Perioperative outcomes associated with robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in patient's undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

Long-term outcomes after robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Robotic assistance has gained acceptance in thoracic procedures, including esophagectomy. There is a paucity of data regarding long-term outcomes for robotic esophagectomy. We previously reported our initial series of robot-assisted Ivor Lewis (RAIL) esophagectomy. We report long-term outcomes to assess the efficacy of the procedure. We performed a retrospective review of 112 consecutive patients who underwent a RAIL. Patient demographics, diagnosis, pathology, operative characteristics, post-operative complications, and long-term outcomes were documented. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed for all the variables. Primary endpoints were mortality and disease-free survival. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Of the 112 patients, 106 had a diagnosis of cancer, with adenocarcinoma the dominant histology (87.5%). Of these 106 patients, 81 (76.4%) received neo-adjuvant chemoradiation. The 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality was 1 (0.9%), 3 (2.7%), and 4 (3.6%), respectively. There were 9 anastomotic leaks (8%) and 18 (16.1%) patients had a stricture requiring dilation. All-patient OS at 1, 3, and 5 years was 81.4%, 60.5%, and 51.0%, respectively. For cancer patients, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS was 81.3%, 59.2%, and 49.4%, respectively, and the DFS was 75.3%, 42.3%, and 44.0%. We have shown that long-term outcomes after RAIL esophagectomy are similar to other non-robotic esophagectomies. Given the potential advantages of robotic assistance, our results are crucial to demonstrate that RAIL does not result in inferior outcomes.

Clinical utility of robot-assisted transthoracic esophagectomy in advanced esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy

Background

Although robot-assisted minimally-invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) surgeries are expanding clinically, few studies have reported patients with locally-advanced esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (nCRT).

Methods

From 2013 to 2017, 219 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent RAMIE and 35 of them received nCRT at our institution. During the period, 289 patients underwent conventional open esophagectomy (OE) and 111 patients underwent nCRT. We compared postoperative mortality and morbidity of RAMIE and OE patients after nCRT.

Results

In patients who received nCRT, the RAMIE and OE groups had similar operative time, estimated blood loss, early-period mortality, and recurrence rate (≤1 year) and both groups showed a high rate of complete resection. With respect to postoperative morbidities, such as anastomotic leakage, chylothorax, postoperative bleeding, and wound infection, only vasopressor use was significantly higher in the OE group (P<0.001). The RAMIE group had a lower, but not statistically significant, postoperative pneumonia incidence than the OE group (5.7% vs. 13.5%, P=0.341).

Conclusions

In patients who received nCRT for locally-advanced esophageal cancer, RAMIE is safe and feasible with comparable postoperative mortality and morbidity to conventional OE. Patients with advanced-stage esophageal cancer who received nCRT may be surgical candidates for RAMIE.

Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: technique and early outcomes

Esophagectomy is pivotal for the long-term survival in patients with early stage and advanced esophageal cancer, and improved perioperative care and advanced surgical techniques have contributed to reduced postoperative morbidity. However, despite these advances, esophagectomy continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive esophageal surgery (MIE) has been increasingly used in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer. Potential advantages of MIE include the decreased postoperative pain; lower postoperative wound infection, decreased pulmonary complications, and decreased length of hospitalization. Robotic esophageal surgery has the ability to overcome some of the limitations of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approaches to esophagectomy while maintaining the benefits of the minimally invasive approach. In this article, we will review the clinical efficacy and outcomes associated with robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAIL).

Robotic surgery for esophageal cancer: Merits and demerits

Since the introduction of robotic systems in esophageal surgery in 2000, the number of robotic esophagectomies has been gradually increasing worldwide, although robot‐assisted surgery is not yet regarded as standard treatment for esophageal cancer, because of its high cost and the paucity of high‐level evidence. In 2016, more than 1800 cases were operated with robot assistance. Early results with small series demonstrated feasibility and safety in both robotic transhiatal (THE) and transthoracic esophagectomies (TTE). Some studies report that the learning curve is approximately 20 cases. Following the initial series, operative results of robotic TTE have shown a tendency to improve, and oncological long‐term results are reported to be effective and acceptable: R0 resection approaches 95%, and locoregional recurrence is rare. Several recent studies have demonstrated advantages of robotic esophagectomy in lymphadenectomy compared with the thoracoscopic approach. Such technical innovations as three‐dimensional view, articulated instruments with seven degrees of movement, tremor filter etc. have the potential to outperform any conventional procedures. With the aim of preventing postoperative pulmonary complications without diminishing lymphadenectomy performance, a nontransthoracic radical esophagectomy procedure combining a video‐assisted cervical approach for the upper mediastinum and a robot‐assisted transhiatal approach for the middle and lower mediastinum, transmediastinal esophagectomy, was developed; its short‐term outcomes are promising.

Thus, the merits or demerits of robotic surgery in this field remain quite difficult to assess. However, in the near future, the merits will definitely outweigh the demerits because the esophagus is an ideal organ for a robotic approach.