Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy and video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Technical feasibility and oncological outcomes of robotic esophagectomy compared with conventional thoracoscopic esophagectomy for clinical T3 or T4 locally advanced esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is the first-line approach for esophageal cancer; however, there has recently been a paradigm shift toward robotic esophagectomy (RE). We investigated the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent RE compared with those of patients who underwent conventional minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) for locally advanced cT3 or cT4 esophageal cancer using a propensity-matched analysis.

METHODS

Overall, 342 patients with locally advanced cT3 or cT4 esophageal cancer underwent transthoracic esophagectomy with total mediastinal lymph node dissection between 2018 and 2022. The propensity-matched analysis was performed to assign the patients to either RE or TE by covariates of histological type, tumor location, and clinical N factor.

RESULTS

Overall, 87 patients were recruited in each of the RE and TE groups according to the propensity-matched analysis. The total complication rate and the rates of the three major complications (recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis, anastomotic leakage, and pneumonia) were not significantly different between the RE and TE groups. However, the peak C-reactive protein concentration on postoperative day 3, rate of surgical site infection, and intensive care unit length of stay after surgery were significantly shorter in the RE group than in the TE group. No significant differences were observed in the harvested total and mediastinal lymph nodes. The total operation time was significantly longer in the RE group, while the thoracic operation time was shorter in the RE group than in the TE group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the recurrence rate of oncological outcomes after surgery.

CONCLUSION

RE may facilitate early recovery after esophagectomy with total mediastinal lymph node dissection and has the same technical feasibility and oncological outcomes as TE.

Prognostic Factors for Recovery from Left Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve Palsy After Minimally Invasive McKeown Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) palsy is a serious complication of esophagectomy that affects the patient's phonation and the ability to prevent life-threatening aspiration events. The aim of this single-center, retrospective study was to investigate the clinical course of left RLN palsy and to identify the main prognostic factors for recovery.

METHODS

The study cohort consisted of 85 patients who had developed left RLN palsy after minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy. Vocal cord function was assessed in all participants through laryngoscopic examinations, both in the immediate postoperative period and during follow-up. Permanent palsy was defined as no evidence of recovery after 6 months. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were applied to evaluate the associations between different variables and the outcome of palsy.

RESULTS

Twenty-two (25.8%) patients successfully recovered from left RLN palsy. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, active smoking (odds ratio [OR] 0.335, p = 0.038) and the use of thoracoscopic surgery (vs. robotic surgery; OR 0.264, p = 0.028) were identified as independent unfavorable predictors for recovery from palsy. The estimated rates of recovery derived from a logistic regression model for patients harboring two, one, or no risk factors were 13.16%, 31.15-34.75%, and 61.39%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Only one-quarter of patients who had developed left RLN palsy after minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy were able to fully recover. Smoking habits and the surgical approach were identified as key determinants of recovery. Patients harboring adverse prognostic factors are potential candidates for early intervention strategies.

Tackling complex thoracic surgical operations with robotic solutions: a narrative review

Background and Objective

The adoption of robotic surgery for general thoracic surgery has rapidly progressed over the last two decades from its application in basic operations to complex pathologies. As such, the purpose of this narrative review is to highlight the collective experience of tackling complex thoracic surgical operations with minimally invasive robotic solutions.

Methods

Electronic searches of PubMed were conducted for each subtopic, using specific keywords and inclusion criteria. Once identified, the articles were screened through the abstract, introduction, results and conclusion for relevancy, and included based on a standard narrative review inclusion criteria.

Key Content and Findings

The role of the robotic approach has increased in thoracic outlet syndrome, chest wall resection, tracheobronchomalacia, airway and sleeve lung surgery, lobectomy after neoadjuvant therapy, complex segmentectomy, giant paraesophageal hernia repair, esophagectomy and esophageal enucleation, mediastinal masses and thymectomy and lung transplantation. Robotic surgery has several advantages when compared to video-assisted and open thoracoscopic surgery. These include better pain control and aesthetic outcome, improved handling of complex anatomy, enhanced access to lymph nodes, and faster recovery rates. Although it is associated with longer operative time, robotic surgery has comparable morbidity rates.

Conclusions

The robotic approach to complex thoracic problems is safe, effective, and associated with improved patient outcomes. To encourage wider adoption of robotic technology, increased training and expanded research efforts are essential, alongside improved worldwide access to this technology.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of robotic-assisted and video-assisted esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is a recently developed technique for the treatment of resectable esophageal cancer. The present study compares the outcomes of RAMIE and video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (VATE).

METHOD

Patients undergoing minimally invasive esophageal surgery between December 2020 and September 2022 were included in the study, while those undergoing conventional surgery were excluded. The patients were divided into two groups, as those undergoing RAMIE (Group 1) and those undergoing VATE (Group 2). The demographic and clinical characteristics, intraoperative parameters, pathological data, and postoperative parameters of the groups were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients were included in the study, with 13 patients in Group 1 and 15 patients in Group 2. The gender distribution was similar (P = 0.488), and the mean age was 64.7 and 59.0 years in Groups 1 and 2, respectively (P = 0.068). The majority of the sample was in the ASA2 category (46.2% vs. 66.7%, P = 0.341); Ca19.9 levels were higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (25.7 vs. 13.7, P = 0.027); preoperative Hb was lower in Group 1 than in Group 2 (10.9 g/dL vs. 12.2 g/dL, P = 0.043); the most commonly performed surgery was the McKeown procedure (69.2% vs. 66.7%, P = 0.492); an intraoperative feeding jejunostomy was placed only in Group 2; the operation time was similar between the groups (338.5 min vs. 340 min, P = 0.916); and the distribution of tumor localizations was similar between the groups (P = 0.407). In terms of tumor histology, squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) was the most common tumor type in the two groups (84.6% vs. 80%, P = 0.636); the tumor diameter was similar between the groups (14.9 vs. 18.1, P = 0.652); the number of removed lymph nodes was similar between the groups (24.9 vs. 22.5, P = 0.419); and the number of metastatic lymph nodes was higher in Group 2 (0.08 vs. 1.07, P = 0.27). One patient in Group 2 underwent repeat surgery due to suspected ischemic anastomosis; the distribution of postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system was similar in the two groups (P = 0.650); there was no early mortality within the first 30 days in either group; one patient in Group 2 was re-admitted within 90 days of discharge with decreased oral intake; the length of hospital stay was shorter in Group 1 (9 days vs. 16.5 days, P = 0.006); and the patients in Group 2 more often received neoadjuvant therapy in proportion to the disease stage (15.4% vs. 60%, P = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Robotic procedures can be safely performed in esophageal cancers with complication rates and oncological radicality similar to those of other minimally invasive techniques.

Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy: Current Situation and Future Perspectives

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been rapidly spreading worldwide as a novel minimally invasive approach for esophageal cancer. This narrative review aimed to elucidate the current situation and future perspectives of RAMIE for esophageal cancer. References were searched using PubMed and Embase for studies published up to 8 April 2023. Search terms included "esophagectomy" or "esophageal cancer" and "robot" or "robotic" or "robotic-assisted." There are several different uses for the robot in esophagectomy. Overall complications are equivalent or may be less in RAMIE than in open esophagectomy and conventional (thoracoscopic) minimally invasive esophagectomy. Several meta-analyses demonstrated the possibility of RAMIE in reducing pulmonary complications, although the equivalent incidence was observed in two randomized controlled trials. RAMIE may increase the number of dissected lymph nodes, especially in the left recurrent laryngeal nerve area. Long-term outcomes are comparable between the procedures, although further research is required. Further progress in robotic technology combined with artificial intelligence is expected.

Essential updates 2020/2021: Recent topics in surgery and perioperative therapy for esophageal cancer

In this review, we focused on four topics, namely, minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), conversion and salvage surgery, and neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy, based on notable reports published in the years 2020 and 2021. It seems that while the short-term outcomes of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE-IL) were better than those of open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (OE-IL), there were no significant differences in the long-term outcomes between MIE-IL and OE-IL. Similarly, the short-term outcomes of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (MIE-MK) were better than those of open McKeown esophagectomy (OE-MK), while there were no significant differences in the long-term outcomes between MIE-MK and OE-MK. Furthermore, the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAMIE-IL) were superior to those of completely minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (CMIE-IL). On the other hand, there were advantages and disadvantages in relation to the short-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (RAMIE-MK) as compared with completely minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (CMIE-MK). However, there were no significant differences in the long-term outcomes between RAMIE-MK and CMIE-MK. Further research is needed to evaluate of short-term and long-term outcomes of transmediastinal esophagectomy with and without robotic assistance. Both induction chemotherapy and induction chemoradiotherapy appear to be promising to secure a higher rate of conversion surgery. Neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy and chemoimmunoradiotherapy have shown promising results and are expected as new powerful therapies.

Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Postoperative Outcomes in a Nationwide Cohort

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in clinical trials has demonstrated improved outcomes compared to open esophagectomy (OE). However, outcomes after national implementation remain unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative outcomes after RAMIE.

METHODS

Patients who underwent elective esophagectomy between 2016 and 2020 were identified from the American College of Surgeons-- National Surgical Quality Improvement Program esophageal targeted participant user files and categorized by operative approach, with patients who underwent hybrid procedures excluded. Outcomes were compared between OE and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE)/RAMIE, with subset analyses by minimally invasive operative approach. Primary outcomes included pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak requiring reintervention, all-cause morbidity, and 30-d mortality.

RESULTS

In total 2786 patients were included, of which 58.3% underwent OE, 33.2% underwent MIE, and 8.4% underwent RAMIE. In the entire cohort, Ivor Lewis esophagectomy was the most common technique (64.6%), followed by transhiatal (22.0%), and a McKeown technique (13.4%). Comparing OE and MIE/RAMIE, pulmonary complications (21.5% versus 16.1%, P < 0.01) and all-cause morbidity (40.9% versus 32.3%, P < 0.01) were both reduced in the MIE/RAMIE group. When directly comparing MIE to RAMIE, there was no difference in the rate of pulmonary complications, anastomotic leak, all-cause morbidity, and mortality. However, RAMIE was associated with decreased all-cause morbidity compared to OE (40.9% versus 33.3%, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

RAMIE was associated with decreased morbidity compared to OE, with similar outcomes to MIE. The national adoption of RAMIE in this select cohort appears safe.

Prevalence and safety of robotic surgery for gastrointestinal malignant tumors in Japan

Aim

The National Health Insurance system has reimbursed robotic gastrointestinal surgery since April 2018 in Japan. Additionally, strict facility and surgeon standards were established by the government and the academic society. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and safety of robotic surgery using a Japanese nationwide web-based database.

Methods

Patients who underwent the following robotic surgeries for malignant tumors in 2018 were included: esophagectomy (RE), total gastrectomy (RTG), distal gastrectomy (RDG), proximal gastrectomy (RPG), low anterior resection (RLAR), and rectal resections other than RLAR (RRR). The number of cases and surgical mortality rates each month were calculated to evaluate the prevalence and safety of robotic procedures.

Results

A total of 3281 patients underwent robotic gastrointestinal surgery. The monthly number of robotic surgeries nearly doubled in April 2018 when they were initially reimbursed by the National Health Insurance system. Operative mortality rates were 0.9%, 0.4%, 0.2%, and 2.8% for RE (n = 330), RTG (n = 239), RDG (n = 1167), and RPG (n = 109), respectively. No mortality was observed in RLAR (n = 1062) or RRR (n = 374).

Conclusion

Robotic surgery for gastrointestinal malignant tumors was safely introduced into daily clinical practice along with rigorous surgeon and facility standards in Japan.

A retrospective study of preoperative malnutrition based on the Controlling Nutritional Status score as an associated marker for short-term outcomes after open and minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

PURPOSE

Preoperative malnutrition is a significant risk factor for post-esophagectomy morbidity. The Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT) is an index used to assess nutritional status, and it has been suggested to predict post-esophagectomy morbidity. However, the difference in the predictive value of CONUT in estimating morbidities between open esophagectomy (OE) and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has not yet been elucidated.

METHODS

This study included patients who underwent a three-incision esophagectomy for esophageal cancer between April 2005 and August 2021. The patients were further divided into two groups according to their preoperative CONUT scores: normal and light malnutrition and moderate and severe malnutrition. Short-term outcomes between these groups were retrospectively compared in the OE and MIE groups.

RESULTS

A total of 674 patients who underwent OE (296) and MIE (378) were analyzed. Moreover, 32 patients of the OE group and 16 of the MIE group were classified as having moderate and severe malnutrition, respectively. Moderate and severe malnutrition was significantly associated with a low body mass index, poor performance status, poor American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, advanced cancer stage, and frequent preoperative treatment. These patients also experienced significantly more frequent morbidities of grade ≥ IIIb according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (CDc), respiratory, and cardiovascular morbidities after OE. Moreover, moderate and severe malnutrition in CONUT was an independent risk factor for morbidity of CDc ≥ IIIb (odds ratio [OR] vs. normal and light malnutrition = 3.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.225-9.332; p = 0.019), respiratory (OR = 3.00; 95% CI, 1.161-7.736; p = 0.023), and cardiovascular morbidities (OR = 3.66; 95% CI, 1.068-12.55; p = 0.039) after OE. Meanwhile, moderate and severe malnutrition in CONUT did not increase the incidence of postoperative morbidities after MIE.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative malnutrition in CONUT reflects various disadvantageous clinical factors and could be a predictor of worse short-term outcomes after OE, but it has no value in MIE. The low invasiveness of MIE might reduce the effect of preoperative malnutrition on worse short-term outcomes.

Selection of minimally invasive surgical approaches for treating esophageal cancer

Minimally invasive esophagectomy has gradually been accepted as an active treatment option for surgery of esophageal cancer. However, there is no consensus about how to perform the procedures in the thoracic and abdominal phase including anastomosis in the neck (McKeown) or chest (Ivor Lewis), VATS, robotic‐assisted or reduced port approaches or various endoscopic abrasion techniques. Further studies to investigate the roles of these novel techniques are required to treat the various patient populations.

Advanced Robotic Surgery: Liver, Pancreas, and Esophagus - The State of the Art?

Background

The trend in performing robotic-assisted operations in visceral surgery has been increasing in the last decade, also reaching the challenging field of hepatic, pancreatic, and esophageal surgery. Nevertheless, solid data about advantages and disadvantages of the robotic approach are still missing. The aim of this review is to analyze the benefit and impact of robotic surgery in the field of hepatic, pancreatic, and esophageal surgery, focusing on the comparison with the conventional laparoscopic or open approach.

Summary

The well-known advantages of laparoscopic surgery in comparison to the open approach are also valid for robotic surgery, with the addition of a 3D-view camera, wristed instrumentation, and an ergonomic console. On the other hand, the use of a robotic system leads to longer operating time and higher costs. Randomized controlled trials comparing the robotic approach with the laparoscopic one are still missing.

Key Message

Recent meta-analyses show promising results of the usage of robotic systems in advanced surgical procedures, like hepatic, pancreatic, and esophageal resections. Further randomized studies are needed to validate the postulated benefit.

Current status of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: what is the real benefit?

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer has been performed increasingly frequently over the last few years. Robotic systems with articulated devices and tremor filtration allow surgeons to perform such procedures more meticulously than by hand. The feasibility of RAMIE has been demonstrated in several retrospective comparative studies, which showed similar short-term outcomes to conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (cMIE). Considering the number of harvested lymph nodes, RAMIE may be superior to cMIE in terms of left upper mediastinal lymph node dissection. However, whether or not the addition of a robotic system to cMIE can help improve perioperative and oncological outcomes remains unclear. Given the lack of established evidence from randomized controlled trials, we must await the results of ongoing studies to reach any meaningful conclusions. Further advancements in robotic platforms, as well as the reduction in medical expenses, will be essential to demonstrate the real benefit of RAMIE.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been demonstrated to offer realistic three-dimensional visual clarity, flexible movement and so on. The high cost is the main reason hampering universal application. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of RAMIE versus video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE).

Methods

The PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to June 1, 2021, for studies comparing RAMIE and VAMIE.

Results

Nineteen studies were enrolled, which consisted of a total of 4,714 patients, including 2,306 patients in the RAMIE group and 2,408 patients in the VAMIE group. In RAMIE patients, higher numbers of total lymph nodes (MD =0.171, 95% CI: 0.086–0.255, P<0.001) and lymph nodes along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) (MD =0.219, 95% CI: 0.097–0.340, P<0.001) were removed. In RAMIE patients in the McKown group, higher numbers of total lymph nodes (MD =0.173, 95% CI: 0.080–0.265, P<0.001) and lymph nodes along the left RLN (MD =0.220, 95% CI: 0.090–0.350, P=0.001) were removed, while in those in the ESCC group, higher numbers of total lymph nodes (MD =0.249, 95% CI: 0.091–0.407, P=0.002) and lymph nodes along the left RLN (MD =0.239, 95% CI: 0.102–0.377, P=0.001) were removed.

Discussion

This study indicated that the main advantage of RAMIE was a greater number of harvested lymph nodes, which may be beneficial to diagnosis and local control. RCTs with larger sample sizes and studies reporting long-term outcomes are needed to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of RAMIE and VAMIE.

Totally Robotic Esophagectomy

Totally robotic esophagectomy is performed using a robotic technique without additional thoracoscopy or laparoscopy. However, most robotic esophagectomies are currently performed in a hybrid form combining robotic and other endoscopic techniques. Laparoscopic stomach mobilization and thoracoscopic esophagogastric anastomosis are commonly used methods in robotic esophagectomy. In this paper, totally robotic esophagectomy without thoracoscopic or laparoscopic assistance is presented.

Robotic Esophagectomy. A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes

Background: Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy is demonstrated to be related with a facilitation in thoracoscopic procedure. To give an update on the state of art of robotic esophagectomy for cancr a systematic review with meta-analysis has been performed. Methods: a search of the studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic or open esophagectomy was performed trough the medical libraries, with the search string “robotic and (oesophagus OR esophagus OR esophagectomy OR oesophagectomy)”. Outcomes were: postoperative complications rate (anastomotic leakage, bleeding, wound infection, pneumonia, recurrent laryngeal nerves paralysis, chylotorax, mortality), intraoperative outcomes (mean blood loss, operative time and conversion), oncologic outcomes (harvested nodes, R0 resection, recurrence) and recovery outcomes (length of hospital stay). Results: Robotic approach is superior to open surgery in terms of blood loss p = 0.001, wound infection rate, p = 0.002, pneumonia rate, p = 0.030 and mean number of harvested nodes, p < 0.0001 and R0 resection rate, p = 0.043. Similarly, robotic approach is superior to conventional laparoscopy in terms of mean number of harvested nodes, p = 0.001 pneumonia rate, p = 0.003. Conclusions: robotic surgery could be considered superior to both open surgery and conventional laparoscopy. These encouraging results should promote the diffusion of the robotic surgery, with the creation of randomized trials to overcome selection bias.