The Oncologic Outcome of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Patients After Robot-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy With Total Mediastinal Lymphadenectomy

Clinical implications of selective right paratracheal lymph node dissection in patients with early-stage esophageal Cancer: Propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of selective right paratracheal lymph node (RtPTLN) dissection in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), focusing on oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

This study included patients who underwent curative surgery for clinical stage I ESCC (cT1N0) at our institution between January 2010 and December 2021. Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. Among 1484 patients, 658 patients (mean age 63.1 ± 7.7 years) were identified and categorized into RtPTLN+ (dissection performed, n = 88) and RtPTLN- (no dissection, n = 570) groups. The groups were propensity score matched in a 1:2 ratios.

RESULTS

The 5-year overall survival (OS, RtPTLN + vs. RtPTLN-, 75.8 % vs. 79.0 %, P = 0.38) and recurrence-free survival (RFS, 70.0 % vs. 72.5 %, P = 0.55) rates showed no significant differences. Propensity score matching yielded 248 patients: RtPTLN+ (n = 83) and RtPTLN- (n = 162). Post-matching, OS and RFS rates did not significantly differ between RtPTLN+ and RtPTLN- groups (OS: 77.2 % vs. 77.9 %, P = 0.94; RFS: 72.1 % vs. 72.8 %, P = 0.85). Subgroup analyses based on tumor location and depth (upper-middle/lower third and T1a/T1b) yielded consistent results. Multivariable analysis confirmed that RtPTLN dissection was not a significant predictor for OS or RFS.

CONCLUSION

In this propensity score-matched analysis, no significant difference in OS and RFS was observed between patients who underwent RtPTLN dissection and those who did not. These findings suggest that routine RtPTLN dissection may not be necessary and that selective dissection could be an acceptable approach in early-stage ESCC.

Lymph Node Metastasis for pN+ Superficial Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to analyze lymph node metastasis (LNM) distribution in superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and its impact factors on survival.

METHODS

We reviewed 241 pT1N+ ESCC cases between February 2012 and April 2022 from 10 Chinese hospitals with a high volume of esophageal cancer (EC). We analyzed clinicopathological data to identify overall survival (OS) risk factors and LNM distribution in relation to tumor invasion depth.

RESULTS

Of the 241 patients, 26 (10.8%) had pT1a cancer and 215 (89.2%) had pT1b cancer. We showed that N3 stage, ≤ 28 lymphadenectomies, and nerve infiltration (NI) were negative factors for OS in superficial pN+ ESCC, whereas the OS was not definitively affected by the tumor depth and the choice of adjuvant therapy. In general, the LNM rates of the 193 pT1N+ ESCC cases can be ranked in the following order: station 106recR > station 106recL > station 1 > station 7 > station 2. With deeper tumor invasion, the higher LNM rate was observed near the bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerves (RLN), but there was no statistically significant difference.

CONCLUSIONS

In superficial ESCC, LNM was frequently observed along the 106recR (35.8%) and 106recL (25.6%) stations. Advanced N-staging (N3) was a major negative impact factor in prognosis, and adequate lymph nodes dissected (LND) (N > 28) improved OS of pT1N+ ESCC. However, in superficial ESCC, tumor infiltration depth did not affect patients' OS or the distribution of positive LNs. The optimal adjuvant treatment that favors survival for these patients required further investigation.

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.

Patterns of Recurrence After Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been proven to be a feasible surgical approach for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). This study aimed to investigate the recurrence pattern and potential risk factors after RAMIE. Consecutive patients with ESCC who received RAMIE with McKeown technique at a single Esophageal Cancer Institute from November 2015 to September 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with available data, radical resection (R0), and a minimum 2-year follow-up period were eligible for the recurrence analysis. Risk factors of recurrence were examined by logistic regression analysis. R0 resection was achieved in 95.1% of patients (310/326). Of the 298 eligible patients with a median follow-up period of 30.6 months, recurrence was recognized in 95 patients (31.9%), with 4 (1.3%) local-only, 40 (13.4%) regional-only, 44 (14.8%) hematogenous-only and 7 (2.3%) combined recurrences. Cervical lymph nodes and lungs were the most frequent sites of regional and hematogenous recurrence, respectively. The median disease-free interval until recurrence was 12.1 (range 1.7-37.6) months and 83.2% of relapses occurred within 2 years after surgery. Multivariable analysis indicated that tumor in the upper esophagus, larger tumor length and positive lymph nodes as independent risk factors for recurrence. Hematogenous recurrence is the prevailing pattern after RAMIE for ESCC. For patients with advanced disease, neoadjuvant therapy is a key factor in reducing recurrence rather than surgical approaches.

Skeletonizing En Bloc Esophagectomy Revisited: Oncologic Outcome in Association with the Presence of Thoracic Duct Lymph Nodes

BACKGROUND

Skeletonizing en bloc esophagectomy (SEBE) involves the removal of the esophagus en bloc with locoregional soft tissues and lymph nodes, including the thoracic duct (TD); however, its oncologic benefits remain unclear. We evaluated the impact of SEBE on oncologic outcomes in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

METHODS

Patients undergoing McKeown esophagectomy without neoadjuvant therapy between 2013 and 2019 were evaluated. Outcomes after SEBE were compared with those after conventional esophagectomy (CE) using propensity score-matched analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 232 patients were identified, including 133 patients with SEBE and 99 patients with CE. Lymph node metastasis along the TD was identified in 7.5% (10/133) of the SEBE group, and the incidence was closely related with the tumor invasion depth (2.2% in pT1 and 19.0% in pT2-3). Based on the propensity score, 180 patients (90 pairs) were analyzed. Tumor recurrence was identified in 24.4% and 12.2% of CE and SEBE cases, respectively (p = 0.036). The observed difference was due to the higher incidence of locoregional recurrence in CE (10.5% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.024), while the incidence of systemic recurrence was similar (18.6% vs. 12.2%; p = 0.240). The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 83.6% and 62.4% in the SEBE and CE groups, respectively (p = 0.022). Multivariate analysis revealed that SEBE could significantly reduce the risk of recurrence or death in patients with pT2-3 tumors (hazard ratio 0.173, 95% confidence interval 0.048-0.628; p = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

SEBE could identify and eradicate lymphatic metastasis along the TD and positively impact disease-free survival, particularly in patients with pT2-3 tumors.

Clinical outcome of patients after recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node dissection for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma

 

OBJECTIVES

Recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node dissection (LND) has been incorporated into oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, but with uncertain oncological efficacy.

METHODS

The data of patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, including who underwent upfront surgery (surgery group) and those who received neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery (neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group), were retrospectively examined. The overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between patients with and without recurrent laryngeal nerve LND.

RESULTS

Among the 312 patients, no significant differences were found in 3-year OS and DFS between patients with and without recurrent laryngeal nerve LND in the entire cohort (OS: 57% vs 52%, P = 0.33; DFS: 47% vs 41%, P = 0.186), or the surgery group (n = 173, OS: 69% vs 58%, P = 0.43; DFS: 52% vs. 48%, P = 0.30) and the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy group (n = 139, OS: 44% vs 43%, P = 0.44; DFS: 39% vs 32%, P = 0.27). However, among patients with clinical positive recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node involvement before treatment, there was significant OS and DFS differences between patients with and without recurrent laryngeal nerve LND (OS: 62% vs 33%, P = 0.029; DFS: 49% vs 26%, P = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrent laryngeal nerve LND is not a significant prognostic factor in patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma; however, it is associated with better outcomes in patients with pre-treatment radiological evidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node involvement.

Role of Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve Lymph Node Dissection in Surgery of Early-Stage Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

In esophageal cancer surgery, it is difficult to perform thorough dissection of lymph nodes along the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN-LN). However, there are limited data regarding the necessity of RLN-LN dissection in surgery for superficial esophageal squamous carcinoma (focused on T1b tumor) and its role in locoregional control and accurate nodal staging.

METHODS

Between 2001 and 2016, 567 patients with pT1N0 and 927 patients with cT1N0 squamous cell carcinoma were identified in a prospectively maintained, single institution esophagectomy registry. Sufficient or insufficient RLN-LN assessment group was defined by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of the number of RLN-LN harvested. To mitigate bias, inverse probability weighting adjustment and several sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

In the pT1N0 cohort, patients with sufficient (≥ 4) harvested RLN-LNs showed significantly superior 5-year recurrence-free survival (89.1% versus 74.8%, log-rank P < 0.001). Patients with insufficient RLN-LN dissection mainly developed locoregional failure at the upper mediastinal or cervical area (87% of total recurred cases). The survival impact of sufficient RLN-LN dissection was more prominent in subsets of upper-middle thoracic tumors or with deep submucosal invasion. In the analysis on cT1N0 cohort, sufficient RLN-LN assessment conferred a 1.5-fold increase in the discovery of positive-nodal disease (19.4% versus 27.8%, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Adequate RLN-LN dissection during surgery may help reduce the risk of recurrence and enhance the accuracy of nodal staging in early-stage esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Therefore, meticulous surgical evaluation for this region should not be underrated, particularly in the high-risk subset with lymph node metastasis. Visual Abstract Graphical summary of key study findings. T wo cohorts (pT1 and cT1 ; both mainly comprised T1b ) were analyzed for separate purposes; the former controlled for pathologic stage was primarily analyzed in terms of survival and recurrence hazard, whereas the latter (controlled for clinical was used for stage migration ( and intention to treat analysis. Th e results show the significance of adequate bilateral RLN LN in the surgery for early stage ESCC (particularly those with T1b)T1b), in terms of accurate nodal staging, effective nodal clearance, and reduced regional.

Robot-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy with Total Mediastinal Lymphadenectomy: A Guide to a Systematic Approach Using the Concept of Fascial Plane Dissection

Recent case series and meta-analyses have suggested that robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) could be a useful alternative to video-assisted thoracic surgery esophagectomy. The advantages of RAMIE are a 3-dimensional view, 7 degrees of freedom, and tremor filtering, which enable more meticulous lymph node dissection with a lower incidence of complications. However, in radical esophagectomy, understanding the concepts of the fascia and compartment is crucial for successful and reliable dissection. The first RAMIE in Korea was performed by our team in July 2006, and since then, we have developed related techniques to achieve better short- and long-term outcomes. The key step in RAMIE for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma is dissection of the upper mediastinum due to the difficulty of lymph node dissection and the high incidence of nodal metastasis in the area. Herein, we describe the technique of fascial plane dissection with esophageal suspension during RAMIE.

Lobe-specific lymph node dissection in stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate lymph node (LN) metastasis according to tumour location and assess the impact of lobe-specific LN dissection on survival in stage IA non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the data of patients with clinical stage IA NSCLC treated with lobectomy and systematic LN dissection at Asan Medical Center (Seoul, Korea) between June 2005 and April 2017. Patients who received neoadjuvant therapy had multiple primary tumours or missed the follow-up during the first postoperative year were excluded. The patients were divided into five groups according to involved lung lobes: right upper lobe (RUL), right middle lobe (RML), right lower lobe (RLL), left upper lobe (LUL) and left lower lobe (LLL), which were further divided into subgroups according to LN station metastasis. Overall survival (OS) and the incidence of metastasis were calculated for each subgroup. Efficacy indices (EIs) were calculated to determine the correlation between each lung lobe and LN station, and the impact of the dissection of these stations on survival.

RESULTS

A total of 1202 patients were analysed. The 5-year OS in the RUL, RML, RLL, LUL and LLL groups was 74%, 88%, 78%, 80% and 75%, respectively. The incidence of single LN station metastasis was 11%, 10%, 10%, 16% and 14%, respectively. The lobe-specific LNs for RUL, RML, RLL, LUL and LLL were stations 2/3/4, 4/7, 2/4/7, 4/5/6 and 6/7/9, respectively. Moreover, the LN stations with high EIs for RUL, RML, RLL, LUL and LLL were 4, 7, 7, 5 and 7, respectively. In the RUL group, the incidence of metastasis to stations 2, 3 and 4 was 2.3%, 0.5% and 7.6%, and the EI was 0.8, 0.3 and 4.3, respectively. In RML, the incidence of metastasis to stations 4 and 7 was 4% and 6%, and the EI was 1.3 and 2.4, respectively. In RLL, the incidence of metastasis to stations 2, 4 and 7 was 4.4%, 5.6% and 8.3%, and the EI was 1.3, 1.4 and 3.3, respectively. In LUL, the incidence of metastasis to stations 4, 5 and 6 was 1.4%, 11.8% and 2.5%, and the EI was 0.4, 7.1 and 0.5, respectively. In LLL, the incidence of metastasis to stations 6, 7 and 9 was 1.1%, 5.7% and 1.7%, and the EI was 0.6, 2.3 and 0.5, respectively. Furthermore, the OS of patients with lobe-specific LN metastasis was statistically significantly different from that of the non-lobe-specific LN metastasis group with P-values of <0.001 for RUL, 0.002 for RML, 0.002 for RLL, 0.001 for LUL and 0.003 for LLL.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the use of lobe-specific LN dissection in stage IA NSCLC. When LN stations with high EI were negative, LN metastasis in other stations was unlikely. The incidence of LN metastasis beyond lobe-specific LN stations was ∼1% in all subgroups. Dissection of non-lobe-specific LNs may not improve the OS; however, prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to modify the standard approach.

Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Early Results of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial: the RAMIE Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in the treatment for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

RAMIE has emerged as an alternative to traditional open or thoracoscopic approaches. Efficacy and safety of RAMIE and MIE in the surgical treatment for ESCC remains uncertain given the lack of high-level clinical evidence.

METHODS

The RAMIE trial was designed as a prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial that compare the efficacy and safety of RAMIE and MIE in the treatment of resectable ESCC. From August 2017 to December 2019, eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive either RAMIE or MIE performed by experienced thoracic surgeons from six high-volume centers in China. Intent-to-treat analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Significantly shorter operation time was taken in RAMIE (203.8 vs. 244.9 mins, P<0.001). Compared to MIE, RAMIE showed improved efficiency of thoracic lymph node dissection in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy (15 vs. 12, P=0.016), as well as higher achievement rate of lymph node dissection along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) (79.5% vs. 67.6%, P=0.001). No difference was found in blood loss, conversion rate, and R0 resection. The 90-day mortality was 0.6% in each group. Overall complications were similar in RAMIE (48.6%) compared to MIE (41.8%) (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.92-1.46; P=0.196). Besides, the rate of major complications (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥ III) was also comparable (12.2% vs. 10.2%, P=0.551). RAMIE showed similar incidences of pulmonary complications (13.8% vs. 14.7%; P=0.812), anastomotic leakage (12.2% vs. 11.3%; P=0.801) and vocal cord paralysis (32.6% vs. 27.1%, P=0.258) to MIE.

CONCLUSIONS

Early results demonstrate that both RAMIE and MIE are safe and feasible for the treatment of ESCC. RAMIE can achieve shorter operative duration as well as better lymph node dissection in patients who received neoadjuvant therapy. Long-term results are pending for further follow-up investigations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrial.gov Identifier: NCT03094351.

Surgical Management of Early Esophageal Cancer

Esophageal cancer is the eighth most common cancer worldwide, and its incidence has been increasing over the past several decades. Esophagectomy currently is the standard of care for more advanced early esophageal cancer and should be performed at centers of excellence with high volumes, appropriate supportive staff, and multidisciplinary expertise.

Short- and mid-term outcomes of robotic versus thoraco-laparoscopic McKeown esophagectomy for squamous cell esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched study

Controversy exists on the advantages of robotic McKeown esophagectomy (RME) versus thoraco-laparoscopic McKeown esophagectomy (TLME). The aim was to evaluate the short- and mid-term outcomes of RME and TLME in the treatment of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). A consecutive series of 652 patients, 280 in RME and 372 in TLME, who underwent minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for ESCC at our department from November 2015 to June 2018 was analyzed. A propensity score-matched comparison with clinicopathological covariates was performed between the two groups. Complications were categorized based on the Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group (ECCG) recommendation. To identify the recurrence, all patients with R0 resection were followed with a median follow-up period of 20.2 months (range 1-33 months). After propensity score matching, 271 patients were identified for each cohort. In the matched cohorts, two patients died within 90 days in TLME, whereas no patients died in RME. RME was associated with similar intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.895), but with shorter surgical duration (244.5 vs. 276.0 min, P < 0.001), shorter thoracic duration (85.0 vs. 102.9 min, P < 0.001) and lower thoracic conversions (0.7% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.001). In spite of the similar results on total and thoracic lymph nodes dissection, RME yielded more lymph nodes along recurrent laryngeal nerve (4.8 vs. 4.1, P = 0.012), as well as the higher incidence of recurrent nerve injury (29.2% vs. 15.1%, P < 0.001) when compared to TLME. Tumor recurrence occurred in 30 patients and was locoregional only in 9 (3.5%) patients, systemic only in 17 (6.7%) patients, and combined in 4 (1.6%) patients in RME, while in 26 patients and was locoregional only in 10 (10.6%) patients, systemic only in 7 (2.8%) patients, and combined in 9 (3.6%) patients in TLME. RME was associated with a lower rate of mediastinal lymph nodes recurrence (2.0% vs. 5.3%, P = 0.044). Overall and disease-free survival was not different between the two cohorts (P = 0.097 and P = 0.248, respectively). RME was shown to be a safe and oncologically effective approach with favorable short- and mid-term outcomes in the treatment of patients with ESCC.

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.

Oncologic Resection in Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Transhiatal Esophagectomy

Background and Objectives:

As the use of robotic surgery continues to increase, little is known about robotic oncologic outcomes compared with traditional methods in esophagectomy. The aim of this study was to examine the perioperative oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic versus robot-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy (THE).

Methods:

Thirty-six consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic and robot-assisted THE for malignant disease over a 3-year period were identified in a retrospective database. Eighteen patients underwent robotic-assisted THE with cervical anastomosis, and 18 patients underwent laparoscopic THE. All procedures were performed by a single foregut and thoracic surgeon.

Results:

Patient demographics were similar between the 2 groups with no significant differences. Lymph node yields for both laparoscopic and robot-assisted THE were similar at 13.9 and 14.3, respectively (P = .90). Ninety-four percent of each group underwent R0 margins, but only 1 patient from each modality had microscopic positive margins. All of the robot-assisted patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation, whereas 83.3% underwent neoadjuvant therapy in the laparoscopy group (P = .23). Clinical and pathologic stagings were similar in each group. There was 1 death after laparoscopic surgery in a cirrhotic patient and no mortalities among the robot-assisted THE patients (P = .99). One patient from each group experienced an anastomotic leak, but neither patient required further intervention.

Conclusions:

Laparoscopic and robot-assisted THEs yield similar perioperative oncologic results including lymph node yield and margin status. In the transition from laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery should be considered oncologically noninferior compared with laparoscopy.

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 minimally invasive esophagectomy versus the conventional minimally invasive one: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Conventional video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is safe and associated with low rates of morbidity and mortality, but the two-dimensional monitor reduces eye-hand harmony and viewing yield. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) with its virtual reality simulators offers a realistic three-dimensional environment that facilitates dissection in the narrow working space, but it is expensive and requires longer operative time. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the safety and feasibility of RAMIE versus MIE in patients with esophageal cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Chinese Biomedical Literature databases were systematically searched up to 21 September 2018 for case-controlled studies that compared RAMIE with MIE.

RESULT

Eight case-controlled studies involving 1862 patients (931 under RAMIE and 931 under MIE) were considered. No statistically significant difference between the two techniques was observed regarding R0 resection rate (OR = 1.1174, P = 0.8647), conversion to open (OR = 0.7095, P = 0.7519), 30-day mortality rate (OR = 0.8341, P = 0.7696), 90-day mortality rate (OR = 0.3224, P = 0.3329), in-hospital mortality rate (OR = 0.3733, P = 0.3895), postoperative complications, number of harvested lymph nodes (mean difference [MD] = 0.8216, P = 0.2039), operation time (MD = 24.3655 min, P = 0.2402), and length of stay in hospitals (LOS) (MD = -5.0228 day, P = 0.1342). The meta-analysis showed that RAMIE was associated with a significantly fewer estimated blood loss (EBL) (MD = -33.2268 mL, P = 0.0075). And the vocal cord palsy rate was higher in the MIE group compared with RAMIE, and the difference was significant (OR = 0.5696, P = 0.0447).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis indicated that RAMIE and MIE display similar feasibility and safety when used in esophagectomy. However, randomized controlled studies with larger sample sizes are needed to evaluate the benefit and harm in patients with esophageal cancer undergoing RAMIE.

Transcervical minimally invasive esophagectomy using da Vinci® SP™ Surgical System: a feasibility study in cadaveric model

BACKGROUND

This is a preclinical cadaveric study to investigate the feasibility of transcervical esophagectomy using a novel single-port robotic surgical system.

METHODS

A 40-mm cervical incision was created over left supraclavicular fossa. The novel da Vinci® SP™ Surgical System was introduced through a wound retraction port. The mobilization of esophagus was performed using da Vinci SP from cervical, thoracic to abdominal segments. Lymph nodes were dissected en bloc with esophagus.

RESULTS

The transcervical esophagectomy with complete mobilization of the cervical, thoracic, and abdominal esophagus was completed in 60 min. The procedure was completed using the novel da Vinci SP Surgical System, which was introduced via the cranial side over the left cervical incision. No additional port was used for retraction and dissection, and the esophageal hiatus could be reached after complete transcervical dissection.

CONCLUSION

This preclinical study demonstrated that transcervical esophagectomy is technically feasible and can be completed with the novel da Vinci SP Surgical System without additional ports or assistance. This will serve as an important step to the performance of robotic transcervical esophagectomy without the necessity of one-lung ventilation.

Safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy

Esophagectomy is associated with substantial morbidity. Robotic surgery allows complex resections to be performed with potential benefits over conventional techniques. We applied this technology to transthoracic esophagectomy to assess safety, feasibility, and reliability of this technology. A retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (RAIL) from 2009 to 2014 was conducted. Clinicopathologic factors and surgical outcomes were recorded and compared. All statistical tests were two-sided and a P-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. We identified 147 patients with an average age 66 ± 10 years. Neoadjuvant therapy was administered to 114 (77.6%) patients, and all patients underwent a R0 resection. The mean operating room (OR) time was 415 ± 84.6 minutes with a median estimated blood loss (EBL) of 150 (25-600) mL. Mean intensive care unit (ICU) stay was 2.00 ± 4.5 days, median length of hospitalization (LOH) was 9 (4-38) days, and readmissions within 90 days were low at 8 (5.5%). OR time decreased from 471 minutes to 389 minutes after 20 cases and a further decrease to mean of 346 minutes was observed after 120 cases. Complications occurred in 37 patients (25.2%). There were 4 anastomotic (2.7%) leaks. Thirty and 90-day mortality was 0.68% and 1.4%, respectively. This represents to our knowledge the largest series of robotic esophagectomies. RAIL is a safe surgical technique that provides an alternative to standard minimally invasive and open techniques. In our series, there was no increased risk of LOH, complications, or death and re-admission rates were low despite earlier discharge.

Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery: Robotic Surgery versus Laparoscopic Procedures for Esophageal Malignancy

Background

The evolution of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) also extends to the field of esophageal surgery and has brought forth the development of several approaches of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Hybrid and total minimally invasive operative techniques have proven beneficial compared to open surgery and are currently evaluated against robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). We aim to review the current literature regarding the position of MIE versus RAMIE.

Methods

A systematic review of the relevant literature on minimally invasive esophageal surgery for cancer is presented. A PubMed search was carried out for the period of 1992-2018 with the following search terms: 'esophageal cancer', 'minimally invasive surgery', 'resection', 'transhiatal', 'transthoracic', 'MIE', 'hybrid', 'robotic resection', 'RAMIE', 'RATE'.

Results

Hybrid and total minimally invasive operative techniques have proven beneficial, especially with regard to pulmonary complications, compared to open surgery. Oncologic outcomes appear equivalent between open and minimally invasive techniques. Currently, the position of RAMIE is being evaluated against other minimally invasive techniques.

Conclusion

All minimally invasive techniques confer the expected reduction in perioperative morbidity compared to open surgery. However, MIS is still evolving with regard to specific technical challenges, especially anastomotic techniques.

Robotic surgery for the upper gastrointestinal tract: Current status and future perspectives

More than 4000 da Vinci Surgical Systems have been installed worldwide. Robotic surgery using the da Vinci Surgical System has been increasingly performed in the last decade, especially in urology and gynecology. The da Vinci Surgical System has not become standard in surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract because of a lack of clear benefits in comparison with conventional minimally invasive surgery. We initiated robotic gastrectomy and esophagectomy for patients with upper gastrointestinal cancer in 2009, and we have demonstrated the potential advantages of the da Vinci Surgical System in reducing postoperative local complications after gastrectomy and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy after esophagectomy. However, robotic surgery has the disadvantages of a longer operative time and higher costs than the conventional approach. In this review article, we present the current status of robotic surgery for gastric and esophageal cancer, as well as future perspectives on this approach, based on our experience and a review of the literature.

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.

Feasibility of four-arm robotic lobectomy as solo surgery in patients with clinical stage I lung cancer

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to investigate the feasibility of four-arm robotic lobectomy (FARL) as a solo surgical technique in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Early outcome and long-term survival of FARL were compared with those of video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (VATL).

METHODS

Prospective enrollment of patients with clinical stage I NSCLC undergoing FARL or VATL (20 patients in each group) was planned. Interim analysis for early postoperative outcome was performed after the initial 10 cases in each group.

RESULTS

The study was terminated early because of safety issues in the FARL group after enrollment of 12 FARL and 17 VATL patients from 2011 to 2012. There were no differences in clinical characteristics between groups. Lobectomy time and total operation time were significantly longer in the FARL group (P=0.003). There were three life-threatening events in the FARL group (2 bleedings, 1 bronchus tear) that necessitated thoracotomy conversion in 1 patient. There were no differences in other operative outcomes including pain score, complications, or length of hospital stay. Pathologic stage and number of dissected lymph nodes (LNs) were also comparable. During a follow-up of 48.9±9.5 months, recurrence was identified in 2 (16.7%) patients in FARL group and 3 (23.5%) in VATL group. Five-year overall survival (100% vs. 87.5%, P=0.386) and disease-free survival (82.5% vs. 75.6%, P=0.589) were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

FARL as solo surgery could not be recommended because of safety issues. It required a longer operation time and had no benefits over VATL in terms of early postoperative outcome or long-term survival.