Robot-assisted thoracoscopic oesophagectomy for cancer

Caseload per Year in Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Narrative Review

Esophageal surgery is deemed one of the most complex visceral operations. There is a well-documented correlation between higher caseload and better outcomes, with hospitals that perform more surgeries experiencing significantly lower mortality rates. The approach to caseload per year varies across different countries within Europe. Germany increased the minimum annual required caseload of complex esophageal surgeries from 10 to 26 starting in 2023. Furthermore, the new regulations present challenges for surgical training and staff recruitment, risking the further fragmentation of training programs. Enhanced regional cooperation is proposed as a solution to ensure comprehensive training. This review explores the benefits of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in improving surgical precision and patient outcomes and aims to evaluate how the caseload per year influences the quality of patient care and the efficacy of surgical training, especially with the integration of advanced robotic techniques.

Efficacy and prognostic analysis of carbon nanotracers combined with the da Vinci robot in the treatment of esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Traditional methods cannot clearly visualize esophageal cancer (EC) tumor contours and metastases, which limits the clinical application of da Vinci robot-assisted surgery.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy of the da Vinci robot in combination with nanocarbon lymph node tracers in radical surgery of EC.

METHODS

In total, 104 patients with early-stage EC who were admitted to Liuzhou worker's Hospital from January 2020 to June 2023 were enrolled. The patients were assigned to an observation group (n = 52), which underwent da Vinci robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with the intraoperative use of nanocarbon tracers, and a control group (n = 52), which underwent traditional surgery treatment. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage tube indwelling time, hospital stay, number of lymph nodes dissected, incidence of complications, and long-term curative effects were comparatively analyzed. The postoperative stress response C-reactive protein (CRP), cortisol, epinephrine (E) and inflammatory response interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, IL-10, and tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, the observation group had significantly lower postoperative CRP, cortisol, and E levels (P < 0.05) with a milder inflammatory response, as indicated by lower IL-6, IL-10, and TNF-α levels (P < 0.05). Patients who underwent RAMIE had less intraoperative blood loss and shorter operation times and hospital stays than those who underwent traditional surgery. The average number of dissected lymph nodes, time of lymph node dissection, and mean smallest lymph node diameter were all significantly lower in the observation group (P < 0.05). The rate of postoperative complications was 5.77% in the observation group, significantly lower than the 15.38% observed in the control group. Furthermore, the lymphatic metastasis rate, reoperation rate, and 12- and 24-month cumulative mortality in the observation group were 1.92%, 0%, 0%, and 0%, respectively, all of which were significantly lower than those in the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The treatment of EC using the da Vinci robot combined with nanocarbon lymph node tracers can achieve good surgical outcomes and demonstrates promising clinical applications.

Long-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus minimally invasive esophagectomy in patients with thoracic esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Recently, robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has gained popularity worldwide. Some studies have compared the long-term results of RAMIE and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). However, there are no reports on the long-term outcomes of RAMIE in Japan. This study compared the long-term outcomes of RAMIE and MIE.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 86 patients with thoracic esophageal cancer who underwent RAMIE or MIE at our hospital from June 2010 to December 2016. Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed, incorporating co-variables such as confounders or risk factors derived from the literature and clinical practice. These variables included age, sex, body mass index, alcohol consumption, smoking history, American Society of Anesthesiologists stage, comorbidities, tumor location, histology, clinical TNM stage, and preoperative therapy. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS), and the secondary endpoints were 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence rates.

RESULTS

Before PSM, the RAMIE group had a longer operation time (min) than the MIE group (P = 0.019). RAMIE also exhibited significantly lower blood loss volume (mL) (P < 0.001) and fewer three-field lymph node dissections (P = 0.028). Postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo: CD ≥ 2) were significantly lower in the RAMIE group (P = 0.04), and postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter than the MIE group (P < 0.001). After PSM, the RAMIE and MIE groups consisted of 26 patients each. Blood loss volume was significantly smaller (P = 0.012), postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 2) were significantly lower (P = 0.021), and postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (P < 0.001) in the RAMIE group than those in the MIE group. The median observation period was 63 months. The 5-year OS rates were 73.1% and 80.8% in the RAMIE and MIE groups, respectively (P = 0.360); the 5-year DFS rates were 76.9% and 76.9% in the RAMIE and MIE groups, respectively (P = 0.749). Six of 26 patients (23.1%) in each group experienced recurrence, with a median recurrence period of 41.5 months in the RAMIE group and 22.5 months in the MIE group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with MIE, RAMIE led to no differences in long-term results, suggesting that RAMIE is a comparable technique.

Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy

Background

Esophagectomy is the gold standard treatment for resectable esophageal cancer; however, there is insufficient evidence to indicate potential advantages over standard minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in treating thoracic esophageal cancer. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) bridges the gap between open and minimally invasive surgery. In this single-center retrospective review, we compare the clinical outcomes of EC patients treated with MIE and RAMIE.

Method

We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients with esophageal cancer who underwent surgery at Qilu Hospital between August 2020 and August 2022, including 159 patients who underwent MIE and 35 patients who received RAMIE. The intraoperative, postoperative, and preoperative patient characteristics in both groups were evaluated.

Results

Except for height, the MIE and RAMIE groups showed no significant differences in preoperative features (P>0.05). Further, there were no significant differences in intraoperative indices, including TNM stage of the resected tumor, tumor tissue type, or ASA score, between the two groups. However, statistically significant differences were found in some factors; the RAMIE group had a shorter operative time, less intraoperative bleeding, and more lymph nodes removed compared to the MIE group. Patients in the RAMIE group reported less discomfort and greater chest drainage on the first postoperative day than patients in the MIE group; however, there were no differences in other features between the two datasets.

Conclusion

By comparing the clinical characteristics and outcomes of RAMIE with MIE, this study verified the feasibility and safety of RAMIE for esophageal cancer. Overall, RAMIE resulted in more complete lymph node clearance, shorter operating time, reduced surgical hemorrhage, reduced postoperative discomfort, and chest drainage alleviation in patients. To investigate the function of RAMIE in esophageal cancer, we propose undertaking a future clinical trial with long-term follow-up to analyze tumor clearance, recurrence, and survival after RAMIE.

The Implementation of Minimally Invasive Surgery in the Treatment of Esophageal Cancer: A Step Toward Better Outcomes?

Esophagectomy is considered the cornerstone of the radical treatment of esophageal cancer. In the past decades, minimally invasive techniques including robot-assisted approaches have become popular. The aim of minimally invasive surgery is to reduce the surgical trauma, resulting in faster recovery, reduction in complications, and better quality of life after surgery. Secondly, a more precise dissection may lead to better oncological outcomes. As such, minimally invasive esophagectomy is now seen by many as the standard surgical approach. However, evidence supporting this viewpoint is limited. This narrative review summarizes recent prospectively designed studies on minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Outcomes of Minimally Invasive and Robot-Assisted Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

Simple Summary

This is an invited review for the special edition, “Minimally Invasive Surgery for Cancer: Indications and Outcomes.” Indications to perform minimally invasive techniques for esophagectomy rather than the classic open technique do not exist. This review outlines the current research by comparing outcomes among minimally invasive esophagectomy, robot-assisted esophagectomy, and open esophagectomy. After determining the benefits of each technique in terms of each outcome, the discussion focuses on how surgeons may use the presented information to determine which approach is most appropriate. We hope this study provides a comprehensive review of the current state of the literature regarding minimally invasive esophagectomy, as well as a guide for surgeons who treat patients with esophageal cancer.

Abstract

With the evolution of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), questions remain regarding the benefits and indications of these methods. Given that set indications do not exist, this article aims first to review the reported outcomes of MIE, RAMIE, and open esophagectomy. Then, considerations based on the reported outcomes are discussed to guide surgeons in selecting the best approach. MIE and RAMIE offer the potential to improve outcomes for esophagectomy patients; however, surgeon experience as well as individual patient factors play important roles when deciding upon the surgical approach.

Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy Leads to Significant Reduction in Postoperative Acute Pain: A Retrospective Clinical Trial

Background

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) shows promising results regarding postoperative complications in patients with esophageal cancer. To date, no data are available regarding postoperative analgesic consumption. The aim of this work is to evaluate analgesic consumption after esophagectomy.

Methods

A total of 274 Ivor Lewis esophageal resections performed sequentially from January 2012 to December 2020 were evaluated. RAMIE cases (n = 51) were compared with the hybrid technique (laparoscopic abdominal phase followed by open thoracotomy, n = 59) and open abdominothoracic esophagectomy (OTE) (n = 164). Data were collected retrospectively. The primary endpoint was the overall postoperative morphine consumption, which represents a reliable indirect measurement of pain. Pain levels recorded on the first, third, and fifth postoperative days were assessed as secondary endpoints.

Results

A total of 274 patients were included. The postoperative opioid consumption rate for patients who underwent RAMIE (quartiles: 0.14, 0.23, 0.36 mg morphine milligram equivalents (MME)/kg body weight (bw)/day) was significantly lower than in the open group (0.19, 0.33, 0.58 mg MME/kg bw/day, p = 0.016). The overall postoperative opioid consumption for patients who underwent RAMIE was significantly lower (2.45, 3.63, 7.20 mg MME/kg bw/day; morphine milligram equivalents per kilogram body weight) compared with the open (4.85, 8.59, 14.63 MME/kg bw/day, p < 0.0001) and hybrid (4.13, 6.84, 11.36 MME/kg bw/day, p = 0.008) groups. Patients who underwent RAMIE reported lower pain scores compared with the open group on the fifth postoperative day, both at rest (p = 0.004) and while performing activities (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

This study shows that patients who underwent RAMIE experienced similar postoperative pain while requiring significantly lower amounts of opioids compared with patients who underwent open and hybrid surgery. Further studies are required to verify the results.

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

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.

Robotic Distal Gastrectomy Reduces Drain Amylase Values in Patients With a Small Pancreas-left Gastric Artery Angle

PURPOSE

Pancreatic fistula is a severe complication after laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG). We previously evaluated the pancreas-left gastric artery angle (PLA) as a risk indicator for developing a pancreatic fistula after LDG. This study evaluated the incidence of pancreatic fistula with robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) in comparison to LDG from the view of the PLA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An association between the PLA and the incidence of pancreatic fistula in 165 patients who underwent either RDG (n=45) or LDG (n=120) was investigated retrospectively.

RESULTS

RDG patients had significantly lower drain amylase values (postoperative day 2) than LDG patients. As opposed to LDG patients, drain amylase values were similar for patients with small (PLA <62 degrees) and large (PLA ≥62 degrees) PLA in RDG patients.

CONCLUSION

Robotic surgery may reduce the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula in patients with a small PLA.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma, a randomized controlled trial (ROBOT-2 trial)

BACKGROUND

For patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction, radical esophagectomy with 2-field lymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of the multimodality treatment with curative intent. Both conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) were shown to be superior compared to open transthoracic esophagectomy considering postoperative complications. However, no randomized comparison exists between MIE and RAMIE in the Western World for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

This is an investigator-initiated and investigator-driven multicenter randomized controlled parallel-group superiority trial. All adult patients (age ≥ 18 and ≤ 90 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0-3, M0) esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and with European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 will be assessed for eligibility and included after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 218) with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction are randomized to either RAMIE (n = 109) or MIE (n = 109). The primary outcome of this study is the total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes specified per lymph node station.

CONCLUSION

This is the first randomized controlled trial designed to compare RAMIE to MIE as surgical treatment for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction in the Western World. The hypothesis of the proposed study is that RAMIE will result in a higher abdominal and mediastinal lymph node yield specified per station compared to conventional MIE. Short-term results and the primary endpoint (total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes per lymph node station) will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient within this trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04306458 . Registered 13th March 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04306458; Date of first enrolment 18.01.2021; Target sample size 218; Recruitment status: Recruiting; Protocol version 2; Issue date 10.03.2020; Rev. 02.02.2021; Authors ET, PCvdS, PPG.

Optimization of robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the lateral decubitus position

BACKGROUND

On the introduction of robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (RATE), we refined the robotic system application to enhance our surgical experience obtained through thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) in the lateral decubitus position (LDP). Herein, we evaluate our methods introduced to optimize RATE in the LDP.

METHODS

We performed RATE in the LDP with camera rotation and manual hand control assignment to reproduce the surgical view and manipulation of open esophagectomy. Forty patients underwent RATE between July 2018 and August 2020. After the initial 30 cases (initial RATE group), we optimized the port arrangement and robot settings in the most recent ten cases (recent RATE group). The surgical results of RATE were compared with those of 30 patients underwent TE between April 2014 and May 2019 selected by propensity score-matched analysis based on cStage (TE group).

RESULTS

Operative duration was significantly longer in the initial RATE group than the TE group and the recent RATE group. Thoracic blood loss was significantly less in the initial RATE group than the TE group. Console time was significantly shorter in the recent RATE group than the initial RATE group. There was no surgical mortality in RATE and the surgical morbidity rate was similar in the three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Camera rotation and manual hand control assignment during RATE in the LDP reproduced the surgical view and manipulation of open esophagectomy and TE in the LDP. The robotic platform enabled meticulous dissection and reduced blood loss, but was initially time-consuming. Optimization of the port arrangement minimized operative duration.

Lower local recurrence rate after robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy than conventional thoracoscopic surgery for esophageal cancer

The oncological advantages of robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (RATE) over conventional thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) for thoracic esophageal cancer have yet to be verified. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed clinical data to compare the incidences of recurrence within the surgical field after RATE and TE as an indicator of local oncological control. Among 121 consecutive patients with thoracic esophageal or esophagogastric junction cancers for which thoracoscopic surgery was indicated, 51 were treated with RATE while 70 received TE. The number of lymph nodes dissected from the mediastinum, duration of the thoracic portion of the surgery, and morbidity due to postoperative complications did not differ between the two groups. However, the rate of overall local recurrence within the surgical field was significantly (P = 0.039) higher in the TE (9%) than the RATE (0%) group. Lymph node recurrence within the surgical field occurred in left recurrent nerve, left tracheobronchial, left main bronchus and thoracic paraaortic lymph nodes, which were all difficult to approach to dissect. The other two local failures occurred around the anastomotic site. This study indicates that using RATE enabled the incidence of recurrence within the surgical field to be reduced, though there were some limitations.

Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy with Intrathoracic Anastomosis (Ivor Lewis): Promising Results in 100 Consecutive Patients (the European Experience)

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with intrathoracic anastomosis is gaining popularity as a treatment for esophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to describe postoperative complications and short-term oncologic outcomes for RAMIE procedures using the da Vinci Xi robotic system 4-arm technique.

METHODS

Data of 100 consecutive patients with esophageal or gastro-esophageal junction carcinoma undergoing modified Ivor Lewis esophagectomy were prospectively collected. All operations were performed by the same surgeon using an identical intrathoracic anastomotic reconstruction technique with the same perioperative management. Intraoperative and postoperative complications were graded according to Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) definitions.

RESULTS

Mean duration was 416 min (±80); 70% of patients had an uncomplicated postoperative recovery. Pulmonary complications were observed in 17% of patients. Anastomotic leakage was observed in 8% of patients. Median ICU stay was 1 day and median overall postoperative hospital stay was 11 days. The 30-day mortality was 1%; 90-day mortality was 3%. A R0 resection was reached in 92% of patients with a median number of 29 dissected lymph nodes. All patients had at least 7 months of follow-up with a median follow-up of 17 months. Median overall survival was not reached yet.

CONCLUSION

RAMIE with intrathoracic anastomosis (Ivor Lewis) for esophageal or gastro-esophageal junction cancer was technically feasible and safe. Postoperative complications and short-term oncologic results were comparable to the highest international standards nowadays.

Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy - a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques

BACKGROUND

Oncological esophageal surgery has evolved significantly in the last decades. From open esophagectomy over (hybrid) minimally invasive surgery, nowadays, robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) approaches are applied. Current techniques require an analysis of possible advantages and disadvantages indicating the direction towards a novel gold standard.

METHODS

Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomies, performed in the period from April 2017 to June 2019 in five German centers (Berlin, Cologne, Hamburg, Kiel, Mainz), were included in this study. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative parameters were assessed. Cases were grouped for hybrid (H-RAMIE) versus totally robot-assisted (T-RAMIE) approaches. Postoperative parameters and complications were compared using risk ratios.

RESULTS

A total of 175 operations were performed as T-RAMIE and 67 as H-RAMIE. Patient age (median age 62 years) and sex (83.1% male) were similarly distributed in both groups. Median duration of esophagectomy was significantly lower in the T-RAMIE group (385 versus 427 min, p < 0.001). The risks of "overall morbidity" (32.0 versus 47.8%; risk ratio [RR], 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5, 1.1-2.1; p = 0.026), "anastomotic leak" (10.3 versus 22.4%; RR, CI: 2.2, 1.2-4.1; p = 0.020), and "respiratory failure" (1.1 versus 7.5%; RR, CI: 6.5, 1.3-32.9; p = 0.019) were significantly higher in case of H-RAMIE.

CONCLUSIONS

In the five participating German centers, T-RAMIE was the preferred procedure (72.3% of operations). In comparison to H-RAMIE, T-RAMIE was associated with a significantly reduced risk of postoperative morbidity, anastomotic leak, and respiratory failure as well as a significantly reduced time necessary for esophagectomy.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE): tips and tricks from the bedside assistant view-expert experiences

The role of bedside assistants in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy is important. It includes knowledge of the procedure, knowledge of the da Vinci Surgical System, skills in laparoscopy, and good communicative skills. An experienced bedside assistant will likely improve efficiency and safety of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: Meticulous surgery minimizing postoperative complications

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been reported to reduce postoperative complications especially pulmonary complications and have equivalent long-term survival outcomes as compared to open esophagectomy. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) using da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, USA) is rapidly gaining attention because it helps surgeons to perform meticulous surgical procedures. McKeown RAMIE has been preferably performed in East Asia where squamous cell carcinoma which lies in more proximal esophagus than adenocarcinoma is a predominant histological type of esophageal cancer. On the other hand, Ivor Lewis RAMIE has been preferably performed in the Western countries where adenocarcinoma including Barrett esophageal cancer is the most frequent histology. Average rates of postoperative complications have been reported to be lower in Ivor Lewis RAMIE than those in McKeown RAMIE. Ivor Lewis RAMIE may get more attention for thoracic esophageal cancer. The studies comparing RAMIE and MIE where recurrent nerve lymphadenectomy was thoroughly performed reported that the rate of recurrent nerve injury is lower in RAMIE than in MIE. Recurrent nerve injury leads to serious complications such as aspiration pneumonia. It seems highly probable that RAMIE is beneficial in performing recurrent nerve lymphadenectomy. Surgery for esophageal cancer will probably be more centralized in hospitals with surgical robots, which enable accurate lymph node dissection with less complications, leading to improved outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer. RAMIE might occupy an important position in surgery for esophageal cancer.

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.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy: clinical evidence and surgical techniques

Background

Surgical esophagectomy plays a crucial role in the curative and palliative treatment of esophageal cancer. Thereby, minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly applied all over the world. Combining minimal invasiveness with improved possibilities for meticulous dissection, robot-assisted minimal invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been implemented in many centers.

Purpose

This review focuses on the development of MIE as well as RAMIE and their value based on evidence in current literature.

Conclusion

Although MIE and RAMIE are highly complex procedures, they can be performed safely with improved postoperative outcome and equal oncological results compared with open esophagectomy (OE). RAMIE offers additional advantages regarding surgical dissection, lymphadenectomy, and extended indications for advanced tumors.

Recurrent laryngeal nerve monitoring during totally robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Purpose

The robot-assisted approach for Ivor Lewis esophagectomy offers an enlarged, three-dimensional overview of the intraoperative situs. The vagal nerve (VN) can easily be detected, preserved, and intentionally resected below the separation point of the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN). However, postoperative vocal cord paresis can result from vagal or RLN injury during radical lymph node dissection, presenting a challenge to the operating surgeon.

Methods

From May to August 2019, 10 cases of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with extended 2-field lymphadenectomy, performed at the University Medical Center Mainz, were included in a prospective cohort study. Bilateral intermittent intraoperative nerve monitoring (IONM) of the RLN and VN was performed, including pre- and postoperative laryngoscopy assessment.

Results

Reliable mean signals of the right VN (2.57 mV/4.50 ms) and the RLN (left 1.24 mV/3.71 ms, right 0.85 mV/3.56 ms) were obtained. IONM facilitated the identification of the exact height of separation of the right RLN from the VN. There were no cases of permanent postoperative vocal paresis. Median lymph node count from the paratracheal stations was 5 lymph nodes.

Conclusion

IONM was feasible during RAMIE. The intraoperative identification of the RLN location contributed to the accuracy of lymph node dissection of the paratracheal lymph node stations. RLN damage and subsequent postoperative vocal cord paresis can potentially be prevented by IONM.

Comparative outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a propensity score-weighted analysis

Robots are increasingly used in minimally invasive surgery. We evaluated the clinical benefits of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in comparison with the conventional open esophageal surgery. From 2012 to 2016, 371 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent an Ivor Lewis or McKeown procedure at our institution. Of these, 130 patients underwent laparoscopic gastric conduit formation followed by RAMIE, whereas 241 patients underwent conventional esophageal surgery, including laparotomy and open esophagectomy (OE). We compared the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of these patients using the propensity score-based inverse probability of treatment weighting technique (IPTW). Among the early outcomes, the OE group showed a higher incidence of pneumonia (P = 0.035) and a higher requirement for vasopressors (P = 0.001). Regarding the long-term outcomes, all-cause mortality was significantly higher (P = 0.001) and disease-free survival was lower (P = 0.006) in the OE group. Wound-related problems also occurred more frequently in the OE group (P = 0.020) during the long-term follow-up. There was no statistical intergroup difference in the recurrence rates (P = 0.191). The Cox proportional-hazard analysis demonstrated that wound problems (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02-0.57; P = 0.017), pneumonia (HR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06-0.68; P = 0.019), and use of vasopressors (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.08-0.25; P = 0.001) were independent predictors of mortality. RAMIE could be a better surgical option for selected patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) compared to conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched analysis

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is increasingly being applied as treatment for esophageal cancer. In this study, the results of 50 RAMIE procedures were compared with 50 conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) operations, which had been the standard treatment for esophageal cancer prior to the robotic era. Between April 2016 and March 2018, data of 100 consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma undergoing modified Ivor Lewis esophagectomy were prospectively collected. All operations were performed by the same surgeon using an identical intrathoracic anastomotic reconstruction technique with the same perioperative management and pain control regimen. Intra-operative and postoperative complications were graded according to definitions stated by the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group. Data analysis was carried out with and without propensity score matching. Baseline characteristics did not show significant differences between the RAMIE and MIE group. Propensity score matching of the initial group of 100 patients resulted in two equal groups of 40 patients for each surgical approach. In the RAMIE group, the median total lymph node yield was 27 (range 13-84) compared to 23 in the MIE group (range 11-48), P = 0.053. Median intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 1 day (range 1-43) in the RAMIE group compared to 2 days (range 1-17) in the MIE group (P = 0.029). The incidence of postoperative complications was not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.581). In this propensity-matched study comparing RAMIE to MIE, ICU stay was significantly shorter in the RAMIE group. There was a trend in improved lymphadenectomy in RAMIE.

Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive Thoracolaparoscopic Esophagectomy Versus Open Transthoracic Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The standard curative treatment for patients with esophageal cancer is perioperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by open transthoracic esophagectomy (OTE). Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy (RAMIE) may reduce complications.

METHODS

A single-center randomized controlled trial was conducted, assigning 112 patients with resectable intrathoracic esophageal cancer to either RAMIE or OTE. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of overall surgery-related postoperative complications (modified Clavien-Dindo classification grade 2-5).

RESULTS

Overall surgery-related postoperative complications occurred less frequently after RAMIE (59%) compared to OTE (80%) [risk ratio with RAMIE (RR) 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.57-0.96; P = 0.02]. RAMIE resulted in less median blood loss (400 vs 568 mL, P <0.001), a lower percentage of pulmonary complications (RR 0.54; 95% CI, 0.34-0.85; P = 0.005) and cardiac complications (RR 0.47; 95% CI, 0.27-0.83; P = 0.006) and lower mean postoperative pain (visual analog scale, 1.86 vs 2.62; P < 0.001) compared to OTE. Functional recovery at postoperative day 14 was better in the RAMIE group [RR 1.48 (95% CI, 1.03-2.13; P = 0.038)] with better quality of life score at discharge [mean difference quality of life score 13.4 (2.0-24.7, p = 0.02)] and 6 weeks postdischarge [mean difference 11.1 quality of life score (1.0-21.1; P = 0.03)]. Short- and long-term oncological outcomes were comparable at a medium follow-up of 40 months.

CONCLUSIONS

RAMIE resulted in a lower percentage of overall surgery-related and cardiopulmonary complications with lower postoperative pain, better short-term quality of life, and a better short-term postoperative functional recovery compared to OTE. Oncological outcomes were comparable and in concordance with the highest standards nowadays.

Outcomes after total robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched comparison with hybrid robotic esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) reduces postoperative respiratory complications and enables meticulous mediastinal lymphadenectomy. However, whether adding a robotic abdominal procedure to a robotic thoracic procedure can result in better outcomes is unclear. We examined outcomes after total-RAMIE (T-RAMIE) and compared them with the outcomes after hybrid-RAMIE (H-RAMIE).

METHODS

Total of 227 patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were included. T-RAMIE was defined as esophagectomy performed robotically in both the thoracic and abdominal cavities. Laparotomy was used instead of the robotic procedure in H-RAMIE. T-RAMIE was performed in 144 patients (63.4%), and propensity score matching produced 49 matched pairs from each group. Early and long-term clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

T-RAMIE was mostly performed for upper or mid-thoracic squamous cell carcinoma (n=119, 82.6%) and cervical anastomosis, and three-field lymphadenectomy was performed in 113 (78.5%) and 54 (37.5%) patients, respectively. One laparotomy conversion was necessary because of severe obesity. The propensity-matched analysis demonstrated that T-RAMIE showed a comparable 90-day mortality rate with H-RAMIE (0% vs. 6.1%, P=0.083). The incidence rates of total (63.3% vs. 63.3%; P=1.000), abdominal (8.2% vs. 14.3%; P=0.366), and respiratory complications (10.2% vs. 10.2%; P=1.000) were not different between two groups. The number of harvested abdominal lymph nodes was similar (12.4±9.0 vs. 12.3±8.9; P=0.992). Median follow-up duration for T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE was 16.3 and 23.5 months, respectively. Two-year overall survival rate (86.2% in T-RAMIE vs. 77.6% in H-RAMIE; P=0.150) and recurrence-free survival (76.6% in T-RAMIE vs. 62.2% in H-RAMIE; P=0.280) were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this matched analysis, T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE showed comparable early outcomes and long-term survival. The low tendencies of early mortality and conversion rate of T-RAMIE suggest that it might be a safe alternative to open stomach mobilization and abdominal lymphadenectomy.

Comparisons of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted and thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy with extended two-field lymph node dissection for resectable thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery has been identified as priori choice compared with open approaches in esophageal cancer surgery. With the developments in the Da Vinci robotic system, the robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been increasingly popular. However, whether RAMIE could be a better choice over thoraco-laparoscopic minimally invasive esophagectomy (TLMIE) is unclear.

Methods

The clinicopathological characteristics of patients who received RAMIE or TLMIE with modern two-field lymph node dissection in Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center between Jan 2016 to Jan 2018 were retrospectively retrieved. The 1:1 propensity score match analysis was performed to compare the short-term effectiveness and safety between the two groups.

Results

Two hundred and fifteen esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients received RAMIE (101 patients) or TLMIE (114 patients) were included in the analysis. After a 1:1 propensity score matching, 108 patients (54 pairs) who received RAMIE or TLMIE displayed no significant variance in baseline clinicopathological characteristics. No significant difference in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, number of resected lymph nodes, and R0 resection rates were observed between the matched groups. However, the recurrent laryngeal nerve protection was better in RAMIE group (P=0.021). Nevertheless, both the incidences of common postoperative complications and length of ICU (hospital) stay were similar in two groups. The average total (P=0.009) and daily (P=0.028) expenses of RAMIE were higher.

Conclusions

In general, RAMIE could benefit patients by providing better recurrent laryngeal nerve protection. In order to promote the applications of RAMIE, more efforts should be made to reduce the costs by the social and medical insurance agencies.

Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE) versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: protocol for a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial (RAMIE trial, robot-assisted minimally invasive Esophagectomy)

Background

Currently, there are three main surgical approaches for resectable esophageal cancer: open transthoracic esophagectomy (OTE), conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE). Previous studies had demonstrated the better short-term outcomes in MIE or RAE when compared to OTE, respectively. However, to date, no prospective study was designed to compare these two minimally invasive approaches (MIE and RAE). The primary objective of this study is to compare the outcomes on survival, safety and efficacy, quality of life between RAE and MIE in the treatment for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Methods

This study is designed as a multicenter, prospective, randomized, non-inferiority phase III clinical trial, investigating the safety and efficacy of RAE compared with MIE in the treatment of resectable ESCC. Eligible patients are randomly assigned to either RAE (n = 180) or MIE (n = 180) group. The follow-up visits will be scheduled at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months in the first two years, and then every 6 months until the end of the study. During the follow-up period, clinical data and quality of life questionnaires will be examined. The primary endpoint is the 5-year overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints are 3-year OS, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), short-term outcomes as well as quality of life.

Discussion

This is the first prospectively randomized controlled trial designed to compare RAE with MIE as surgical treatment for resectable ESCC. According to our hypothesis, RAE will result in at least similar oncologic outcomes and long-term quality of life, but with a shorter operation time, lower percentage of perioperative complications, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay when compared with MIE. This study started in July 2017. Follow-up will terminate after 5 years from the time when the last patient was enrolled.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT03094351 (March 29, 2017). The trial was prospectively registered.

Minimally Invasive and Robotic Esophagectomy: A Review

Great advances have been made in the surgical management of esophageal disease since the first description of esophageal resection in 1913. We are in the era of minimally invasive esophagectomy. The current three main approaches to an esophagectomy are the Ivor Lewis technique, McKeown technique, and the transhiatal approach to esophagectomy. These operations were associated with a high morbidity and mortality. The recent advances in minimally invasive surgical techniques have greatly improved the outcomes of these surgical procedures. This article reviews the literature and describes the various techniques available for performing minimally invasive esophagectomy and robot-assisted esophagectomies, the history behind the development of these techniques, the variations, and the contemporary outcomes after such procedures.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) improves perioperative outcomes: a review

Robotic assisted minimal invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is increasingly applied as a clinically and oncologically safe technique in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer. This review focuses on the advantages and potential opportunities of RAMIE to improve the perioperative and oncological outcomes based on the evidence from current literature. In addition, critical notes on aspects such as procedure duration and costs are addressed in this paper.

Extended thoracic lymph node dissection in robotic-assisted minimal invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for patients with superior mediastinal lymph node metastasis

Background

Robot-assisted surgery may have a role in improving oncological outcomes in esophagectomy. Especially in the anatomical areas in the chest that are more difficult to reach in open surgery (including the superior mediastinum). The dexterity of the robotic instruments aid in performing a more extensive nodal dissection and the precision and detailed vision of the robotic system potentially improves staging, oncological outcomes and reduces complications (i.e., recurrent nerve palsy). In this article, we describe our experience and clinical outcomes in patients treated by robot assisted minimal invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in cN+ esophageal cancer patients with positive nodes localized in the superior mediastinum.

Methods

From May 2007-2018, all patients who had involved nodes by either fluor-18-deoxyglucose positron-emission-tomography-computed tomography (FDG-PET-CT) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) + fine needle aspiration (FNA) localized in the superior mediastinum (above level Th4/sternal angle) were identified. Patient characteristics, perioperative data, postoperative clinical outcomes/complications and overall survival were prospectively recorded and retrospectively evaluated.

Results

Forty patients (48% adenocarcinoma) met our inclusion criteria. All patients underwent a three-stage procedure with cervical anastomosis and 90% of the patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Mortality occurred in three patients (7.5%), of which two were caused by severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). The most frequent complications were pneumonia (25%), chylothorax (20%), anastomotic leakage (17.5%) and vocal cord paralysis (17.5%) which was grade 1 in 72% of the patients. Radicality rate (R0 resection) was 98% and the average lymph node yield was 24 (range, 9-57). Median overall and disease-free survival was 26 and 17 months, respectively.

Conclusions

RAMIE for esophageal cancer patients with node positive disease in the superior mediastinum is associated with increased mortality/morbidity. Oncological outcome showed excellent lymph node yield, R0 rate and survival was equal compared to patients with lower mediastinal node positive disease.

Robot assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer

Worldwide, the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer with curative intent is perioperative chemotherapy or preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by open transthoracic esophagectomy (OTE) with gastric conduit reconstruction. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) was developed to improve the postoperative outcome by reducing the surgical trauma, with comparable short-term oncologic results. However, MIE is a highly complex procedure associated with a long learning curve. In 2003, robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy (RAMIE) was developed to overcome the technical limitations of MIE. Robotic surgery benefits from a stable 3-dimensional, magnified view and articulated instruments enabling precise dissection with 7 degrees of freedom of movement. In this review, the development of RAMIE within our hospital is described using a 5-stage development process for the assessment of surgical innovation (IDEAL).

Esophagectomy from then to now

We have come a long way from the onset of surgery for esophageal cancer. Surgical resection is pivotal for the long-term survival in patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer. Moreover, advancements in post-operative care and surgical techniques have contributed to reductions in morbidity. More recently minimally invasive esophagectomy has been increasingly used in patients undergoing esophageal cancer resection. Potential advantages of MIE include: the decreased pulmonary complications, lower post-operative wound infection, decreased post-operative pain, and decreased length of hospitalization. The application of robotics to esophageal surgery is becoming more widespread. Robotic esophageal surgery has potential advantages over the known limitations of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approaches to esophagectomy while adhering to the benefits of the minimally invasive approach. This paper is a review of the evolution from open esophagectomy to the most recent robotic approach.

Early experience with totally robotic esophagectomy for malignancy. Surgical and oncological outcomes

BACKGROUND

Over recent decades, minimally invasive esophagectomy has gained popularity and is increasingly performed worldwide. The aim of this work was to investigate the perioperative, clinicopathologic, and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted esophagectomy on a consecutive series of totally robotic procedures.

METHODS

All patients received either an Ivor Lewis or a McKeown procedure according to tumor location. Perioperative, clinicopathologic and oncological outcomes were examined.

RESULTS

A total of 38 patients underwent robot-assisted esophagectomy procedures. All underwent surgery for primary esophageal neoplasms. Neoadjuvant therapy was given to 22 patients. R0 resections were achieved in all patients and no conversion to open surgery occurred. Overall morbidity and mortality were 42% and 10%, respectively. The 1 year disease free survival was 78.9%, whereas the 1 year overall survival was 84.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic surgery can be employed to treat esophageal malignancy competently. Robotic esophagectomy satisfies all features of pathologic appropriateness and offers the expected oncological results.

Robot assisted esophagectomy for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Background

This study aims to report our experience with robot assisted esophagectomy (RAE) for the treatment of resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Methods

A series of 249 consecutive patients diagnosed with ESCC who underwent RAE from November 2015 to December 2017 at Shanghai Chest Hospital were evaluated, and their clinical data were reviewed retrospectively. One hundred patients were equally divided into four groups according to the surgery order, and the short-term outcomes in each group were analyzed.

Results

Overall, 249 patients (201 males and 48 females) with a mean age of 63.4±7.3 years who underwent RAE were analyzed. The thoracic procedure was successfully performed with the assistance of a robot. The mean total duration was 250.6±58.4 mins, and the estimated blood loss was 215.5±87.6 mL. R0 resection was performed in 232 (93.2%) patients with a mean total number of dissected lymph nodes of 18.5±9.1 and mean yield of lymph nodes along the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) of 4.4±3.2. The median postoperative hospital stay was 11 days, and no 90-day mortality was observed. Forty-five (18.1%) patients experienced pulmonary complications, and the recurrent laryngeal nerve injury were observed in 38 (15.3%) patients. A significant reduction in thoracic duration was observed after the initial 25 cases (P<0.001). After 50 cases, the dissection of total lymph nodes, mediastinum lymph nodes and lymph nodes along the RLN were significantly improved (P<0.001, P<0.001, P=0.001, respectively) with a shorter postoperative hospital stay (P=0.005).

Conclusions

RAE is a safe and feasible alternative surgical approach for resectable esophageal carcinoma and is associated with a large yield of lymph nodes, especially along the RLN. The surgeon will reach a plateau of operative duration after 25 cases and a plateau of lymphadenectomy after 50 cases.

Usefulness of robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy

OBJECTIVES

We started robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy using the da Vinci surgical system from June 2010 and operated on 30 cases by December 2013. Herein, we examined the usefulness of robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy and compared it with conventional esophagectomy by right thoracotomy.

METHODS

Patients requiring an invasion depth of up to the muscularis propria with preoperative diagnosis were considered for surgical adaptation, excluding bulky lymph node metastasis or salvage surgery cases. The outcomes of 30 patients who underwent robot-assisted surgery (robot group) and 30 patients who underwent conventional esophagectomy by right thoracotomy (thoracotomy group) up to December 2013 were retrospectively examined. Five ports were used in the robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy: 3rd intercostal (da Vinci right arm), 6th intercostal (da Vinci camera), 9th intercostal (da Vinci left arm), 4th and 8th intercostals (for assistance).

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in patient characteristics. Robot group/right thoracotomy group: Operation time, 563/398 min; thoracic procedure bleeding volume, 21/135 ml; number of thoracic lymph node radical dissections, 25/23. Postoperative complications were recurrent nerve paralysis, 16.7/16.7%; pneumonia, 6.7%/10.0%; anastomotic leakage, 10.0/20.0%; surgical site infection, 0/10.0%; hospitalization, 17/30 days. For the robot group, the operation time was significantly longer, but the amount of intraoperative bleeding and postoperative hospitalization were significantly reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy enables delicate surgical procedures owing to the 3D effect of the field of view and articulated forceps of the da Vinci. This procedure reduces bleeding and postoperative hospitalization and is less invasive than conventional esophagectomy by right thoracotomy.

Management of Patients With Adenocarcinoma or Squamous Cancer of the Esophagus

Esophageal cancer is characterized by early and frequent metastasis. Surgery is the primary treatment for early-stage disease, whereas patients with patients with locally advanced disease receive perioperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Squamous cancers can be treated with primary chemoradiotherapy without surgery, depending on their response to therapy and patient tolerance for subsequent surgery. Chemotherapy with a fluorinated pyrimidine and a platinum agent, followed by later treatment with taxanes and irinotecan, provides some benefit. Agents that inhibit the erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 (ERBB2 or HER2), or vascular endothelial growth factor, including trastuzumab, ramucirumab, and apatinib, increase response and survival times. Esophageal adenocarcinomas have mutations in tumor protein p53 and mutations that activate receptor-associated tyrosine kinase, vascular endothelial growth factor, and cell cycle pathways, whereas esophageal squamous tumors have a distinct set of mutations. Esophageal cancers develop systems to evade anti-tumor immune responses, but studies are needed to determine how immune checkpoint modification contributes to esophageal tumor development.

[Differentiated surgical approach for adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction]

For adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) the classification of Siewert with its three subtypes is well established as a practical approach to surgical treatment. Transthoracic esophagectomy with gastric tube formation is generally accepted as the surgical standard for adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus (GEJ type I). Intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy has become the most frequently used anastomotic technique (Ivor Lewis esophagectomy). Both the abdominal and thoracic part can be safely performed with a minimally invasive access. For subcardiac gastric cancer (GEJ type III) transhiatal extended gastrectomy is the resection of choice. For true cardiac carcinomas (GEJ type II) it has not yet been decided which of the abovementioned surgical procedures offers the best long-term survival. If technically possible in terms of a complete resection, transhiatal extended gastrectomy should be preferred because of a better postoperative quality of life. For GEJ type II tumors a minimally invasive approach is not recommended if the extent of resection cannot be safely determined preoperatively.

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).

Minimally invasive and robotic esophagectomy: state of the art

Esophageal cancer is the eight most common cancer in the world and surgical resection remains the gold standard not only in providing the optimal chance for cure but also the best palliation for dysphagia. Esophagectomy is a complex operation and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality that are reported as 23-50% and 2-8% in western country. At the moment no gold standard techniques exist for esophagectomy. The choice of the technique depends on several factors; location of tumor and surgeon's experience are probably the most relevant. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), performed in high volume centers, has shown to reduce the rate of complications with the same oncological outcome as open esophagectomy. The addition of robotic technique to MIE is relatively new and is gaining widespread acceptance. Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is safe and feasible, and its short-term results are comparable to conventional MIE. Randomized studies are needed to assess if there is any real benefit associated to the use of the robotic approach.

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.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in the upper mediastinum

BACKGROUND

Patients with upper third esophageal cancer or esophageal cancer with upper mediastinal paratracheal lymph node metastases are often precluded from surgery because of technical difficulties. With the aid of robotic surgery, an excellent overview and reach of the thoracic inlet can be accomplished. In this way, patients with upper mediastinal esophageal cancer are eligible for esophageal resection with curative intent. The aim of this study was to review the results of a consecutive series of patients who underwent robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for tumors of the upper 1/3 of the esophagus or positive lymph nodes in the upper mediastinum.

METHODS

Between 2007-2016, 31 patients who underwent RAMIE in the UMC Utrecht for proximal esophageal cancer or proximal thoracic lymphadenopathy were identified from a prospective surgical database. Perioperative characteristics and oncologic outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

The majority of patients had a squamous cell carcinoma. Clinical tumor stage was cT3 or higher in 25 (81%) of patients. Clinically positive lymph nodes (cN1-3) were observed in 29 (94%) patients. Neoadjuvant treatment was administered in 27 (87%) patients. Median duration of the surgical procedure was 435 min (range 299-874 min). Pulmonary complications were most frequent and occurred in 13 (42%) patients. Median intensive care (ICU stay) was 1 day (range 1-65 days) and median overall postoperative hospital stay was 15 days (range 10-118 days). In hospital mortality was 10%. Causes of mortality were tracheo-neo-esophageal fistula, sepsis after abdominal wall drainage due to leakage of the jejunal fistula resulting in respiratory and kidney failure, after which refraining further treatment resulting in death, and irreversible ARDS in a patient with COPD Gold III needing extracorporeal life support. Radical resection was achieved in 30 (97%) of the patients. Median number of retrieved lymph nodes was 22 (range 9-57). Median time of follow up was 18 months (range 3-81 months). Median disease-free survival was 13 months (range 0-81 months) and median overall survival was 16 months (range 0-81 months). Tumor recurrence occurred in 15 patients (48%) and was locoregional only in 3 patients, systemic only in 5 patients and combined locoregional and systemic in 7 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot assisted thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy with curative intent in patients with upper mediastinal esophageal cancer is feasible, but associated with increased in hospital mortality. Short-term oncologic results are encouraging.

A Mediastinoscopic Approach With Bilateral Cervicopneumomediastinum in Radical Thoracic Esophagectomy

We previously reported the performance of “mediastinoscopic esophagectomy with lymph node dissection” (MELD) under pneumomediastinum using a transcervical and transhiatal approach, as a method of radical esophagectomy. The procedure included the dissection of the left tracheobronchial lymph nodes (106tbL). We described our technique for dissecting the upper mediastinal lymph nodes. We revealed that the 106tbL lymph nodes were almost completely retrieved but that the upper thoracic paraesophageal lymph nodes (105) and the right recurrent nerve lymph nodes (106recR) were not completely retrieved. We are therefore of the opinion that a right cervical pneumomediastinal approach is necessary to achieve total dissection. We herein describe a case that was surgically treated using a bilateral cervicopneumomediastinal approach. A 68-year-old male patient was referred to our institution to undergo treatment for lower thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The right recurrent nerve was first identified using an open approach. Pneumomediastinum was then initiated to allow for the 105 and 106recR lymph nodes to be completely dissected along the right mediastinal pleura, the right vagus nerve, the proximal portion of the azygos vein, and the right bronchial artery. The left recurrent nerve lymph nodes (106recL) and 106tbL lymph nodes were dissected as described previously. In order to perform bilateral upper mediastinal lymph node dissection and esophagectomy, a bilateral cervicopneumomediastinal approach is needed.

[Oncologic esophageal resection and reconstruction : Open, hybrid, minimally invasive or robotic?]

Minimally invasive resections are increasingly employed in oncologic surgery for esophageal carcinoma. The new German S3 guideline states that esophagectomy, as well as reconstruction of the esophagus, can be performed minimally invasively or in combination with open techniques (hybrid). However, the current value of different techniques - ranging from complete minimally invasive esophagectomy over hybrid to robotic surgery - remains unregarded.This review provides a critical comparison of these techniques based on current evidence. Minimally invasive procedures of oncologic esophageal resection are safe in experienced hands and show numerous advantages with regard to postoperative reconvalescence. Laparoscopic gastrolysis with intra-abdominal lymphadenectomy and muscle sparing as well as anterolateral mini-thoracotomy (also via VATS as single-port technique) as a hybrid method also result in a relevant reduction of postoperative mortality and offer the possibility of extended mediastinal lymphadenectomy, which requires a high level of expertise when performed thoracoscopically. At present, robotic esophagectomy is applied in only a few clinics in Germany. A lack of evidence based on studies for esophageal surgery, as well as high acquisition and operating costs of the robotic system, have to be taken into account.