Single-incision laparo-thoracoscopic minimally invasive oesophagectomy to treat oesophageal cancer†

Prognostication and optimal criteria of circumferential margin involvement for esophageal cancer after chemoradiation and esophagectomy

Purpose

Circumferential radial margin (CRM) involvement by tumor after resection for esophageal cancer has been suggested as a significant prognostic factor. However, the prognostic value of CRM involvement after surgery with neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of and survival outcomes in CRM involvement as defined by the Royal College of Pathologists (RCP) and the College of American Pathologists (CAP) for patients with esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant CCRT and esophagectomy.

Methods

A total of 299 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant CCRT followed by esophagectomy between 2006 and 2016 were enrolled in our study. The CRM status of the specimens obtained was determined pathologically according to both the CAP and RCP criteria. Survival analyses were performed and compared according to the two criteria.

Results

Positive CRM was found in 102 (34.1%) and 40 (13.3%) patients according to RCP and CAP criteria, respectively. The overall and progression-free survival rates were significantly lower in the CRM-positive group than in the CRM-negative group according to both the RCP and CAP criteria. However, under multivariate analysis, in addition to pathological T and N staging of the tumor, only CAP-defined CRM positivity was a significant prognostic factor with adjusted hazard ratios of 2.64 (1.56-4.46) and 2.25 (1.34-3.78) for overall and progression-free survival, respectively (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

In patients with esophageal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant CRT followed by esophagectomy, CAP-defined CRM positivity is an independent predictor of survival. Adjuvant therapy should be offered to patients with positive CRM.

The Long-Term Clinical Impact of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) for Advanced Esophageal Cancer Invading Aorta

Background

Advanced esophageal cancer invading the aorta is considered unsuitable for surgery with definitive chemotherapy or chemoradiation as the treatments of choice. In the current study, we evaluated the long-term clinical impact of combining thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) with multimodality treatment in caring for such patients.

Methods

We evaluated 48 patients who had advanced esophageal cancer with aortic invasion. The oncological outcome, including overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), after multimodality treatment with or without TEVAR is evaluated for these patients.

Results

Overall, 25/48 patients (52.1%) received a TEVAR procedure. There was no significant difference in OS (p = 0.223) between patients who did or did not receive TEVAR; however, patients who received TEVAR had significantly less local tumor recurrence (p = 0.020) and longer PFS (p = 0.019). This impact was most evident in patients who received both TEVAR and esophagectomy, with an incremental increase in hazard ratio (HR) for disease progression of 2.89 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86–9.96) and 4.37 (95% CI 1.33–14.33) observed under multivariable analysis, respectively, in comparison with patients who underwent only one or neither of these procedures (p = 0.005 for trend test).

Conclusion

TEVAR is a feasible procedure for esophageal cancers invading the aorta and can be used for curative-intent resection to improve local tumor control and PFS.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10081-3.

Robotic-assisted single-incision gastric mobilization for minimally invasive oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: preliminary results

OBJECTIVES

With the gradual acceptance of robotic-assisted surgery to treat oesophageal cancer and the application of a single-port approach in several abdominal procedures, we adopted a single-port technique in robotic-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy during the abdominal phase for gastric mobilization and abdominal lymph node dissection.

METHODS

Robotic-assisted oesophagectomy and mediastinal lymph node dissection in the chest were followed by robotic-assisted gastric mobilization and conduit creation with abdominal lymph node dissection, which were performed via a periumbilicus single incision. The oesophagogastrostomy was accomplished either in the chest (Ivor Lewis procedure) or neck (McKeown procedure) depending on the status of the proximal resection margin.

RESULTS

The procedure was successfully performed on 11 patients with oesophageal cancer from January 2017 to December 2018 in our institute. No surgical or in-hospital deaths occurred, though we had one case each of anastomotic leakage, pneumonia and hiatal hernia (9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic single-incision gastric mobilization for minimally invasive oesophagectomy for treating oesophageal cancer seems feasible. Its value in terms of perioperative outcome and long-term survival results awaits future evaluation.

Uniportal Thoracoscopic McKeown Esophagectomy

We performed the technique of uniportal thoracoscopic McKeown esophagectomy. The incision was located in the fourth intercostal space on the right axillary midline. The right recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph nodes were dissected. Four hemlocks were applied to clamp the proximal and distal ends of the aortic arch. The esophagus was suspended with purse-string at the level of the azygos vein arch to assist the dissection of the left recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph nodes. A silk thread was drawn out from the incision in order to remove the subcarinal lymph nodes. A thoracic drainage tube was placed at the back of the incision at the end.

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: past, present and future

Esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus is increasingly performed using minimally invasive techniques. After the introduction of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) in the early 1990's, robotic-assisted techniques followed after the turn of the millennium. The advent of robotic platforms has allowed the development of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) over the past 15 years. Although recent trials have shown superior peri-operative morbidity and quality of life compared to open esophagectomy, no randomized trials have compared RAMIE to conventional MIE. This paper summarizes the current literature on RAMIE and provides an overview of expected future developments in robotic surgery.

Single-Port Thoracoscopic Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND

This study was to explore the safety and feasibility of single-port thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

The patients were placed in left lateral prone position, and a 4-cm incision through the 4th-5th intercostal space was taken on the post-axillary line. Except for a surgical wound protector, no other special instruments were used for single-port technique. The 10-mm camera and two or three thoracoscopic instruments were used for the thoracic phase. Mobilization of stomach with celiac lymph node dissection was performed via multiple-port laparoscopic approach. Cervical double-layered anastomosis was completed by hand-sewn technique.

RESULTS

A total of twenty-eight patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent the single-port thoracoscopic surgery. All of the patients underwent R0 resection. The median time taken for thoracic phase and total operation time were 126 min (range, 121-153) and the 253 min (range, 197-309), respectively. The median number of resected thoracic lymph nodes was 16 (range, 12-24). There were no deaths or severe postoperative complications in this study, with no conversion of minimally invasive surgery to open procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Our preliminary results demonstrate that this technique is safe and feasible for treating esophageal cancer within an acceptable length of operation time, which does not compromise the surgical radicality.

Application of single-port video-assisted thoracoscope in treating thoracic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma using McKeown approach

Objective:

This study aims to investigate the feasibility of single-port video-assisted thoracoscope (SPVATS) in treating thoracic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (TESCC) using McKeown approach.

Materials and Methods:

Totally 10 McKeown approach-based SPVATS surgeries (8 males and 2 females, aged 42–68 years) were carried out from January 2015 to December 2015 to treat TESCC, including one case in upper thoracic segment, 5 cases in median thoracic segment and 4 cases in inferior thoracic segment. All the cases were pathologically diagnosed as SCC pre-operatively. SPVATS was performed to free thoracic oesophagus and dissect the lymph nodes, and laparoscopy was performed to free stomach and to perform oesophagus-left gastric collum anastomosis.

Results:

All the patients were successfully completed SPVATS, with average thoracic surgery time as 150 min, intra-operative blood loss as 30–260 ml (average 90 ml), and post-operative hospital stay as 9–16 days (average 12 days).

Conclusions:

SPVATS was technically feasible and safe in treating TESCC using McKeown approach, with less trauma and rapid post-operative recovery, and hence, it could be used as a new surgical option for McKeown approach-based TESCC treatment.

Comparison of single- and multi-incision minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for treating esophageal cancer: a propensity-matched study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the perioperative outcome of minimally invasive (MIE) esophagectomy performed with a single- or a multi-incision in treating esophageal cancer.

METHOD

Patients with esophageal cancer who underwent MIE from 2006 to 2016 were evaluated. A 3-4-cm incision was created in both the thoracoscopic and the laparoscopic phases during the single-incision MIE procedures. A propensity-matched comparison was made between the two groups of patients.

RESULTS

We analyzed a total of 48 pairs of patients with propensity-matched from the cohort of 360 patients undergoing MIE during 2006-2015. There is no statistical difference in terms of postoperative ICU and hospital stay, number of dissected lymph nodes and presence of major surgical complications (anastomotic leakage and pulmonary complications) between the two groups of patients. The pain score one week after surgery was significantly lower in the single-incision group (p < 0.05). There was no surgical mortality in the single-incision MIE group.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive esophagectomy performed with a single-incision approach is feasible for treating patients with esophageal cancer, with a comparable perioperative outcome with that of multi-incision approaches. The postoperative pain one week after surgery was significantly reduced in patients undergoing single-incision MIE.

Global development and current evidence of uniportal thoracoscopic surgery

In the era of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), uniportal and single incision thoracoscopic surgeries are gaining popularity. The spectrum of uniportal VATS indications is now almost equal to that of conventional VATS. For example, successful uniportal sleeve lobectomy, rib segmental resection, and management of intraoperative bleeding have all been reported. According to published data in the English-language literature, more than 9,545 uniportal VATS have been performed to date, including 1,293 lobectomies, 1,024 procedures for pneumothorax, and 6,845 sympathectomies. Of the 192 articles discussing this topic, 35 were conducted in Spain, and there were an increasing number of publications from China, Korea, and other Asian countries. There were 41 technical and review articles, all of which provided an excellent foundation of surgical concept and skill learning. The benefits of uniportal VATS include better surgical geometry and cosmetics. Regarding postoperative outcomes, thirteen out of the 15 articles reviewed showed that uniportal VATS has similar or superior outcomes to conventional VATS. Most studies demonstrated that uniportal VATS produced less postoperative pain and paresthesia. In conclusion, uniportal VATS can produce excellent operative outcome, which is becoming a mature surgical approach in thoracic disease, supported by fast-accumulating and abundant experience.