Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: description of a learning curve. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218:1130-1140. [PMID: 24698488 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.02.014]

Laparoscopic vs robot-assisted gastrectomy in gastric cancer patients with prior abdominal surgery: a propensity-matched analysis

No studies have compared the efficacy of laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) and robot-assisted gastrectomy (RG) for gastric cancer (GC) patients with a history of abdominal surgery (HAS). This is the first study in this field to identify complication-related factors and compare survival outcomes using propensity score matching (PSM) and a competing risk model (CRM). A retrospective cohort study was conducted on GC patients with HAS who underwent radical LG or RG. PSM was applied to achieve baseline balance. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify factors independently associated with complications. CRM adjusted by inverse probability of censoring weighting (IPCW) was used to analyze overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and disease-free survival (DFS) across different TNM stages. PSM with a 3:1 ratio ensured baseline balance while minimizing sample loss (LG n = 87, RG n = 29). RG was associated with a significantly longer surgery duration but a lower incidence of overall and Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade ≥ 2 complications. Multivariate analysis identified RG (OR, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.01-0.15), surgery duration (OR, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.00-1.01), and lymphadenectomy extent (OR, 95% CI: 2.81, 1.16-7.25) as independent factors associated with overall complications. Likewise, RG (OR, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.01-0.38), surgery duration (OR, 95% CI: 1.01, 1.00-1.02), and tumor size (OR, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.00-1.04) were independently associated with CD grade ≥ 2 complications. Kaplan-Meier analyses based on IPCW-adjusted CRM showed no significant differences in OS, CSS, and DFS between RG and LG across TNM stages. RG may efficiently reduce complications compared to LG but offers no survival benefit, suggesting a potential advantage in perioperative safety for GC patients with HAS.

Structured surgical training in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) increases textbook outcome-a risk-adjusted learning curve

BACKGROUND

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex surgical procedure that has become a cornerstone in the management of esophageal cancer. This study aims to delineate the learning curve associated with MIE and its impact on patient outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 191 patients who underwent MIE between 2015 and 2022. The cohort was divided into two groups according to the level of competence: Trainer (n = 100) and Trainee (n = 91). Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and surgical parameters were examined. RA-CUSUM methodology was employed to monitor patient outcomes, adjusting for variations in risk profiles using varying-coefficient logistic regression models to establish the MIE proficiency learning curve.

RESULTS

The trainee achieved competence in terms of operative time within 47 cases, following risk adjustment. Similarly, the learning curve in terms of major complications was completed after the 55th consecutive case. The LC was completed in terms of increased incidence of TO achievement in the trainee group after 83 cases (Trainer vs. Trainee, 27.00% vs. 40.66%, p = 0.046). Anastomotic leakage (Trainer vs. Trainee, 10.00% vs. 7.69% (p = 0.575)) could be identified with consistent rates for both trainer and trainee during the observational period. Pulmonary complications accounted for the majority of complications. After a follow-up of 2 years, no effect of the learning curve on overall (p = 0.436) or disease-free (p = 0.305) survival could be concluded, indicating consistent quality and patient safety during the surgical training.

CONCLUSIONS

While technical competence can be achieved after approximately 55 cases, achievement of 'textbook outcome' (TO) requires 83 cases. The findings demonstrate that structured surgical training can progress in tandem while maintaining oncological safety for patients. While technical competence is crucial, the ultimate goal should be achieving a TO.

Minimally invasive vs open vs hybrid esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal carcinoma has emerged as the contemporary alternative to conventional laparoscopic minimally invasive (LMIE), hybrid (HE) and open (OE) surgical approaches. No single study has compared all four approaches with a view to postoperative outcomes. A systematic search of electronic databases was undertaken. A network meta-analysis was performed as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-network meta-analysis guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed using R and Shiny. Seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 1063 patients were included. Overall, 32.9% of patients underwent OE (350/1063), 11.0% underwent HE (117/1063), 34.0% of patients underwent LMIE (361/1063), and 22.1% of patients underwent RAMIE (235/1063). OE had the lowest anastomotic leak rate 7.7% (27/350), while LMIE had the lowest pulmonary 10.8% (39/361), cardiac 0.56% (1/177) complications, re-intervention rates 5.08% (12/236), 90-day mortality 1.05% (2/191), and shortest length of hospital stay (mean 11.25 days). RAMIE displayed the lowest 30-day mortality rate at 0.80% (2/250). There was a significant increase in pulmonary complications for those undergoing OE (OR 3.63 [95% confidence interval: 1.4-9.77]) when compared to RAMIE. LMIE is a safe and feasible option for esophagectomy when compared to OE and HE. The upcoming RCTs will provide further data to make a more robust interrogation of the surgical outcomes following RAMIE compared to conventional open surgery to determine equipoise or superiority of each approach as the era of minimally invasive esophagectomy continues to evolve (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews Registration: CRD42023438790).

Recurrence and Survival After Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Ensure Study

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of operative approach [open (OE), hybrid minimally invasive (HMIE), and total minimally invasive (TMIE) esophagectomy] on operative and oncologic outcomes for patients treated with curative intent for esophageal and junctional cancer.

BACKGROUND

The optimum oncologic surgical approach to esophageal and junctional cancer is unclear.

METHODS

This secondary analysis of the European multicenter ENSURE study includes patients undergoing curative-intent esophagectomy for cancer between 2009 and 2015 across 20 high-volume centers. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and the incidence and location of disease recurrence. Secondary endpoints included among others R0 resection rate, lymph node yield, and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

In total, 3199 patients were included. Of these, 55% underwent OE, 17% HMIE, and 29% TMIE. DFS was independently increased post-TMIE [hazard ratio (HR): 0.86 (95% CI: 0.76-0.98), P = 0.022] compared with OE. Multivariable regression demonstrated no difference in absolute locoregional recurrence risk according to the operative approach [HMIE vs OE, odds ratio (OR): 0.79, P = 0.257; TMIE vs OE, OR: 0.84, P = 0.243]. The probability of systemic recurrence was independently increased post-HMIE (OR: 2.07, P = 0.031), but not TMIE (OR: 0.86, P = 0.508). R0 resection rates ( P = 0.005) and nodal yield ( P < 0.001) were independently increased after TMIE, but not HMIE ( P = 0.424; P = 0.512) compared with OE. OS was independently improved following both HMIE (HR: 0.79, P = 0.009) and TMIE (HR: 0.82, P = 0.003) as compared with OE.

CONCLUSION

In this European multicenter study, TMIE was associated with improved surgical quality and DFS, whereas both TMIE and HMIE were associated with improved OS as compared with OE for esophageal cancer.

Evolving Perspectives on Esophagectomy Care: Clinical Update

Recent changes in perioperative care have led to new perspectives and important advances that have helped to improve outcomes among patients treated with esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Minimally invasive surgery for gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: Current evidence and future perspectives

Minimally invasive surgery is increasingly indicated in the management of malignant disease. Although oesophagectomy is a difficult operation, with a long learning curve, there is actually a shift towards the laparoscopic/thoracoscopic/ robotic approach, due to the advantages of visualization, surgeon comfort (robotic surgery) and the possibility of the whole team to see the operation as well as and the operating surgeon. Although currently there are still many controversial topics, about the surgical treatment of patients with gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) adenocarcinoma, such as the type of open or minimally invasive surgical approach, the type of oesophago-gastric resection, the type of lymph node dissection and others, the minimally invasive approach has proven to be a way to reduce postoperative complications of resection, especially by decreasing pulmonary complications. The implementation of new technologies allowed the widening of the range of indications for this type of surgical approach. The short-term and long-term results, as well as the benefits for the patient - reduced surgical trauma, quick and easy recovery - offer this type of surgical treatment the premises for future development. This article reviews the updates and perspectives on the minimally invasive approach for GOJ adenocarcinoma.

Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus thoracoscopic-assisted Mckeown esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Thoracoscopic-assisted and robot-assisted Mckeown esophagectomy are currently two common surgical methods, but there is no clear statement on the advantages and disadvantages of the two.

METHODS

This study conducted a single-centre retrospective analysis of esophageal cancer patients diagnosed and treated at Lanzhou University Second Hospital from 1 February 2020 to 31 July 2022. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 126 patients were finally included in the RAM group and 169 patients in the TAM group.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the RAM and TAM groups in the number of lymph node dissections, operative time, the length of stay in the intensive care unit after surgery, the incidence of hoarseness, postoperative pulmonary complications, surgery-related complications, use of opioids after surgery, the length of postoperative hospital stay, and 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

RAM is a minimally invasive alternative to TAM and has similar short-term oncological efficacy.

Short-term outcome of totally minimally invasive versus hybrid minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy

OBJECTIVES

For resectable esophageal cancer, the choice of total minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE) or hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term clinical outcomes of TMIE and HMIE under the Ivor-Lewis procedure.

METHODS

The data of 145 patients diagnosed with middle or lower esophageal cancer who underwent radical Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University between January 2018 and December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The short-term outcomes such as complications during surgery or within 30 days after surgery and postoperative pain were analyzed.

RESULTS

All patients were divided into TMIE group (75 patients) and HMIE group (70 patients). No significant difference was observed in the baseline characteristics of the two groups. TMIE was associated with less blood loss than the HMIE group (p < 0.05). A total of 54 (37.2%) patients had postoperative complications. Although the two groups were statistically similar in the incidence of major complications, patients in the HMIE group were more likely to have pneumonia compared with those in the TMIE group. The numeric rating scale for pain was significantly higher in the HMIE group (p = 0.002) and more patients required an additional opioid analgesia after esophagectomy (p = 0.282).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, according to perioperative outcomes, TMIE can benefit patients better than HMIE.

Effect of gastric ischemic conditioning prior to esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Ischemia at the anastomotic site is thought to be a protagonist in the development of anastomosis-related complications while different strategies to overcome this problem have been reported. Gastric ischemic conditioning (GIC) prior to esophagectomy has been described with this intent. Evaluate the effect of GIC on anastomotic complications after esophagectomy. Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed were investigated up to March 31st, 2023. We considered articles that appraised short-term outcomes after GIC vs. no GIC in patients undergoing esophagectomy. Anastomotic leak (AL), anastomotic stricture (AS), and gastric conduit necrosis (GCN) were primary outcomes. Risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as pooled effect size measures, whereas 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were used to calculate related inference. Fourteen studies (1760 patients) were included. Of those, 732 (41.6%) underwent GIC, while 1028 (58.4%) underwent one-step esophagectomy. Compared with no GIC, GIC was related to a reduced RR for AL (R RR = 0.63; 95% CI 0.47-0.86; p < 0.01) and AS (RR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.29-0.91; p = 0.02), whereas no differences were found for GCN (RR = 0.56; 95% CI 0.19-1.61; p = 0.28). Postoperative pneumonia (RR = 1.09; p = 0.99), overall complications (RR = 0.87; p = 0.19), operative time (SMD - 0.58; p = 0.07), hospital stay (SMD 0.66; p = 0.09), and 30-day mortality (RR = 0.69; p = 0.22) were comparable. GIC prior to esophagectomy seems associated with a reduced risk for AL and AS. Further studies are necessary to identify the subset of patients who can benefit from this procedure, the optimal technique, and the timing of GIC prior to esophagectomy.

Exploring the learning curve in minimally invasive esophagectomy: a systematic review

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been shown to be superior to open esophagectomy with reduced morbidity, mortality, and comparable lymph node (LN) harvest. However, MIE is technically challenging. This study aims to perform a pooled analysis on the number of cases required to surmount the learning curve (LC), i.e. NLC in MIE. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for articles from inception to June 2022. Inclusion criteria were articles that reported LC in video-assisted MIE (VAMIE) and/or robot-assisted MIE (RAMIE). Poisson means (95% confidence interval [CI]) was used to determine NLC. Negative binomial regression was used for comparative analysis. There were 41 articles with 45 data sets (n = 7755 patients). The majority of tumors were located in the lower esophagus or gastroesophageal junction (66.7%, n = 3962/5939). The majority of data sets on VAMIE (n = 16/26, 61.5%) used arbitrary analysis, while the majority of data sets (n = 14/19, 73.7%) on RAMIE used cumulative sum control chart analysis. The most common outcomes reported were overall operating time (n = 30/45) and anastomotic leak (n = 28/45). Twenty-four data sets (53.3%) reported on LN harvest. The overall NLC was 34.6 (95% CI: 30.4-39.2), 68.5 (95% CI: 64.9-72.4), 27.5 (95% CI: 24.3-30.9), and 35.9 (95% CI: 32.1-40.2) for hybrid VAMIE, total VAMIE, hybrid RAMIE, and total RAMIE, respectively. NLC was significantly lower for total RAMIE compared to total VAMIE (incidence rate ratio: 0.52, P = 0.032). Studies reporting NLC in MIE are heterogeneous. Further studies should clearly define prior surgical experiences and assess long-term oncological outcomes using non-arbitrary analysis.

Implementation of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: learning curve of a single high-volume center

Open esophagectomy is considered to be the main surgical procedure in the world for esophageal cancer treatment. Implementing a new surgical technique is associated with learning curve morbidity. The objective of this study is to determine the learning curve based on anastomotic leakage (AL) after implementing minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MI-ILE) in January 2015. All 257 patients who underwent MI-ILE in a single high-volume center between January 2015 and December 2020 were retrospectively included in this study. The learning curve was evaluated using the standard CUSUM analysis with an expected AL rate of 11%. Secondary outcome parameters were postoperative complications, textbook outcome, and lymph node yield divided by the year of operation. Hierarchical binary logistic regression analysis was used to check for potential confounding variables. The CUSUM analysis showed a learning curve of 179 cases. The mean AL rate decreased from 33.3% in 2015 to 9.5% in 2020 (P = 0.007). There was an increase in the mean lymph node yield from 21 in 2018 to 28 in 2019 (P < 0.001) and textbook outcome from 37.3% in 2015 to 66.7% in 2020 (P = 0.005). A newly implemented MI-ILE has a learning curve of 179 patients based on a reference AL rate of 11% using the CUSUM method. Whether future generation surgeons will show similar learning curve numbers, implicating continuous development of different introduction programs of new techniques, will have to be the focus of future research.

Overall morbidity after total minimally invasive keyhole oesophagectomy versus hybrid oesophagectomy (the MICkey trial): study protocol for a multicentre randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal cancer (EC) is the sixth leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Oesophageal resection is the only curative treatment option for EC which is frequently performed via an abdominal and right thoracic approach (Ivor-Lewis operation). This 2-cavity operation is associated with a high risk of major complications. To reduce postoperative morbidity, several minimally invasive techniques have been developed that can be broadly classified into either hybrid oesophagectomy (HYBRID-E) via laparoscopic/robotic abdominal and open thoracic surgery or total minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIN-E). Both, HYBIRD-E and MIN-E, compare favourable to open oesophagectomy. However, there is still an evidence gap comparing HYBRID-E with MIN-E with regard to postoperative morbidity.

METHODS

The MICkey trial is a multicentre randomized controlled superiority trial with two parallel study groups. A total of 152 patients with oesophageal cancer scheduled for elective oesophagectomy will be randomly assigned 1:1 to the control group (HYBRID-E) or to the intervention group (MIN-E). The primary endpoint will be overall postoperative morbidity assessed via the comprehensive complication index (CCI) within 30 days after surgery. Specific perioperative parameters, as well as patient-reported and oncological outcomes, will be analysed as secondary outcomes.

DISCUSSION

The MICkey trial will address the yet unanswered question whether the total minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIN-E) is superior to the HYBRID-E procedure regarding overall postoperative morbidity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DRKS00027927 U1111-1277-0214. Registered on 4th July 2022.

Learning curve for inflatable mediastinoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted esophagectomy

OBJECTIVE

To identify the morbidity that is associated with the learning curve of inflatable mediastinoscopic and laparoscopic-assisted esophagectomy (IMLE), and investigate the strategies to ride out the early period.

METHODS

Our study included a retrospective series of 108 consecutive patients undergoing IMLE by a single surgeon with advanced training in minimally invasive esophageal surgery in independent practice at high-volume tertiary center from July 2017 to November 2020. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) method was used to analyze the learning curve. Patients were stratified into two groups in chronological order, defining the surgeon's early (Group 1: the first 27 cases) and late experience (Group 2: the next 81 cases). Intraoperative characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 108 patients were included. Three patients converted into thoracoscopic surgery. The number of patients with postoperative pulmonary infection was 16 (14.8%), and vocal cord palsy had occurred in 12 patients (11.1%). One patient died within 90 days after surgery. CUSUM plots revealed decreasing total operative time, thoracic procedure time, abdominal procedure time, assistant-adjustment time after patients 27, 17, 26, and 35, respectively.

CONCLUSION

IMLE is technically feasible, in terms of perioperative outcomes, for using as a radical surgery for thoracic esophageal cancer. For a surgeon experienced in minimally invasive esophageal surgery, experience of 27 cases is required to gain early proficiency of IMLE.

Esophagectomy-prevention of complications-tips and tricks for the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative stage

Esophagectomy still remains the mainstay of treatment for localized esophageal cancer. Many progresses have been made in the technique of esophagectomy in the last decades but the overall morbidity for this operation remains formidable. Postoperative complication and mortality rate after esophagectomy are significant; anastomotic leak has an incidence of 11,4%. The occurrence of a complication is a significant negative prognostic factor for long term survival and is also linked to longer postoperative stay, a lower quality of life, increased hospital costs. Preventing the occurrence of postoperative morbidity and reducing associated postoperative mortality rate is a major goal for surgeons experienced in resective esophageal surgery. Many details of pre, intra and postoperative care for patients undergoing esophagectomy need to be shared among the professionals taking care of these patients (oncologists, dieticians, physiotherapists, surgeons, nurses, anesthesiologists, gastroenterologists) in order to improve the short and long term clinical results.

Semiprone thoracoscopic approach during totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy seems to be beneficial

Minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy (MIE) is widely accepted as a surgical treatment of resectable esophageal cancer. Aim of this paper is to describe the surgical details of our standardized MIE technique and its safety. We also evaluate the esophageal mobilization in semiprone compared to the left lateral position. A retrospective analysis of 141 consecutive patients who underwent Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy for cancer, from February 2016 to September 2021, was conducted. All the procedures were performed by totally thoraco-laparoscopic with an intrathoracic end-to-side circular stapled anastomosis. Thoracic phase was performed in left lateral position (LLP-group, n=47) followed by a semiprone position (SP-group, n=94). The intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were prospectively collected and analyzed. The procedure was completed without intraoperative complication in 94.68% of cases in SP-group and in 93.62% of cases in LLP-group (P=0.99). The total operative time and thoracic operative time were significantly shorter in SP-group (P=0.0096; P=0.009). No statistically significant differences were detected in postoperative outcomes between the groups, except for anastomotic strictures (higher in LLP-group, P=0.02) and intensive care unit stay (longer in LLP-group, P=00.1). No reoperation was needed in any cases. Surgical radicality was comparable; the median of harvested lymph nodes was significantly higher in SP-group (P<0.0001). The present semiprone technique of thoraco-laparoscopic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy is safe and feasible but may also provide some advantages in terms of lymph nodes harvested and total operation time.

Linear- versus circular-stapled esophagogastric anastomosis during esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different techniques have been described for esophagogastric anastomosis. Over the past decades, surgeons have been improving anastomotic techniques with a gradual shift from hand-sewn to stapled anastomosis. Nowadays, circular-stapled (CS) and linear-stapled (LS) anastomosis are commonly used during esophagectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched up to June 2022. The included studies evaluated short-term outcomes for LS vs. CS anastomosis in patients undergoing esophagectomy for cancer. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak (AL) and stricture (AS). Risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used as pooled effect size measures whereas 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were used to assess relative inference.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies (2861 patients) were included. Overall, 1371 (47.9%) underwent CS while 1490 (52.1%) LS. Compared to CS, LS was associated with a significantly reduced RR for AL (RR = 0.70; 95% CI 0.54-0.91; p < 0.01) and AS (RR = 0.32; 95% CI 0.20-0.51; p < 0.0001). Stratified subgroup analysis according to the level of anastomosis (cervical and thoracic) still shows a tendency toward reduced risk for LS. No differences were found for pneumonia (RR 0.78; p = 0.12), reflux esophagitis (RR 0.74; p = 0.36), operative time (SMD -0.25; p = 0.16), hospital length of stay (SMD 0.13; p = 0.51), and 30-day mortality (RR 1.26; p = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

LS anastomosis seems associated with a tendency toward a reduced risk for AL and AS. Although surgeon's own training and experience might direct the choice of esophagogastric anastomosis, our meta-analysis encourages the use of LS anastomosis.

Factors influencing quality of lymphadenectomy in minimally invasive esophagectomy: a US-based analysis

NCCN guidelines suggest that at least 15 lymph nodes (LN) should be evaluated at the time of esophagectomy to consider the lymphadenectomy 'adequate'. Despite these guidelines, this may not always be achieved in practice. The purpose of this study was to determine factors associated with adequate lymphadenectomy among patients receiving minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Patients receiving MIE in the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2016 were identified. Patients with metastatic disease were excluded. The primary endpoint was adequate lymphadenectomy, defined as >15 or greater LN evaluated. Factors associated with adequate lymphadenectomy and overall survival were evaluated in univariable and multivariable analyses. Categorical variables were assessed using chi-squared, and continuous variables were assessed with rank-sum test. Survival was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A total of 6,539 patients underwent MIE between 2010 and 2016 (5,024 thoracoscopic-laparoscopic MIE and 1,515 robotic-assisted MIE). A total of 3,527 patients (53.9%) received adequate lymphadenectomy. Receiving MIE at an academic center (odds ratio [OR] 1.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-1.63, P < 0.001), institutional volume of MIE (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.008-1.011, P < 0.001), and presence of clinical nodal disease (OR 1.17, 95%CI 1.02-1.33, P = 0.025) were associated with adequate lymphadenectomy. Patients with >15 LN removed had increased overall survival (46.6 vs. 41.5 months, P < 0.001). Adequate lymphadenectomy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.77, 95%CI 0.71-0.85, P < 0.001), receiving surgery at an academic center (HR 0.87, 95%CI 0.78-0.96, P = 0.007) and private insurance status (HR 0.88, 95%CI 0.81-0.98, P = 0.02) were independently associated with improved survival. Nearly half of patients receiving MIE do not receive adequate lymphadenectomy as defined by NCCN guidelines. Receiving MIE at an academic center with high procedural volume and the presence of nodal disease were independently associated with adequate lymphadenectomy. Adequate lymphadenectomy was associated with improved survival. These findings suggest that providers performing esophagectomy should follow guideline-based recommendations for lymphadenectomy.

Ten years of IRCAD, Barretos, SP, Brazil

Minimally invasive surgery represented a significant milestone in modern surgery; however, continuous innovation and the emergence of new technologies pose new challenges in terms of surgical learning curves since new interventions are associated with increased surgical complexity and a higher risk of complications. For this reason, surgeons are aware of the beneficial effects of "learning before doing" and the importance of safely implementing new surgical procedures in order to obtain better patient outcomes. Considered the largest Latin American training center in minimally invasive surgery, IRCAD Barretos, São Paulo, Brazil, makes it possible to acquire surgical skills through training in different and the most complex areas of medicine, providing the experience of real and simulated situations, with focus on innovation. The center possesses state-of-the-art infrastructure and technology, with a very high-level teaching staff and an affectionate and hospitable reception. Since its inauguration, in 2011, the center has already qualified numerous professionals and has placed the country in a privileged position in terms of surgical knowledge. The present article describes the activities developed over these ten years of the institute in Brazil as the largest training center for surgeons of the continent in order to address the importance of surgical skills training.

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 minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer training curriculum-a worldwide Delphi consensus study

BACKGROUND

Structured training protocols can safely improve skills prior initiating complex surgical procedures such as robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). As no consensus on a training curriculum for RAMIE has been established so far it is our aim to define a protocol for RAMIE with the Delphi consensus methodology.

METHODS

Fourteen worldwide RAMIE experts were defined and were enrolled in this Delphi consensus project. An expert panel was created and three Delphi rounds were performed starting December 2019. Items required for RAMIE included, but were not limited to, virtual reality simulation, wet-lab training, proctoring, and continued monitoring and education. After rating performed by the experts, consensus was defined when a Cronbach alpha of ≥0.80 was reached. If ≥80% of the committee reached a consensus an item was seen as fundamental.

RESULTS

All Delphi rounds were completed by 12-14 (86-100%) participants. After three rounds analyzing our 49-item questionnaire, 40 items reached consensus for a training curriculum of RAMIE.

CONCLUSION

The core principles for RAMIE training were defined. This curriculum may lead to a wider adoption of RAMIE and a reduction in time to reach proficiency.

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy within the prospective multicenter German da Vinci Xi registry trial

Abstract

Purpose

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has become one standard approach for the operative treatment of esophageal tumors at specialized centers. Here, we report the results of a prospective multicenter registry for standardized RAMIE.

Methods

The German da Vinci Xi registry trial included all consecutive patients who underwent RAMIE at five tertiary university centers between Oct 17, 2017, and Jun 5, 2020. RAMIE was performed according to a standard technique using an intrathoracic circular stapled esophagogastrostomy.

Results

A total of 220 patients were included. The median age was 64 years. Total minimally invasive RAMIE was accomplished in 85.9%; hybrid resection with robotic-assisted thoracic approach was accomplished in an additional 11.4%. A circular stapler size of ≥28 mm was used in 84%, and the median blood loss and operative time were 200 (IQR: 80–400) ml and 425 (IQR: 335–527) min, respectively. The rate of anastomotic leakage was 13.2% (n=29), whereas the two centers with >70 cases each had rates of 7.0% and 12.0%. Pneumonia occurred in 19.5% of patients, and the 90-day mortality was 3.6%. Cumulative sum analysis of the operative time indicated the end of the learning curve after 22 cases.

Conclusions

High-quality multicenter registry data confirm that RAMIE is a safe procedure and can be reproduced with acceptable leak rates in a multicenter setting. The learning curve is comparably low for experienced robotic surgeons.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00423-022-02520-w.

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging for prevention of anastomotic leak in totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging is an emerging technology that might help decreasing anastomotic leakage (AL) rates. The aim of this study was to determine the usefulness of ICG fluorescence imaging for the prevention of AL after minimally invasive esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of the MEDLINE and Cochrane databases was performed to identify all articles on totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Studies were then divided into two groups based on the use or not of ICG for perfusion assessment. Primary outcome was anastomotic leak. Secondary outcomes included operative time, ICG-related adverse reactions, and mortality rate. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the overall weighted proportion and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for main outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 3,171 patients were included for analysis: 381 (12%) with intraoperative ICG fluorescence imaging and 2,790 (88%) without ICG. Mean patients' age and proportion of males were similar between groups. Mean operative time was also similar between both groups (ICG: 354.8 vs. No-ICG: 354.1 minutes, P = 0.52). Mean ICG dose was 12 mg (5-21 mg). No ICG-related adverse reactions were reported. AL rate was 9% (95% CI, 5-17%) and 9% (95% CI, 7-12%) in the ICG and No-ICG groups, respectively. The risk of AL was similar between groups (odds ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.53-1.28, P = 0.45). Mortality was 3% (95% CI, 1-9%) in patients with ICG and 2% (95% CI, 2-3%) in those without ICG. Median length of hospital stay was also similar between groups (ICG: 13.6 vs. No-ICG: 11.2 days, P = 0.29).

CONCLUSION

The use of ICG fluorescence imaging for perfusion assessment does not seem to reduce AL rates in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy with intrathoracic anastomosis.

Surgical outcomes after totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A transthoracic esophagectomy is associated with high rates of morbidity. Minimally invasive esophagectomy has emerged to decrease such morbidity. The aim of this study was to accurately determine surgical outcomes after totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy (TMIE).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify original articles analyzing patients who underwent TMIE. Main outcomes included overall morbidity, major morbidity, pneumonia, arrhythmia, anastomotic leak, chyle leak, and mortality. A meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the overall weighted proportion and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for each analyzed outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 5619 patients were included for analysis; 4781 (85.1%) underwent a laparoscopic/thoracoscopic esophagectomy and 838 (14.9%) a robotic-assisted esophagectomy. Mean age of patients was 63.5 (55-67) years and 75.8% were male. Overall morbidity and major morbidity rates were 39% (95% CI, 33%-45%) and 20% (95% CI, 13%-28%), respectively. Postoperative pneumonia and arrhythmia rates were 10% (95% CI, 8%-13%) and 12% (95% CI, 8%-17%), respectively. Anastomotic leak rate across studies was 8% (95% CI, 6%-10%). Chyle leak rate was 3% (95% CI, 2%-5%). Mortality rate was 2% (95% CI, 2%-2%). Median ICU stay and length of hospital stay were 2 (1-4) and 11.2 (7-20) days, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy is a challenging procedure with high morbidity rates. Strategies to enhance postoperative outcomes after this operation are still needed.

Learning curve for robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

This study aimed to demonstrate the learning curve of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). A retrospective analysis of the first 124 consecutive patients who underwent RAMIE with intrathoracic anastomosis (Ivor Lewis) by a single surgeon between May 2015 and August 2020 was performed. An risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) analysis was applied to generate a learning curve of RAMIE considering the major complication rate, which reflected the technical proficiency. The overall 30-day morbidity rate was 38.7%, while the major complication rate was 25.8%. The learning curve was divided into two phases based on the RA-CUSUM analysis: phase I, the initial learning phase (cases 1-51) and phase II, the proficiency phase (cases 52-124). As we compared the proficiency phase with the initial learning phase, significantly decreased trends were observed in relation to the major complication rate (37.3% vs. 18.7%, P = 0.017), total operation time (330.9 ± 55.6 vs. 267.3 ± 39.1 minutes, P < 0.001), and length of hospitalization (10 [IQR, 9-14] days vs. 9 [IQR, 8-11] days, P = 0.034). In conclusion, the learning curve of RAMIE consisted of two phases, and at least 51 cases were required to gain technical proficiency.

INFLUENCE OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE LAPAROSCOPIC EXPERIENCE SKILLS ON ROBOTIC SURGERY DEXTERITY

Background:

It is unclear if there is a natural transition from laparoscopic to robotic surgery with transfer of abilities.

Aim:

To measure the performance and learning of basic robotic tasks in a simulator of individuals with different surgical background.

Methods:

Three groups were tested for robotic dexterity: a) experts in laparoscopic surgery (n=6); b) experts in open surgery (n=6); and c) non-medical subjects (n=4). All individuals were aged between 40-50 years. Five repetitions of four different simulated tasks were performed: spatial vision, bimanual coordination, hand-foot-eye coordination and motor skill.

Results:

Experts in laparoscopic surgery performed similar to non-medical individuals and better than experts in open surgery in three out of four tasks. All groups improved performance with repetition.

Conclusion:

Experts in laparoscopic surgery performed better than other groups but almost equally to non-medical individuals. Experts in open surgery had worst results. All groups improved performance with repetition.

Diabetes Adversely Influences Postoperative Outcomes After Oesophagectomy: An Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes is a recognised risk for several chronic and acute illnesses, including increased complications in surgery for oesophageal cancer. Our primary aim is to determine the impact of diabetes on postoperative surgical and medical complications after oesophagectomy.

METHODS

All oesophagectomies for malignancy as reflected in the 2016-2018 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) datasets were extracted and analysed. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes used were 1) open procedures (43107, 43108, 43112, 43113, 43116, 43117, 43118, 43121, 43122, and 43123) and 2) hybrid procedures (43186, 43287, and 43288). Logistic regression models examined associations between diabetic status and adverse outcomes. The associations were adjusted for sex, race, age group, operation year, CPT code, body mass index (BMI), smoking, congestive heart failure, antihypertensives, renal failure, and dyspnoea.

RESULTS

Two thousand five hundred and thirty-eight oesophagectomies were identified. 86.45% (n=2,194) underwent open procedures and 13.55% (n=344) had hybrid procedures. There were 177 insulin-dependent diabetics (IDDM) and 320 (12.61%) non-insulin-dependent diabetics (NIDDM). 84.14% were male and 77.74% were Caucasian. 89.48% of the patients were between 50 and 79 years of age. 40.27% experienced postoperative complications. Medical complications (odds ratio [OR]: 1.7, p-value: 0.002), surgical complications (OR: 1.9, p-value: <0.001), wound complications (OR: 2.9, p-value: <0.001), and anastomotic leaks (OR: 2.4, p-value: <0.001) were more common in diabetic patients. Subgroup analysis showed that in hybrid procedures, there is a statistically significant increase in the OR of surgical complications (OR: 3.61, p-value: 0.05), medical complications (OR: 3.76, p-value: 0.04), and anastomotic leak (OR: 3.49, p-value: 0.27) in IDDM as compared to NIDDM.

CONCLUSION

Insulin-dependent diabetes doubles the risk of all major complications compared to nondiabetics. When considering surgical approach and diabetic status (IDDM vs nondiabetics, NIDDM vs nondiabetics), the risk of complications further doubles for hybrid oesophagectomies compared to open procedures.

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic-thoracoscopic technique. Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence comparing conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (CMIE) via laparoscopy and thoracoscopy with robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is scarce. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare surgical outcomes after CMIE and RAMIE with an intrathoracic anastomosis.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify original articles analyzing outcomes after CMIE and RAMIE. Main surgical outcomes included operative time, intraoperative blood loss, anastomotic leak rates, pneumonia, overall morbidity, length of stay (LOS), and 30-day mortality. Oncologic outcomes included lymph node yield and R0 resections rates. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 6,249 patients were included for analysis; 5,275 (84%) underwent CMIE and 974 (16%) RAMIE. Robotic esophagectomy had longer operative time and less intraoperative blood loss. Anastomotic leakage rates were similar with both approaches. Patients undergoing RAMIE had significantly lower rates of postoperative pneumonia (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35-0.61, P < .0001) and overall morbidity (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58-0.79, P < .0001). Median LOS was similar in both procedures (RAMIE: 12.1 versus CMIE: 11.9 days, P = .64). Similar mortality rates were found after RAMIE and CMIE (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.34-1.38, P = .29). Lymph node yield was similar in both procedures, but RAMIE was associated with higher rates of R0 resection (OR 2.84, 95% CI 1.53-5.26, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing robotic esophagectomy have less intraoperative blood loss, lower rates of postoperative pneumonia, reduced overall morbidity, and higher rates of R0 resections, as compared with those undergoing a laparoscopic-thoracoscopic esophageal resection.

Learning curves in minimally invasive esophagectomy: A systematic review and evaluation of benchmarking parameters

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive techniques are increasingly used in the treatment of esophageal cancer. The learning curve for minimally invasive esophagectomy is variable and can impact patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to review the current evidence on learning curves in minimally invasive esophagectomy and identify which parameters are used for benchmarking.

METHODS

A search of the major reference databases (PubMed, Medline, Cochrane) was performed with no time limits up to February 2020. Results were screened in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were included if an assessment of the learning curve was reported on, regardless of which (if any) statistical method was used.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies comprising 3,741 patients were included. Twenty-two studies reported on a combination of thoracoscopic, hybrid, and total minimally invasive esophagectomy, 6 studies reported robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy alone, and 1 study evaluated both robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy and thoracoscopic esophagectomies. Operating time was the most frequently used parameter to determine learning curve progression (23/39 studies), with number of resected lymph nodes, morbidity, and blood loss also frequently used. Learning curves were found to plateau at 7 to 60 cases for thoracoscopic esophagectomy, 12 to 175 cases for total and thoracoscopic/hybrid esophagectomy, and 9 to 85 cases for robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy.

CONCLUSION

Multiple parameters are employed to gauge minimally invasive esophagectomy learning curve progression. However, there are no validated or approved sets of outcomes. Further work is required to determine the optimum parameters that should be used to ensure best patient outcomes and required length of proctoring.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy learning curves with different types of background experience

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex procedure with learning associated morbidity. The aim was to evaluate the learning curve for MIE focusing on short-term outcomes in two settings: (I) experienced MIE surgeon in new hospital (Hospital 1); (II) surgeons experienced with open esophagectomy and minimally invasive surrogate surgery (Hospital 2).

METHODS

In Hospital 1 and Hospital 2, on intent-to-treat basis number of MIEs were 132 and 57, respectively. The primary outcomes were major complications and anastomosis leaks. Secondary outcomes were operative time, blood loss, lymph node yield, hospital stay and 1-year mortality. Length of learning curves were analyzed with risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) method.

RESULTS

In Hospital 1, major complication and anastomosis leak rates were 9.8% and 4.5%, 22.8% and 12.3% in Hospital 2, respectively. In Hospital 1, complication and leak rates remained stable. In Hospital 2, improvement occurred after 34 cases in major complications and 29 cases in leaks. Of secondary outcomes, improvements were seen in Hospital 1 in operative time after 61, blood loss after 86, lymph node yield after 52, hospital stay after 19 and 1-year mortality after 24 cases. In Hospital 2, improvement occurred in operative time after 30, blood loss after 15, lymph node yield after 45, hospital stay after 50 and 1-year mortality after 15 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this study, learning phase of the individual surgeon determines the outcomes of MIE, not the institutional learning phase.

Intrathoracic vs Cervical Anastomosis After Totally or Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Transthoracic minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly performed as part of curative multimodality treatment. There appears to be no robust evidence on the preferred location of the anastomosis after transthoracic MIE.

Objective

To compare an intrathoracic with a cervical anastomosis in a randomized clinical trial.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This open, multicenter randomized clinical superiority trial was performed at 9 Dutch high-volume hospitals. Patients with midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer planned for curative resection were included. Data collection occurred from April 2016 through February 2020.

Intervention

Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to transthoracic MIE with intrathoracic or cervical anastomosis.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was anastomotic leakage requiring endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes were overall anastomotic leak rate, other postoperative complications, length of stay, mortality, and quality of life.

Results

Two hundred sixty-two patients were randomized, and 245 were eligible for analysis. Anastomotic leakage necessitating reintervention occurred in 15 of 122 patients with intrathoracic anastomosis (12.3%) and in 39 of 123 patients with cervical anastomosis (31.7%; risk difference, -19.4% [95% CI, -29.5% to -9.3%]). Overall anastomotic leak rate was 12.3% in the intrathoracic anastomosis group and 34.1% in the cervical anastomosis group (risk difference, -21.9% [95% CI, -32.1% to -11.6%]). Intensive care unit length of stay, mortality rates, and overall quality of life were comparable between groups, but intrathoracic anastomosis was associated with fewer severe complications (risk difference, -11.3% [-20.4% to -2.2%]), lower incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (risk difference, -7.3% [95% CI, -12.1% to -2.5%]), and better quality of life in 3 subdomains (mean differences: dysphagia, -12.2 [95% CI, -19.6 to -4.7]; problems of choking when swallowing, -10.3 [95% CI, -16.4 to 4.2]; trouble with talking, -15.3 [95% CI, -22.9 to -7.7]).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial, intrathoracic anastomosis resulted in better outcome for patients treated with transthoracic MIE for midesophageal to distal esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer.

Trial Registration

Trialregister.nl Identifier: NL4183 (NTR4333).

Side-to-side esophagogastric anastomosis for minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: operative technique and short-term outcomes

Totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (TMIIL) is associated to lower rate of post-operative complication, decreases length of hospital stay and improves quality of life compared to open approach. Nevertheless, adaptation of TMIIL still proceeds at slow pace, mainly due to the difficulty to perform the intra-thoracic anastomosis and heterogeneity of surgical techniques. We present our experience with TMIIL utilizing a stapled side-to-side anastomosis. We retrospectively evaluated 36 patients who underwent a planned TMIIL from January 2017 to September 2020. Esophagogastric anastomoses were performed using a 3-cm linear-stapled side-to-side technique. General features, operative techniques, pathology data and short-term outcomes were analyzed. The median operative time was 365 min (ranging from 240 to 480 min) with a median blood loss of 100 ml (50–1000 ml). The median overall length of stay was 13 (7–64) days and in-hospital mortality rate was 2.8%. Two patients (5.6%) had an anastomotic leak, without need for operative intervention and another patient developed an anastomotic stricture, resolved with a single endoscopic dilation. Chylothorax occurred in three patients; two of these required a surgical intervention. Pulmonary complications occurred in six patients (16.7%). Based on Comprehensive Complications Index (CCI), median values of complications were 27.9 (ranging from 20.9 to 100). The results of our study suggest that TMIIL with a 3-cm linear-stapled anastomosis seems to be safe and effective, with low rates of post-operative anastomotic leak and stricture.

Does robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy have superiority over thoraco-laparoscopic minimally invasive oesophagectomy in lymph node dissection?

Although robotic techniques have been used for oesophagectomy for many years, whether robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy (RAMIE) can actually improve outcomes and surpass thoraco-laparoscopic minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIE) in the success rate of lymph node dissection remains to be empirically demonstrated. Therefore, we performed this systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies to systematically compare the effect of lymph node dissection and the incidence of vocal cord palsy between RAMIE and MIE. The PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to December 1, 2019, for case-control studies that compared RAMIE with MIE. Thirteen articles were included, with a total of 1,749 patients with esophageal cancer, including 866 patients in the RAMIE group and 883 patients in the MIE group. RAMIE yielded significantly larger numbers of total dissected lymph nodes (WMD = 1.985; 95% CI, 0.448-3.523; P = 0.011) and abdominal lymph nodes (WMD = 1.686; 95% CI, 0.420-2.951; P = 0.009) as well as lymph nodes along RLN (WMD = 0.729; 95% CI, 0.348-1.109; P < 0.001) than MIE. Additionally, RAMIE could significantly decrease estimated blood loss (WMD = -11.208; 95% CI, -19.358 to -3.058; P = 0.007) and the incidence of vocal cord palsy (OR = 0.624; 95% CI, 0.411-0.947; P = 0.027) compared to MIE. Compared with MIE, RAMIE resulted in a higher total lymph node yield and a higher lymph node yield in the abdomen and along RLN, along with reduced blood loss during surgery and the incidence of vocal cord palsy. Therefore, RAMIE could be considered to be a standard treatment, with less blood loss, lower incidence of vocal cord palsy, and more radical lymph node dissection, exhibiting superiority over MIE.

Drivers of Cost Associated With Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

In this era of value-based healthcare, costs must be measured alongside patient outcomes to prioritize quality improvement and inform performance-based reimbursement strategies. We sought to identify drivers of costs for patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer from December 2008 to March 2020 were included. Our institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons database was merged with financial data to determine inpatient direct accounting costs in 2020 US dollars for total, operative (surgery and anesthesia), and postoperative (intensive care, floor, radiology, laboratory, etc) services. A supervised machine learning quantitative method, the lasso estimator with 10-fold cross-validation, was applied to identify predictors of costs.

RESULTS

In the study cohort (n = 240) most had ≥cT2 pathology (82%), adenocarcinoma histology (90%), and received neoadjuvant therapy (78%). Mean length of stay was 8.00 days (SD, 4.13) with 45% inpatient morbidity rate and no deaths. The largest proportions of cost were from the operating room (30%), inpatient floor (30%), and postanesthesia care/intensive care units (20%). Preoperative predictors of operative costs were age (-5.18% per decade [95% confidence interval {CI}, -9.95 to -0.27], P = .039), body mass index ≥ 30 (+12.9% [95% CI, 0.00-27.5], P = .050), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (-3.24% per 10% forced expiratory volume in 1 second [95% CI, -5.80 to -0.61], P = .017), and year of surgery (+2.55% [95% CI, 0.97-4.15], P = .002). Predictors of postoperative costs were postoperative renal failure (+91.6% [95% CI, 9.93-233.8], P = .022), respiratory failure (+414.6% [95% CI, 158.7-923.6], P < .001), pneumonia (+136.1% [95% CI, 71.1-225.8], P < .001), and reoperation (+60.5% [95% CI, 21.5-111.9], P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Costs associated with minimally invasive esophagectomy are driven by preoperative risk factors and postoperative outcomes. These data enable surgeons and policymakers to reduce cost variation, improve quality through standardization, and ultimately provide greater value to patients.

Minimally Invasive Versus open AbdominoThoracic Esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma (MIVATE) - study protocol for a randomized controlled trial DRKS00016773

BACKGROUND

The only curative treatment for most esophageal cancers is radical esophagectomy. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) aims to reduce postoperative morbidity, but is not yet widely established. Linear stapled anastomosis is a promising technique for MIE because it is quite feasible even without robotic assistance. The aim of the present study is to compare total MIE with linear stapled anastomosis to open esophagectomy (OE) with circular stapled anastomosis with special regard to postoperative morbidity in an expertise-based randomized controlled trial (RCT).

METHODS/DESIGN

This superiority RCT compares MIE with linear stapled anastomosis (intervention) to OE with circular stapled anastomosis (control) for Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy. It was initiated in February 2019, and recruitment is expected to last for 3 years. For inclusion, patients must be 18 years of age or more with a resectable primary malignancy in the distal esophagus. Participants with tumor localizations above the azygos vein, metastasis, or infiltration into adjacent tissue will be excluded. In an expertise-based approach, the allocated treatment will only be carried out by the single most experienced surgeon of the surgical center for each respective technique. The sample size was calculated with 20 participants per group for the primary endpoint postoperative morbidity according to comprehensive complication index (CCI) within 30 postoperative days. Secondary endpoints include anastomotic insufficiency, pulmonary complications, other intra- and postoperative outcome parameters such as estimated blood loss, operative time, length of stay, short-term oncologic endpoints, adherence to a standardized fast-track protocol, postoperative pain, and postoperative recovery (QoR-15). Quality of life (SF-36, CAT EORTC QLQ-C30, CAT EORTC QLQ-OES18) and oncological outcomes are evaluated with 60 months follow-up.

DISCUSSION

MIVATE is the first RCT to compare OE with circular stapled anastomosis to total MIE with linear stapled anastomosis exclusively for intrathoracic anastomosis. The expertise-based approach limits bias due to heterogeneity of surgical expertise. The use of a dedicated fast-track protocol in both OE and MIE will shed light on the role of the access strategy alone in this setting. The findings of this study will serve to define which approach has the best perioperative outcome for patients requiring esophagectomy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00016773 . Registered on 18 February 2019.

Supraclavicular Approach for Neurogenic Thoracic Outlet Syndrome: Description of a Learning Curve

BACKGROUND

The supraclavicular exposure represents an alternative approach for thoracic outlet decompression in neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome with unique access to neurovascular structures. We aimed to evaluate the learning curve for this approach and associated patient outcomes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing first-time, unilateral, supraclavicular thoracic outlet decompression for neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome were included. Cumulative-sum and linear-spline-regression analyses were used to determine the operative time learning curve. Patients were consecutively organized into early (learning phase) and late (competency) cohorts. Primary endpoints were the operative time learning curve operation number and association of this learning curve on differences in self-reported postoperative symptomatic improvement between early and late cohorts, adjusting for American Society of Anesthesiology classification, body mass index, previous treatment (opioid/neuropathic medication/botulinum-injection), and length of stay.

RESULTS

Among 114 patients, learning curve analyses showed decreasing operative times, plateauing at the 51st operation (ß = -1.63, 95% confidence interval [-2.30, -0.95], P < .001). No periprocedural differences existed between early (operations 1-50) and late (operations 51-114) cohorts. Self-reported 90-day outcomes were similar in early and late cohorts (odds ratio [OR]: 1.60 [0.65, 3.95], P = .31). Mediators of poor self-reported outcomes included increasing American Society of Anesthesiology classification (OR 0.21 [0.08, 0.54], P = .001), failed preoperative botulinum injection (OR 0.15 [0.03, 0.65], P = .01), and increased length of stay (OR 0.40 [0.22, 0.73], P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

The learning curve for supraclavicular thoracic outlet decompression in neurogenic thoracic outlet syndrome occurred after 51 operations with a trend towards improved 90-day self-reported outcomes from the early to late phases. These findings, along with mediators of poorer outcomes, may aid surgeons in adopting a new approach and counseling patients on expected outcomes.

Routine intraoperative jejunostomy placement and minimally invasive oesophagectomy: an unnecessary step?†

OBJECTIVES

Adequate nutrition is challenging after oesophagectomy. A jejunostomy is commonly placed during oesophagectomy for nutritional support. However, some patients develop jejunostomy-related complications and the benefit over oral nutrition alone is unclear. This study aims to assess jejunostomy-related complications and the impact of intraoperative jejunostomy placement on weight loss and perioperative outcomes in patients with oesophageal cancer treated with minimally invasive Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy (MIE).

METHODS

From a prospectively maintained database, patients were identified who underwent MIE with gastric reconstruction. Between 2007 and 2016, a jejunostomy was routinely placed during MIE. After 2016, a jejunostomy was not utilized. Postoperative feeding was performed according to a standardized protocol and similar for both groups. The primary outcomes were jejunostomy-related complications, relative weight loss at 3 and 6 months postoperative and perioperative outcomes, including anastomotic leak, pneumonia and length of stay, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 188 patients were included, of whom 135 patients (72%) received a jejunostomy. Ten patients (7.4%) developed jejunostomy-related complications, of whom 30% developed more than 1 complication. There was no significant difference in weight loss between groups at 3 months (P = 0.73) and 6 months postoperatively (P = 0.68) and in perioperative outcomes (P-value >0.999, P = 0.591 and P = 0.513, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a routine intraoperative jejunostomy appears to be an unnecessary step in patients undergoing MIE. Intraoperative jejunostomy placement is associated with complications without improving weight loss or perioperative outcomes. Its use should be tailored to individual patient characteristics. Early oral nutrition allows patients to maintain an adequate nutritional status.

Analysis of the learning curve for artificial pneumothorax during an endoscopic McKeown-type resection of oesophageal carcinoma

Background

Due to the large trauma caused by conventional open surgery, minimally invasive esophageal cancer surgery has been gradually carried out, and there is no report on the learning curve for artificial pneumothorax during an endoscopic McKeown-type resection of oesophageal carcinoma.

Methods

Forty cases of McKeown resection of oesophageal carcinoma with artificial pneumothorax that were completed by the same operator between December 2017 and August 2019 were analysed. The patients were divided into four groups (A, B, C, D) of 10 cases each according to the order of operation. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, total lymph nodes and left recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph nodes resection, conversion rate, complication rate and hospitalization time were compared between the four groups.

Results

The operation time of the four groups were as follows: A, 243.2±44.1 min; B, 265.0±59.3 min; C, 255.8±41.7 min; D, 201.0±16.2 min, there were significant difference in terms of the operation time between group A, group B, group C and group D (P<0.05). Moreover, groups A and C all differed significantly from group D in the number of dissected left recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph nodes. However, no significant inter-group differences were observed in the number of trans-laparotomy and trans-thoracotomy, number of dissected total lymph nodes, intraoperative blood loss, incidence of postoperative complications and postoperative length of hospital stay (P>0.05).

Conclusions

Artificial pneumothorax during an endoscopic McKeown-type resection of oesophageal carcinoma required a learning curve of approximately 30 cases.

Conversion to open surgery during minimally invasive esophagectomy portends worse short-term outcomes: an analysis of the National Cancer Database

OBJECTIVE

The objectives were to determine factors associated with conversion to open surgery in patients with esophageal cancer who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE, including laparo-thoracoscopic and robotic) and the impact of conversion to open surgery on patient outcomes.

METHODS

We included patients from the National Cancer Database with esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer who underwent MIE from 2010 to 2015. Patient-, tumor-, and facility-related characteristics as well as short-term and oncologic outcomes were compared between patients who were converted to open surgery and those who underwent successful MIE without conversion to open surgery. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to analyze risk factors for conversion to open surgery from attempted MIE.

RESULTS

7306 patients underwent attempted MIE. Of these patients, 82 of 1487 (5.2%) robotic-assisted esophagectomies were converted to open, compared to 691 of 5737 (12.0%) laparo-thoracoscopic esophagectomies (p < 0.001). Conversion rates decreased significantly over the study period (ptrend = 0.010). Patient age, tumor size, and nodal involvement were independently associated with conversion. Facility minimally invasive cumulative volume and robotic approach were associated with decreased conversion rates. Patients whose MIEs were converted had increased 90-day mortality [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.49; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.10, 2.02], prolonged hospital stay (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.17, 1.66), and higher rates of unplanned readmission (OR 1.67; 95% CI 1.27, 2.20). No significant differences were found in surgical margins or number of lymph nodes harvested.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing attempted MIE requiring conversion to open surgery had significantly worse short-term outcomes including postoperative mortality. Patient factors and hospital experience contribute to conversion rates. These findings should inform surgeons and patients considering esophagectomy for cancer.

The Complications between Different Routes of Reconstruction after Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

The main purpose of this study was to compare the postoperative complications caused by surgical reconstruction via either retrosternal (RS) or prevertebral (PV) routes in thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively screened the perioperative data in total 59 patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy in time period from January 2016 to January 2018. All the patients were subgrouped into two cohorts according to the surgical routes being taken: the RS route group (28 patients) and the PV route group (31 patients). The perioperative data including operation and hospitalization time and surgical complications were comparatively analyzed.

RESULTS

The surgical procedure in all patients was successful and no case of death occurred during perioperative stage in both groups. Notably, patients in the RS group had significantly lower propensity of pneumonia than patients in the PV group (p < 0.05). However, comparative analysis revealed almost an identical time for both operative process and postoperative hospitalization. And there was no statistical significance in the rate of anastomotic leakage and stricture as well as other complications (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

RS and PV paths are both safe and effective routes that yielded similar postoperative complications. Reconstruction after thoracoscopic and laparoscopic esophagectomy via the RS route had lower propensity of pneumonia than PV route.

Strategies to prevent anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy and gastric conduit reconstruction

Background

Surgery remains the cornerstone of esophageal cancer treatment but is burdened with high procedure-related morbidity. Anastomotic leakage as the most important surgical complication after esophagectomy is a key indicator for quality in surgical outcome research.

Purpose

The aim of this narrative review is to assess and summarize the current knowledge on prevention of anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy and to provide orientation for the reader in this challenging field of surgery.

Conclusions

There are various strategies to reduce postoperative morbidity and to prevent anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy, including adequate patient selection and preparation, and many technical-surgical and anesthesiological details. The scientific evidence regarding those strategies is highly heterogeneous, ranging from expert’s recommendations to randomized controlled trials. This review is intended to serve as an empirical guideline to improve the clinical management of patients undergoing esophagectomy with a special focus on anastomotic leakage prevention.

Long-term oncological outcomes following completely minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy

Open esophagectomy (OE) for esophageal and gastroesophageal junctional cancers is associated with high morbidity. Completely minimally invasive esophagectomy (CMIE) techniques have evolved over the last two decades and significantly reduce surgical trauma compared to open surgery. Despite this, long-term oncological outcomes following CMIE compared to OE remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare overall 5-year survival (OFS) and disease-free 5-year survival (DFFS) between CMIE and OE. It was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive electronic literature search from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted. The PROSPERO database was also searched for studies comparing OFS and DFFS between CMIE and OE. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality for included studies. Overall, seven studies (containing 949 patients: 527 OE and 422 CMIE) were identified from screening. On pooled meta-analysis, there was no significant difference in OFS or DFFS between CMIE and OE cohorts ([odds ratio 1.12; 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.48; P = 0.41] and [odds ratio 1.34; 95% CI: 0.81-2.22; P = 0.25] respectively). Sensitivity and subgroup analysis with high-quality studies, three highest sample sized studies, and three most recent studies also revealed no difference in long-term oncological outcomes between the two operative groups. This review demonstrates long-term oncological outcomes following CMIE appear equivalent to OE based on amalgamation of existing published literature. Limited high-level evidence comparing OFS and DFFS between CMIE and OE exists. Further research with a randomized controlled trial is required to clinically validate these findings.

Transition from open to minimally invasive en bloc esophagectomy can be achieved without compromising surgical quality

BACKGROUND

En bloc esophagectomy results in higher lymph node (LN) retrieval than standard esophagectomy. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has gained traction due to improved short-term outcomes, but many large series report LN yields well below the international benchmark of 23. We sought to determine if an established approach to open en bloc resection can be safely transferred to MIE using LN yield as a quality benchmark.

METHODS

An open approach to en bloc esophagectomy (OE) was established over 5 years (~ 300 cases) before en bloc MIE was introduced in 2010. Patients undergoing curative-intent en bloc Ivor-Lewis and McKeown esophagectomy for cancer from 2010 to 2019 by a single surgeon with formal minimally invasive surgery training were identified from a prospectively collected database. Mann-Whitney U and χ² tests and cumulative sum analysis were used for statistical analysis. "Failure" was defined as LN yield less than AJCC's 8th edition guidelines: 10 LNs for pT1 cancers, 20 for pT2 and 30 for pT3-4.

RESULTS

A total of 269 esophageal resections met inclusion criteria [193(72%) OE; 76(28%) MIE]. Age, sex, BMI and comorbidities were comparable between groups. Tumors were larger and more often locally advanced in OE. Median LN retrieval was sufficient by international standards in both groups [OE:34(27-46); MIE:28(22-39); p = 0.01]. "Failures" occurred in 33(17%) of OE and 12(16%) MIE cases (p = 0.63). No learning effect was observed for LN yield. R0 resection rate was comparable [OE:191(99%); MIE:73(96%); p = 0.90]. Operative time was longer for MIE [275(246-300)] than OE [240(210-270) minutes], p < 0.0001, while estimated blood loss (OE:350(250-500)mL; MIE:300(200-400)mL; p = 0.02] and length of stay [OE:8(6-13); MIE7(6-9) days; p = 0.02] were higher for OE. Morbidity and mortality were comparable between groups and LN yield did not impact survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Under appropriate conditions, an established approach to open en bloc esophagectomy can be safely transferred to MIE without compromising surgical quality.

Totally minimally invasive esophagectomy versus hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is increasingly performed for the treatment of esophageal cancer, but it is unclear whether hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) or totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (TMIE) should be preferred. The objective of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of studies comparing HMIE with TMIE. A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Articles comparing HMIE and TMIE were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for critical appraisal of methodological quality. The primary outcome was pneumonia. Sensitivity analysis was performed by analyzing outcome for open chest hybrid MIE versus total TMIE and open abdomen MIE versus TMIE separately. Therefore, subgroup analysis was performed for laparoscopy-assisted HMIE versus TMIE, thoracoscopy-assisted HMIE versus TMIE, Ivor Lewis HMIE versus Ivor Lewis TMIE, and McKeown HMIE versus McKeown TMIE. There were no randomized controlled trials. Twenty-nine studies with a total of 3732 patients were included. Studies had a low to moderate risk of bias. In the main analysis, the pooled incidence of pneumonia was 19.0% after HMIE and 9.8% after TMIE which was not significantly different between the groups (RR: 1.46, 95% CI: 0.97-2.20). TMIE was associated with a lower incidence of wound infections (RR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.13-2.90) and less blood loss (SMD: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.34-1.22) but with longer operative time (SMD:-0.33, 95% CI: -0.59--0.08). In subgroup analysis, laparoscopy-assisted HMIE was associated with a higher lymph node count than TMIE, and Ivor Lewis HMIE was associated with a lower anastomotic leakage rate than Ivor Lewis TMIE. In general, TMIE was associated with moderately lower morbidity compared to HMIE, but randomized controlled evidence is lacking. The higher leakage rate and lower lymph node count that was found after TMIE in sensitivity analysis indicate that TMIE can also have disadvantages. The findings of this meta-analysis should be considered carefully by surgeons when moving from HMIE to TMIE.

Postoperative complications of minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has been performed increasingly more frequently for the treatment of esophageal cancer, ever since it was first described in 1992. However, the incidence of postoperative complications of MIE has not yet been well-characterized, because (a) there are few reports of studies with a sufficient sample size, (b) a variety of minimally invasive surgical techniques are used, and (c) there are few reports in which an established system for classifying the severity of complications is examined. According to an analysis performed by the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group, the most common complications of MIE are pneumonia, arrhythmia, anastomotic leakage, conduit necrosis, chylothorax, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. Therefore, we decided to focus on these complications. We selected 48 out of 1245 reports of studies (a) that included more than 50 patients each, (b) in which the esophagectomy technique used was clearly described, and (c) in which the complications were adequately described. The overall incidences of the postoperative complications of MIE for esophageal cancer were analyzed according to the MIE technique adopted, that is, McKeown MIE, Ivor Lewis MIE, robotic-assisted McKeown MIE, robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis MIE, or mediastinoscopic transmediastinal esophagectomy. Pneumonia, arrhythmia, anastomotic leakage, and recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy occurred at an incidence rate of about 10% each; Ivor Lewis MIE was associated with a relatively low incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy. It is important to recognize that the incidences of complications of MIE are influenced by the MIE technique adopted and the extent of lymph node dissection.