stay were significantly lower in the FMIE group. FMIE was also associated with fewer pulmonary infections. Postoperative drainage volume on postoperative day (POD) 1 and POD 2, and white blood cell counts on POD 2 and POD 4 were also significantly lower in the FMIE group. There was no statistically significant difference in the number of dissected lymph nodes, short-term recurrence, metastasis rates, or survival rate between the two groups.

Conclusions

FMIE is a less invasive procedure and may be a suitable alternative for lower and early middle esophageal carcinoma.

Conversions related to adhesions in abdominal surgery. Robotic versus laparoscopic approach: A multicentre experience

BACKGROUND

An advantage of robotic surgery over laparoscopy is the lower rate of unplanned conversion. One of the implicated reasons for conversion is adhesions from previous abdominal surgeries (PASs).

METHODS

A comparative analysis of 98 patients with history of open PAS treated by laparoscopic or robotic surgery was performed. Primary endpoint was the rate of conversion to open surgery related to adhesiolysis. Secondary endpoints were short-term outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

Conversion rate specifically related to adhesiolysis was significantly lower in robotic group (13 for laparoscopic group vs. 2 for robotic group; p = 0.046). Conversions occurred during adhesiolysis were significantly related to severity of adhesions expressed by peritoneal adhesion index (PAI) score (p < 0.001), number of abdominal areas involved by adhesions (p < 0.001) and severity of PAI into the target area of surgical intervention (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Benefits of robotic surgery are more noticeable in performing procedures with increasing technical difficulties.

Robotic resection for esophageal cancer

Background

In the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer, complete tumor resection is the most important factor and determines long-term survival. With an increase in robotic expertise in other fields of surgery, robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was born. Currently, there is a lack of convincing data on the extent of expected benefits (perioperative and oncologic outcomes and/or quality of life). Some evidence exists that patients’ overall quality of life and physical function improves, with less fatigue and pain 3 months after surgery. We aimed to review the available literature regarding robotic esophagectomy, compare perioperative, oncologic, and quality of life outcomes with open and minimally invasive approaches, and give a brief overview of our standardized four-arm RAMIE technique and explore future directions.

Methods

A Medline (PubMed) search was conducted including the following key words: esophagectomy, minimally invasive esophagectomy, robotic esophagectomy, Ivor Lewis and McKeown. We present the history, different techniques used, outcomes, and the standardization of robotic esophagectomy.

Results

Robotic esophagectomy offers a steeper learning curve with fewer complications but comparable oncological results compared to conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Conclusions

Available studies suggest that RAMIE is associated with benefits regarding length of stay, clinical outcomes, and quality of life—if patients are treated in an experienced center with a standardized technique for robotic esophagectomy—making it a potentially beneficial tool in the treatment of esophageal cancer. However, center-wide standardization and prospective data collection will be a necessity to prove superiority of robotic esophagectomy.

Robotic enucleation for oesophageal benign and borderline tumours: Less is more?

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal benign to borderline tumours are rare entities, and their optimal treatment strategy remains controversial. Surgical robotic enucleation is an option to optimize their management.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on seven consecutive oesophageal benign to borderline tumours operated robotically over a 4-year period. Patient baseline characteristics, perioperative outcomes and medium-term follow-ups were reviewed and analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Two patients underwent a robotic oesophagectomy and five underwent a simple enucleation. These last were the objective of the final analysis. Median operative time was 150 min. Neither deaths nor postoperative complications occurred. Median oral feeding started on postoperative day 3.5. The median postoperative stay was 5 days. Final histopathology confirmed two gastrointestinal stromal tumours, two leiomyomas and one simple cyst.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic enucleation of oesophageal benign to borderline tumours is a feasible procedure in a dedicated oesophageal unit, with optimal perioperative outcomes in a small series of cases with limited follow-up.