Minimally invasive esophagectomy versus open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis

Risk factors for pneumonia after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective is to systematically gather relevant research to determine and quantify the risk factors and pooled prevalence for pneumonia after a radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer.

METHODS

The reporting procedures of this meta-analysis conformed to the PRISMA 2020. Chinese Wan Fang data, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Periodical Full-text Database (VIP), Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library from inception to January 20, 2024, were systematically searched for cohort or case-control studies that reported particular risk factors for pneumonia after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. The pooled prevalence of pneumonia was estimated alongside risk factor analysis. The quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale after the chosen studies had been screened and the data retrieved. RevMan 5.4 and R 4.4.2 were the program used to perform the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Our study included data from 20,840 individuals across 27 trials. The pooled prevalence of postoperative pneumonia was 11.0% (95% CI = 8.0% ~ 15.0%). Fifteen risk factors were statistically significant, according to pooled analyses. Several factors were identified to be strong risk factors, including smoking history (OR 2.71, 95% CI = 2.09 ~ 3.50, I2 = 26%), prolonged postoperative nasogastric tube retention (OR 2.25, 95% CI = 1.36-3.72, I2 = 63%), intraoperative bleeding ≥ 200 ml (OR 2.21, 95% CI = 1.15-4.24, I2 = 79%), diabetes mellitus (OR 4.58, 95% CI = 1.84-11.38, I2 = 96%), male gender (OR 3.56, 95% CI = 1.50-8.42, I2 = 0%), total gastrectomy (OR 2.59, 95% CI = 1.83-3.66, I2 = 0%), COPD (OR 4.72, 95% CI = 3.80-5.86, I2 = 0%), impaired respiratory function (OR 2.72, 95% CI = 1.58-4.69, I2 = 92%), D2 lymphadenectomy (OR 4.14, 95% CI = 2.29-7.49, I2 = 0%), perioperative blood transfusion (OR 4.21, 95% CI = 2.51-7.06, I2 = 90%), and hypertension (OR 2.21, 95% CI = 1.29-3.79, I2 = 0%). Moderate risk factors included excessive surgery duration (OR 1.51, 95% CI = 1.25-1.83, I2 = 90%), advanced age (OR 1.91, 95% CI = 1.42-2.58, I2 = 94%), nutritional status (OR 2.62, 95% CI = 1.55-4.44, I2 = 71%), and history of pulmonary disease (OR 1.61, 95% CI = 1.17-2.21, I2 = 79%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study identified 15 independent risk factors significantly associated with pneumonia after radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer, with a pooled prevalence of 11.0%. These findings emphasize the importance of targeted preventive strategies, including preoperative smoking cessation, nutritional interventions, blood glucose and blood pressure control, perioperative respiratory training, minimizing nasogastric tube retention time, and optimizing perioperative blood transfusion strategies. For high-risk patients, such as the elderly, those undergoing prolonged surgeries, experiencing excessive intraoperative blood loss, undergoing total gastrectomy, or receiving open surgery, close postoperative monitoring is essential. Early recognition of pneumonia signs and timely intervention can improve patient outcomes and reduce complications.

Fashioning esophagogastric anastomosis in robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: a multicenter experience

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study is to compare outcomes of the robotic hand-sewn, linear- and circular-stapled techniques performed to create an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis in patients who underwent Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent a planned Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy were retrospectively analysed from prospectively maintained databases. Only patients who underwent a robotic thoracic approach with the creation of an intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis were included in the study. Patients were divided into three groups: hand-sewn-, circular stapled-, and linear-stapled anastomosis group. Demographic information and surgery-related data were extracted. The primary outcome was the rate of anastomotic leakages (AL) in the three groups. Moreover, the rate of grade A, B and C anastomotic leakage were evaluated. In addition, patients of each group were divided in subgroups according to the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique.

RESULTS

Two hundred and thirty patients were enrolled in the study. No significant differences were found between the three groups about AL rate (p = 0.137). Considering the management of the AL for each of the three groups, no significant differences were found. Evaluating the correlation between AL rate and the characteristics of anastomotic fashioning technique, no significant differences were found.

CONCLUSIONS

No standardized anastomotic fashioning technique has yet been generally accepted. This study could be considered a call to perform ad hoc high-quality studies involving high-volume centers for upper gastrointestinal surgery to evaluate what is the most advantageous anastomotic technique.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

Three-staged minimally invasive esophagectomy with end-to-end esophago-gastric anastomosis for thoracic esophageal cancers: An experience from a low middle-income country

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer is on a steady rise and carries significant mortality and morbidity. Depending upon the clinical stage at presentation, either chemotherapy, radiotherapy with or without surgical resection is the treatments in practice. Traditionally, open esophagectomy was performed but over time, the importance of minimally invasive esophagectomy has been established. In this study, we aimed to report our data of totally minimally invasive esophagectomies performed for thoracic esophageal cancers in last four years.

METHODOLOGY

A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted at the Department of Upper GI Surgery, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi. All diagnosed cases of esophageal carcinoma undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy, from 2019 to 2022 were included in this study. Outcomes measured were operative time, intra operative complications, conversion rate to open, postoperative complications, number of lymph nodes harvested, margin clearance, in-hospital mortality and 90-days mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 53 cases were included in the study, the most prevalent histological type was squamous cell carcinoma 42(79.2%) as compared to adenocarcinoma 8(15.1%). Most common tumor site was lower thoracic esophagus (30-38 cm) in 20 (56.6%) cases. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy was given in all 53(100%) cases, whereas neo-adjuvant radiation therapy was offered to 49(92.5%) patients. There was a significant and favorable patient response to the neo-adjuvant treatment in 37(69.8%) cases, leading to a decrease in tumor size. Laparoscopic McKeown Esophagectomies were performed in 44 (83.0%) and 9(17.0%) were Robot-assisted Minimally Invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). Intraoperative injuries (i.e., lung parenchymal injury and bleeding) were reported in only 2(3.8%) patients. Post-operative complications were recorded in 12(22.6%) patients. Margin clearance was observed in 53 (100%) of the patients. The 90-day mortality rate was 3(5.7%), one due to bleeding and other two mortalities were due to COVID related respiratory complications.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive esophagectomy was found to be safe and feasible technique with encouraging results in terms of decreased intraoperative and post operative complications as well as achieving the standard oncological surgery with acceptable lymph node yield and margin clearance and in hospital and 90 days mortality.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American Society for Radiation Oncology Updated Clinical Practice Guidelines on Multimodality Therapy for Locally Advanced Cancer of the Esophagus or Gastroesophageal Junction

Outcomes for patients with esophageal cancer have improved over the last decade with the implementation of multimodality therapy. There are currently no comprehensive guidelines addressing multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer that have incorporated the input of surgeons, radiation oncologists, and medical oncologists. To address the need for multidisciplinary input in the management of esophageal cancer and to meet current best practices for clinical practice guidelines, the current guidelines were created as a collaboration between The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS), American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), and the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Physician representatives chose 8 key clinical questions pertinent to the care of patients with locally advanced, resectable thoracic esophageal cancer (excluding cervical location). A comprehensive literature review was performed identifying 227 articles that met the inclusion criteria covering the use of induction chemotherapy, chemotherapy vs chemoradiotherapy before surgery, optimal radiation dose, the value of esophagectomy, timing of esophagectomy, the approach and extent of lymphadenectomy, the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy, and the value of adjuvant therapy after resection. The relevant data were reviewed and voted on by the panel with 80% of the authors, with 75% agreement on class and level of evidence. These data were then complied into the guidelines document.

Stroke volume variation and dynamic arterial elastance predict fluid responsiveness even in thoracoscopic esophagectomy: a prospective observational study

PURPOSE

It remains unknown whether stroke volume variation (SVV), pulse pressure variation (PPV), and dynamic arterial elastance (Eadyn) are suitable for monitoring fluid management during thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) in the prone position with one-lung ventilation and artificial pneumothorax. Our study aimed to evaluate the accuracy of SVV, PVV, and Eadyn in predicting the fluid responsiveness in these patients.

METHODS

We recruited 24 patients who had undergone TE. Patients with a mean arterial blood pressure ≤ 65 mmHg received a 200-ml bolus of 6% hydroxyethyl starch over 10 min. Fluid responders showed the stroke volume index ≥ 15% 5 min after the fluid bolus. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated and area under the ROC curve (AUROC) was calculated.

RESULTS

We obtained 61 fluid bolus data points, of which 20 were responders and 41 were non-responders. The median SVV before the fluid bolus in responders was significantly higher than that in non-responders (18% [interquartile range (IQR) 13-21] vs. 12% [IQR 8-15], P = 0.001). Eadyn was significantly lower in responders than in non-responders (0.55 [IQR 0.45-0.78] vs. 0.91 [IQR 0.67-1.00], P < 0.001). There was no difference in the PPV between the groups. The AUROC was 0.76 for SVV (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.89, P = 0.001), 0.56 for PPV (95% CI 0.41-0.71, P = 0.44), and 0.82 for Eadyn (95% CI 0.69-0.95, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

SVV and Eadyn are reliable parameters for predicting fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing TE.

Controversies in the surgical management of esophageal adenocarcinoma

The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) has risen dramatically over the last decade. Over this same period, our understanding and treatments have been revolutionized. Just over a decade ago, the majority of patients with locally advanced esophageal cancer went directly to surgery and our overall survival was bleak. Our current strategy for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma is a multi-disciplinary approach. This approach consists of chemotherapy plus or minus radiation followed by surgical resection followed by adjuvant immunotherapy with the presence of any residual disease. Therefore, now more than ever, the goals of surgery are to minimize morbidity, provide aggressive local control and allow patients to receive to quickly recover so they can receive adjuvant systemic therapy. Surgery continues to play a crucial role in the multi-disciplinary approach to EAC. This review will highlight the on-going areas of controversy in surgical treatment. These controversies are around surgical selection, perioperative decision making and the role of surgery. Specifically, there are controversies in the type of surgical approach offered. This review will discuss the benefits of minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy. The indications for gastrectomy versus esophagectomy in patients with gastroesophageal junction EAC. Further, at the time of operation, there is still debate and on-going trials addressing the addition of a pyloric intervention. Lastly, as we push the limits of systemic therapy, there are those who may not even need a surgical resection. This review will cover the most recent data on selective esophageal resection and the concerns regarding this approach.

Complications of modern pancreaticoduodenectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In the past decades, the perioperative management of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) has undergone major changes worldwide. This review aimed to systematically determine the burden of complications of PD performed in the last 10 years.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review was conducted in PubMed for randomized controlled trials and observational studies reporting postoperative complications in at least 100 PDs from January 2010 to April 2020. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB2 tool for randomized studies and the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS). Pooled complication rates were estimated using random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was investigated by subgroup analysis and meta-regression.

RESULTS

A total of 20 randomized and 49 observational studies reporting 63 229 PDs were reviewed. Mean MINORS score showed a high risk of bias in non-randomized studies, while one quarter of the randomized studies were assessed to have high risk of bias. Pooled incidences of 30-day mortality, overall complications and serious complications were 1.7% (95% CI: 0.9%-2.9%; I2 = 95.4%), 54.7% (95% CI: 46.4%-62.8%; I2 = 99.4%) and 25.5% (95% CI: 21.8%-29.4%; I2= 92.9%), respectively. Clinically-relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula risk was 14.3% (95% CI: 12.4%-16.3%; I2 = 92.0%) and mean length of stay was 14.8 days (95% CI: 13.6-16.1; I2 = 99.3%). Meta-regression partially attributed the observed heterogeneity to the country of origin of the study, the study design and the American Society of Anesthesiologists class.

CONCLUSIONS

Pooled complication rates estimated in this study may be used to counsel patients scheduled to undergo a PD and to set benchmarks against which centers can audit their practice. However, cautious interpretation is necessary due to substantial heterogeneity.

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

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) was introduced as a further development of the conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy, aiming to further improve the high morbidity and mortality associated with open esophagectomy. We aimed to compare the outcomes between RAMIE and open esophagectomy, which remains a popular approach for resectable esophageal cancer. Ten studies meeting our inclusion criteria were identified, including five retrospective cohort, four prospective cohort, and one randomized controlled trial. RAMIE was associated with significantly lower rates of overall pulmonary complications (odds ratio (OR): 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI): [0.26, 0.56]), pneumonia (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: [0.26, 0.57]), atrial fibrillation (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: [0.29, 0.98]), and wound infections (OR: 0.20, 95% CI: [0.07, 0.57]) and resulted in less blood loss (weighted mean difference (WMD): -187.08 mL, 95% CI: [-283.81, -90.35]) and shorter hospital stays (WMD: -9.22 days, 95% CI: [-14.39, -4.06]) but longer operative times (WMD: 69.45 min, 95% CI: [34.39, 104.42]). No other statistically significant difference was observed regarding surgical and short-term oncological outcomes. Similar findings were observed when comparing totally robotic procedures only to OE. RAMIE is a safe and feasible procedure, resulting in decreased cardiopulmonary morbidity, wound infections, blood loss, and shorter hospital stays compared to open esophagectomy.

End-to-side circular stapled versus side-to-side linear stapled intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis following minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: comparison of short-term outcomes

PURPOSE

The search for the optimal procedure for creation of a safe gastroesophageal intrathoracic anastomosis with a lower risk of leakage in totally minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (TMIIL) is ongoing. In the present study, we compared the outcomes of end-to-side (with circular stapler [CS]) and side-to-side (with linear stapler [LS]) techniques for intrathoracic anastomosis during TMIIL performed in 2 European high-volume centers for upper gastrointestinal surgery. A propensity score method was used to compare the CS and LS groups.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated patients with lower esophageal cancer or Siewert type 1 or 2 esophagogastric junction carcinoma who underwent a planned TMIIL esophagectomy, performed from January 2017 to September 2020. The anastomosis was created by a semi-mechanical technique using a LS in one center and by a mechanical technique using a CS in the other center. General features, operative techniques, pathology data, and short-term outcomes were analyzed. Statistical evaluations were performed on the whole cohort, stratifying the analyses by risk strata factors identified with the propensity scores, and on a subgroup of patients matched by propensity score. The primary endpoint of the study was the rate of anastomotic leakage in the two groups. Secondary endpoints included rates of anastomotic stricture and overall postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Considering the whole population, 256 patients were included; of those, 220 received the anastomosis with a circular stapler (CS group), and 36 received the anastomosis with a linear stapler (LS group). No significant differences by group in terms of sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, and type of neoplasm were showed. The rate of anastomotic leakage did not differ in the two groups (9.6% CS vs. 5.6% LS, p = 0.438), as well as the rate of anastomotic stricture in the 3-month follow-up (0.9% CS vs. 2.8% LS, p = 0.367). The rate of chyle leakage and of pulmonary, cardiac, and infective complications was not significantly different in the groups. After propensity score matching, 72 patients were included in the analysis. The 2 obtained propensity score matched groups did not differ for any of the clinical and pathologic variables considered for the analysis, resulting in well-balanced cohorts. The results obtained on the whole population were confirmed in the matched groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of our study suggest that both techniques for esophagogastric anastomosis during TMIIL are feasible, safe, and effective, with comparable rates of postoperative anastomotic leakage and stricture.

Survival after minimally invasive vs. open radical nephrectomy for stage I and II renal cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

A recently reported phase III randomized trial comparing open and minimally invasive hysterectomy showed significantly higher rates of local recurrence after minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for cervical cancer. This raised concerns regarding patterns of recurrences and survival after MIS in general. This study aims to determine the effect of MIS on all-cause mortality among patients undergoing radical nephrectomy for Stage I and II renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

METHODS

We utilized the National Cancer Database to identify patients diagnosed with clinical stage I-II RCCs between 2010 and 2013. Patients for whom a laparoscopic or robotic radical nephrectomy was attempted were compared to patients who underwent open radical nephrectomy (ORN). Adjusted regression models with inverse probability propensity score weighting (IPW) were utilized to identify independent predictors of receiving MIS. All-cause mortality rates were compared using IPW survival functions and log-rank tests. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard models were fitted to determine independent predictors of OS.

RESULTS

27,642 patients were identified; 11,524 (41.7%) had MIS, while 16,118 (58.3%) had ORN. Kaplan-Meier survival curves in the IPW cohort showed significant OS advantage for patients who underwent MIS (p < 0.001). Furthermore, length of hospital stays (3 vs. 4 days), 30 day readmission rates (2.4 vs. 2.87%), 30 day (0.53 vs. 0.96%) and 90 day mortality rates (1.04 vs. 1.77%) were significantly higher in the ORN group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

MIS was associated with better OS outcomes compared to ORN for stage I and II RCC. In addition, MIS had lower post-operative readmission, 30- and 90 day mortality rates.

Robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoraco-laparoscopic McKeown's esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis of minimally invasive approaches

Minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer decreases overall complication rate and leads to faster postoperative recovery. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy is becoming more common. Its three-dimensional view and wristed instruments may provide advantages over traditional thoraco-laparoscopic techniques. There are limited studies comparing robotic and conventional thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy. This study aimed to evaluate short-term outcomes of robot-assisted McKeown esophagectomy (RAME) and video-assisted McKeown esophagectomy (VAME). All consecutive patients undergoing minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for middle and distal third esophageal cancer between January 2016 and December 2018 at our center were included in this study. Data on baseline characteristics, pathological data and short-term outcomes were collected in a dedicated database. Postoperative complications were defined as per recommendations of Esophagectomy Complications Consensus Group. Histopathologic assessment was performed as per College of American Pathologists guidelines. Propensity score matching was performed for comparison between RAME and VAME groups using age, gender, performance status, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, Charlson Index, tumor location, clinical tumor stage, and neoadjuvant treatment as covariates. A total of 74 patients were included, 25 of whom underwent RAME and 49 underwent VAME. Propensity score matching on 1:1 basis produced 25 pairs of patients, comparable in terms of baseline characteristics. Total operative time and estimated blood loss was similar between the two groups. Length of hospital stay was significantly lower in RAME group. Major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3A) were more common in VAME group, but not statistically significant. Median number of harvested lymph nodes and R0 resection rate did not differ in between the two groups. In our experience, robot-assisted McKeown esophagectomy was comparable to video-assisted McKeown esophagectomy in terms of safety, feasibility and oncologic adequacy. Use of the robot was associated with reduced hospital stay. Further randomized controlled studies with larger patient samples are needed to compare the two.

Operative Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy versus Open Esophagectomy for Resectable Esophageal Cancer

Background There is a recent rise in the incidence of esophageal carcinoma in India. Surgical resection with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiation is the current treatment modality of choice. Postoperative complications, especially pulmonary complications, affect many patients who undergo open esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) could reduce the pulmonary complications and reduce the postoperative stay.

Methodology We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 114 patients with esophageal cancer in the department of surgical oncology at a tertiary cancer center in South India between January 2019 and March 2020. We included patients with resectable cancer of middle or lower third of the esophagus, and gastroesophageal junction tumors (Siewert I). MIE was performed in 27 patients and 78 patients underwent open esophagectomy (OE). The primary outcome measured was postoperative complications of Clavien–Dindo grade II or higher within 30 days. Other outcomes measured include overall mortality within 30 days, intraoperative complications, operative duration and the length of hospital stay.

Results A postoperative complication rate of 18.5% was noted in the MIE group, compared with 41% in the OE group ( p = 0.034). Pulmonary complications were noted in 7.4% in the MIE group compared to 25.6% in the OE group ( p = 0.044). Postoperative mortality rates, intraoperative complications, and other nonpulmonary postoperative complications were almost similar with MIE as with open esophagectomy. Although the median operative time was more in the MIE group (260 minutes vs. 180 minutes; p < 0.0001), the median length of hospital stay was shorter in patients undergoing MIE (9 days vs. 12 days; p = 0.0001).

Conclusions We found that MIE resulted in lower incidence of postoperative complications, especially pulmonary complications. Although, MIE was associated with prolonged operative duration, it resulted in shorter hospital stay.

Early implementation of a perioperative nutrition support pathway for patients undergoing esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

Background

Unintentional weight loss and malnutrition are associated with poorer prognosis in patients with cancer. Risk of cancer‐associated malnutrition is highest among patients with esophageal cancer (EC) and has been repeatedly shown to be an independent risk factor for worse survival in these patients. Implementation of nutrition protocols may reduce postoperative weight loss and enhance recovery in these patients.

Methods

We retrospectively identified all patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for EC from January 2015 to August 2019 from a prospectively collected institutional database. Patients who underwent surgery after the implementation of this protocol (September 2017–August 2019) were compared with patients who underwent resection before protocol implementation (January 2015–July 2017). Patients undergoing surgery during the month of protocol initiation were excluded.

Results

Of the 404 patients included in our study, 217 were in the preprotocol group, and 187 were in the postprotocol group. Compared with the preprotocol group, there were significant reductions in length of hospital stay (p < 0.001), time to diet initiation (p < 0.001), time to feeding tube removal (p = 0.012), and postoperative weight loss (p = 0.002) in the postprotocol group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications, 30‐day readmission, or mortality rates between groups.

Conclusions

Results of the present study suggest a standardized perioperative nutrition protocol may prevent unintentional weight loss and improve postoperative outcomes in patients with EC undergoing resection.

Outcomes of robotic esophagectomy

Esophagectomy has long been considered the standard of care for early-stage (≤ T2N0) esophageal cancer. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), using a combined laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approach, was first performed in the 1990s and showed significant improvements over open approaches. Refinement of MIE arrived in the form of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) in 2004. MIE is a challenging procedure for which consensus on optimal technique is still elusive. Although nonrobotic MIE confers significant advantages over open approaches, MIE remains associated with stubbornly high rates of complications, including pneumonia, aspiration, arrhythmia, anastomotic leakage, surgical site infection, and vocal cord palsy. RAMIE was envisioned to improve operative-associated morbidity while achieving equivalent or superior oncologic outcomes to nonrobotic MIE. However, owing to RAMIE’s significant upfront costs, steep learning curve, and other requirements, adoption remains less than widespread and convincing evidence supporting its use from well-designed studies is lacking. In this review, we compare operative, oncologic, and quality-of-life outcomes between open esophagectomy, nonrobotic MIE, and RAMIE. Although RAMIE remains a relatively new and underexplored modality, several studies in the literature show that it is feasible and results in similar outcomes to other MIE approaches. Moreover, RAMIE has been associated with favorable patient satisfaction and quality of life.

Video-assisted mediastinoscopic and laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND

Mediastinoscopy was originally applied for lymph node biopsy and mediastinal tumor resection. Improved video imaging with spreadable working channels enabled mediastinoscopy for inspection and tissue biopsy in the superior mediastinum but it is rarely used in minimally invasive esophageal cancer surgery. In this prospective trial, the practicability and security of spreadable video-assisted mediastinoscopic combined with laparoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy (VAME) with video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (VATE) were compared.

METHODS

A total of 200 eligible patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma were randomly divided into VAME or VATE groups. Early postoperative outcomes and lymph node dissection between the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

The operation time was significantly shorter (164.3 ± 47.0 min vs. 265.4 ± 47.2 min, P < 0.001), the number of dissected lymph nodes was less (15.8 ± 4.5 vs. 20.3 ± 6.5, P < 0.001), and the intraoperative blood loss was also significantly reduced (94.7 ± 56.7 mL vs. 184.4 ± 65.2 mL, P < 0.001) in the VAME compared to the VATE group, respectively. The incidence of pneumonia was lower (7% vs. 29%; P < 0.001) and the length of hospital stay was shorter in the VAME group compared to the VATE group (18.0 ± 7.6 days vs. 23.2 ± 7.2, P < 0.001, respectively). The chyle leak incidence appeared to be lower in the VAME group but statistical significance was not reached (1% vs. 4%; P = 0.369). There were no differences in the incidence of anastomotic leakages and recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis between the groups. No 30-day mortality occurred in any of the cases.

CONCLUSION

VAME appears to be a practicable and secure method for esophagectomy but needs further proof of concept. Clinical registration number: Registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR1900022797.

Robotic Esophagectomy. A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes

Background: Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy is demonstrated to be related with a facilitation in thoracoscopic procedure. To give an update on the state of art of robotic esophagectomy for cancr a systematic review with meta-analysis has been performed. Methods: a search of the studies comparing robotic and laparoscopic or open esophagectomy was performed trough the medical libraries, with the search string "robotic and (oesophagus OR esophagus OR esophagectomy OR oesophagectomy)". Outcomes were: postoperative complications rate (anastomotic leakage, bleeding, wound infection, pneumonia, recurrent laryngeal nerves paralysis, chylotorax, mortality), intraoperative outcomes (mean blood loss, operative time and conversion), oncologic outcomes (harvested nodes, R0 resection, recurrence) and recovery outcomes (length of hospital stay). Results: Robotic approach is superior to open surgery in terms of blood loss p = 0.001, wound infection rate, p = 0.002, pneumonia rate, p = 0.030 and mean number of harvested nodes, p < 0.0001 and R0 resection rate, p = 0.043. Similarly, robotic approach is superior to conventional laparoscopy in terms of mean number of harvested nodes, p = 0.001 pneumonia rate, p = 0.003. Conclusions: robotic surgery could be considered superior to both open surgery and conventional laparoscopy. These encouraging results should promote the diffusion of the robotic surgery, with the creation of randomized trials to overcome selection bias.

Recommendations for Surveillance and Management of Recurrent Esophageal Cancer Following Endoscopic Therapies

With advancing endoscopic technology and screening protocols for Barrett disease, more patients are being diagnosed with early-stage esophageal cancer. These early-stage patients may be amendable to endoscopic therapies, such as endomucosal resection and ablation. These therapies may minimize morbidity, but the elevated risk of recurrence cannot be overlooked. This article reports outcomes and recommendations for surveillance and management of recurrent esophageal cancer following endoscopic therapies.

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.

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy the Standard of Care: Experience from a Tertiary Care Cancer Center from India

For localized esophageal cancer, esophageal resection remains the prime form of treatment but is a highly invasive procedure associated with prohibitive morbidity. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) by laparoscopic or thoracoscopic approach was therefore introduced to reduce surgical trauma and its associated morbidity. We thereby review our minimally invasive esophagectomy results with short- and long-term outcomes. From January 2010 through December 2016, 459 patients with carcinoma esophagus and gastro-esophageal junction undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The morbidity, mortality data with short- and long-term results of the procedure were studied. Patients were stratified into two arms based on the approach into minimally invasive transhiatal esophagectomy (MI-THE) and minimal invasive transthoracic esophagectomy TTE (MI-THE). Thirty days mortality in the whole cohort was 3.5% (2.5% in MI-THE vs. 5% in MI-TTE arm). Anastomotic leak rates (5 vs. 4.9%), median intensive care unit (ICU) stay (4 days), hospital stay (9 days), were similar between both the approaches. Major pulmonary complications were significantly higher in MI-TTE arm (18.9% vs 12.5%) (p 0.047). Cardiac, renal, conduit-related complication rates, vocal cord palsy, chyle leak, re-exploration, and late stricture rates were similar between the groups. The median number of nodes resected was higher in the MI-TTE arm (14 vs. 12) (p 0.002). R0 resection rate in the entire cohort was 89% (87.4% in MI-THE, 92% in MI-TTE arm p 0.12). The median overall survival and disease-free survival were also not different between MI-THE and MI-TTE arms (34 vs. 38 months, p 0.64) (24 vs. 36 months, p 0.67). Minimally invasive esophagectomy either by transhiatal or transthoracic approach is feasible and can be safely accomplished with a low morbidity and mortality and with satisfactory R0 resection rates, good nodal harvest, and acceptable long-term oncological outcomes.

Risk of chyle leak after robotic versus video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

We investigate the incidence and risk factors for post-operative outcomes including chyle leak following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE).

METHODS

Patients undergoing MIE from May 2016 until August 2020 were prospectively followed. Outcomes of robotic and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) esophagectomy were analyzed.

RESULTS

347 esophagectomies were performed: 70 cases were done robotically by 2 surgeons and 277 by VATS by 14 surgeons. Patients had similar demographics, surgical technique, length of stay (LOS), and re-operation rates. Overall complication rates between robotic and VATS MIE were statistically similar (61% vs. 50%; p = 0.082). The majority of complications for either VATS (41.5%) or robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) (51.4%) were grade II. Nineteen patients developed a chyle leak. Patients with a chyle leak were similar in age, gender, and hospital LOS (all p > 0.05), but were more likely to undergo a three-hole or robotic esophagectomy (both p < 0.05) as well as have higher rehabilitation requirements on discharge (26% vs. 10%; p = 0.05). Among the two surgeons who each performed > 20 robotic esophagectomies (n = 70), nine chyle leaks occurred. Rates varied by surgeon (7 vs. 2; p = 0.003). Lower leak rates occurred in the surgeon with more robotic esophagectomy experience (n = 47 vs. 23). Patients were similar in age, and gender (p > 0.05), but those with a chyle leak were more likely to undergo three-hole esophagectomies, prophylactic thoracic duction ligations, undergo the abdominal portion via laparotomy, and not have a prophylactic omental flap (all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Robotic and VATS esophagectomy have similar rates of re-operation, length of stay, discharge needs and complications. Differences in outcomes between VATS and Robotic esophagectomy appears to be related to surgeon experience with the robot but may also be associated with techniques such as anastomotic height, omental flap utilization and performance of laparoscopy.

Thoracoscopy-Assisted Esophagectomy vs Transhiatal Esophagectomy for Carcinoma Esophagus: a Prospective Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) was popularized to reduce the morbidity of esophagectomy. Thoracoscopy-assisted esophagectomy (TAE) offers esophageal dissection under magnified vision. This study compares the short-term morbidity and oncological outcome following TAE and THE for esophageal carcinoma.

METHODOLOGY

This is a prospective comparative (January 2017-May 2018) study between TAE and THE for >cT1bN1 esophageal carcinoma. After neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT), responders and patients with stable diseases were subjected to surgery. Thoracoscopy in esophagectomy was performed in prone position. Follow-up duration was at least 4 weeks post-discharge.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients of esophageal carcinoma undergoing TAE (n = 18) or THE (n = 15) were included. Common locations of tumor were lower third of esophagus (72.7%) and esophagogastric junction (18.2%). Majority (73.3%) had squamous cell carcinoma. Median interval between NACRT and surgery was 13 weeks. The mean operating time was significantly more with TAE than THE (292.5 vs 207.33 min, p = 0.005). R0 resection rate in TAE was 83.3% compared with 66.7% in THE. There was no difference in the lymph node yield. There was non-significant trend towards lower incidence of major pulmonary complication (66.7% vs 80.0%), cardiac complications (27.8% vs 46.7%), anastomotic leak (27.8% vs 46.7%), recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (16.7% vs 20.0%), and overall major morbidity (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) (44.4% vs 66.7%) in TAE than THE. The chyle leak was observed more in TAE (16.7%) than THE (6.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

TAE achieved higher R0 resection rate and better short-term morbidity than THE. Enrollment of small number of cases in the study precluded statistical significance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered in Clinical Trial Registry-India (CTRI registration no: CTRI/2018/05/013880) in 14-05-2018.

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.

Minimal invasive versus open esophagectomy for patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after neoadjuvant treatments

Background

Although previous studies have discussed whether the minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is superior to open surgery, the data concerning esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) patients underwent neoadjuvant treatment followed by radical resection is limited. The purpose of our study was to compare the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of the two surgical approaches in treating ESCC patients.

Methods

Between January 2010 and December 2016, ESCC patients who had received neoadjuvant therapy and underwent Mckeown esophagectomy at our institute were eligible. The baseline characteristics, pathological data, short-and long-term outcomes of these patients were collected and compared based on the surgical approach.

Results

A total of 195 patients was included in the current study. Compared to patients underwent open surgery, patients underwent MIE had shorter operative time and less intraoperative bleeding (390 min vs 330 min, P = 0.001; 204 ml vs 167 ml, P = 0.021). In addition, the risk of anastomotic leakage was decreased in MIE group (20.0% vs 3.3%, P < 0.001), while the occurrence of other complications did not have statistical significance between two groups. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) was no difference in patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy between the two approaches. For the patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, OS was significantly better in the MIE group (log rank = 6.197; P = 0.013).

Conclusion

Minimally invasive Mckeown esophagectomy is safe and feasible for ESCC patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. MIE approach presented better perioperative results than open esophagectomy. The effect of surgical approaches on survival was depending on the scheme of neoadjuvant treatment.

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes between robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy and video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Though robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is demonstrated to offer a better visualization and provide a fine dissection of the mediastinal structures to facilitate the complex thoracoscopic operation, the superiorities of RAMIE over MIE have not been well verified. The aim of this study was to explore the actual superiorities through comparing short-term results of RAMIE with that of MIE.

Methods

PubMed, EMBASE and web of science databases were systematically searched up to September 1, 2020 for case-controlled studies that compared RAMIE with TLMIE.

Results

Fourteen studies were identified, with a total of 2,887 patients diagnosed with esophageal cancer, including 1,435 patients subjected to RAMIE group and 1,452 patients subjected to MIE group. The operative time in RAMIE was still significantly longer than that in MIE group (OR =0.785; 95% CI, 0.618-0.952; P<0.001). The incidence of pneumonia was significantly lower in RAMIE group compared with MIE group (OR =0.677; 95% CI, 0.468-0.979; P=0.038).

Conclusions

RAMIE has the superiorities over MIE in short-term outcomes in terms of pneumonia and vocal cord palsy. Therefore, RAMIE could be considered as a standard treatment for patients with esophageal cancer.

Robot-Assisted Esophagectomy After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation-Current Status and Future Prospects

Multimodality treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by surgery has become the standard of care for esophageal cancer. In the recent years, there has been a shift in focus of surgical approach from open esophagectomy to minimally invasive esophagectomy. Robot-assisted esophagectomy is being performed more often in centers across the world. However, there is limited data on role of robot-assisted esophagectomy in patients who have received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. Initial reports have shown that integrating neoadjuvant therapy to robot-assisted esophagectomy is feasible and safe. With the growing popularity of robot-assisted surgery worldwide among both surgeons and patients, understanding the impact of neoadjuvant chemoradiation on the procedure and its oncological outcome seems worthwhile. In the present study, we present a review of available literature on the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy in esophageal cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Minimal Invasive Esophagectomy-a New Dawn of EsophagealSurgery

Surgery is the mainstay of esophageal cancer. However, esophagectomy is a major surgical trauma on a patient with high morbidity and mortality. The intent of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is to decrease the degree of surgical trauma and perioperative morbidity associated with open surgery, and provide faster recovery and shorter hospital stay with the equivalent oncological outcome. It also allows for lesser pulmonary morbidity, less blood loss, less pain, and a better quality of life. MIE is safe and effective but has a steep learning curve with high technical expertise. Recently, it is increasingly accepted and adopted all over the globe. In this article, we discuss the safety, efficacy, short-term, and oncological outcomes of thoracoscopic- and laparoscopic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy and robotic surgery compared with open esophagectomy with a special focus on the Indian perspective.

Outcomes of Right Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy Combined with Laparotomy: a Preliminary Vietnamese Study

BACKGROUND

Esophageal cancer is the fourth-most-common cancerous disease of the gastrointestinal tract, with increasing incidence rates.

AIM

The present study aimed to assess the outcomes of right thoracoscopic esophagectomy combined with laparotomy for esophageal cancer treatment in Vietnamese patients.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of 71 patients was conducted at 108 Military Central Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam, from January 2010 to December 2017.

RESULTS

Right thoracoscopic esophagectomy combined with laparotomy was performed in 71 patients with esophageal cancer. The mean patient age was 55.8 years, and 100% were male. Patients were diagnosed with the following cancer stages: Stage 0: 4.2%; Stage I: 14.1%; Stage II: 59.2%; and Stage III: 22.5%. The lymph node metastasis rate was 33.8%. The overall complication rate was 42.3%, which included a pneumonia rate of 12.3%, a respiratory failure rate of 7.0%, an anastomotic leak rate of 11.3%, and a chylothorax rate of 4.2%. The mean postoperative time was 16.4 days. The mean follow-up time was 21.7 months. The median overall survival was 45.7 months. The 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, and 4-year survival rates were 79.7%, 62.3%, 52.3%, and 43.6%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracoscopic esophagectomy combined with laparotomy for esophageal cancer was a safe, effective, and minimally invasive procedure that should play a continued role in cancer treatment.

How I do it: robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Advances in minimally invasive techniques, including robotic surgical technology, have led to improved outcomes in esophagectomy. In this article, we detail our approach to the robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

Three-Dimensional vs Two-Dimensional Completely Minimally Invasive 2-Stage Esophagectomy With Intrathoracic Hand-Sewn Anastomosis for Esophageal Cancer: Comparison of Intra-and Postoperative Outcomes

Background. Completely minimally invasive esophagectomy (CMIE) has been associated with reduced morbidity compared to open esophagectomy in the treatment of esophageal cancer. Three-dimensional (3D) vision can enhance depth perception during minimally invasive surgery when compared to two-dimensional (2D) vision. We aimed to compare outcomes from 2-stage CMIEs when performed in 2D vs 3D. Method. All consecutive 2-stage CMIEs performed for esophageal or gastroesophageal junctional cancer at a single-centre between 2016 and 2018 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. All operations were completed in either 2D or 3D. All esophagogastric anastomoses were hand-sewn thoracoscopically. Intraoperative and postoperative clinical parameters were compared between 2D and 3D CMIE. Results. Overall, 98 patients underwent a 2-stage CMIE, of which 59 (60.2%) were in 2D and 39 (39.8%) in 3D. Median operative blood loss was less in the 3D group compared to the 2D group (283 mls vs 409 mls, P = .016). A higher number of lymph nodes were retrieved from 3D CMIE (30 vs 25, P = .010). The median duration of surgery was 407 minutes (interquartile ranges (IQR): 358-472 minutes) and 426 minutes (IQR: 369-509 minutes) when performed in 2D and 3D, respectively (P = .162). There were no significant intergroup differences in 30-day postoperative complications, short-term mortality, and hospital stay. Conclusion. We report reduced blood loss and higher lymph node yield when performing 3D CMIE than 2D CMIE. Other intraoperative and postoperative clinical outcomes were similar in both groups. A randomized controlled trial is needed to validate these findings of superior outcomes from CMIE performed in 3D over 2D.

Application of neck anastomotic muscle flap embedded in 3-incision radical resection of oesophageal carcinoma: A protocol for systematic review and meta analysis

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors and has been identified as one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Surgery is considered to be the optimal treatment for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer. Oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer can significantly extend the survival period of patients and provide a potential opportunity for a cure. However, there is still controversy regarding application of neck anastomotic muscle flap embedded. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed to determine whether the application of neck anastomotic muscle flap embedded would benefit patients more.

METHODS

We will search PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cancerlit, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar databases for relevant clinical trials published in any language before October 1, 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, propensity score-matched comparative studies, and prospective cohort studies of interest, published or unpublished, that meet the inclusion criteria will be included. Subgroup analysis of the type of operation, tumor pathological stage, and ethnicity will be performed. INPLASY registration number: INPLASY202080059.

RESULTS

The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

CONCLUSION

As far as we know, this study will be the first meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of the application of neck anastomotic muscle flap embedded in 3-incision radical resection of oesophageal carcinoma. Due to the nature of the disease and intervention methods, RCTs may be inadequate, and we will carefully consider inclusion in high-quality, non-RCTs, but this may result in high heterogeneity and affect the reliability of the results.

Minimally invasive esophagectomy: clinical evidence and surgical techniques

Background

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

Purpose

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

Conclusion

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

Minimally invasive techniques for transthoracic oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Oesophagectomy is a demanding operation that can be performed by different approaches including open surgery or a combination of minimal access techniques. This systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of open, minimally invasive and robotic oesophagectomy techniques for oesophageal cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting open oesophagectomy, laparoscopically assisted oesophagectomy (LAO), thoracoscopically assisted oesophagectomy (TAO), totally minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO) or robotic MIO (RAMIO) for oesophagectomy. A network meta-analysis of intraoperative (operating time, blood loss), postoperative (overall complications, anastomotic leaks, chyle leak, duration of hospital stay) and oncological (R0 resection, lymphadenectomy) outcomes, and survival was performed.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight studies involving 32 315 patients were included in the network meta-analysis (open 17 824, 55·2 per cent; LAO 1576, 4·9 per cent; TAO 2421 7·5 per cent; MIO 9558, 29·6 per cent; RAMIO 917, 2·8 per cent). Compared with open oesophagectomy, both MIO and RAMIO were associated with less blood loss, significantly lower rates of pulmonary complications, shorter duration of stay and higher lymph node yield. There were no significant differences between surgical techniques in surgical-site infections, chyle leak, and 30- and 90-day mortality. MIO and RAMIO had better 1- and 5-year survival rates respectively compared with open surgery.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive and robotic techniques for oesophagectomy are associated with reduced perioperative morbidity and duration of hospital stay, with no compromise of oncological outcomes but no improvement in perioperative mortality.

Favourable long-term survival of patients with esophageal cancer treated with extended transhiatal esophagectomy combined with en bloc lymphadenectomy: results from a retrospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although considered complex and challenging, esophagectomy remains the best potentially curable treatment option for resectable esophageal and esophagogastric junction (AEG) carcinomas. The optimal surgical approach and technique as well as the extent of lymphadenectomy, particularly regarding quality of life and short- and long-term outcomes, are still a matter of debate. To lower perioperative morbidity, we combined the advantages of a one-cavity approach with extended lymph node dissection (usually achieved by only a two-cavity approach) and developed a modified single-cavity transhiatal approach for esophagectomy.

METHODS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of an extended transhiatal esophageal resection with radical bilateral mediastinal en bloc lymphadenectomy (eTHE). A prospective database of 166 patients with resectable cancers of the esophagus (including adenocarcinomas of the AEG types I and II) were analyzed. Patients were treated between 2001 and 2017 with eTHE at a tertiary care university center. Relevant patient characteristics and outcome parameters were collected and analyzed. The primary endpoint was 5-year overall survival. Secondary outcomes included short-term morbidity, mortality, radicalness of en bloc resection and oncologic efficacy.

RESULTS

The overall survival rates at 1, 3 and 5 years were 84, 70, and 61.0%, respectively. The in-hospital mortality rate after eTHE was 1.2%. Complications with a Clavien-Dindo score of III/IV occurred in 31 cases (18.6%). A total of 25 patients (15.1%) had a major pulmonary complication. The median hospital stay was 17 days (interquartile range (IQR) 12). Most patients (n = 144; 86.7%) received neoadjuvant treatment. The median number of lymph nodes resected was 25 (IQR 17). The R0 resection rate was 97%.

CONCLUSION

In patients with esophageal cancer, eTHE without thoracotomy resulted in excellent long-term survival, an above average number of resected lymph nodes and an acceptable postoperative morbidity and mortality.

The Impact of Hybrid Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy with Neck-Abdominal First Approach on the Short- and Long-Term Outcomes for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is no consensus for an optimal minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) approach. This study aimed to compare hybrid MIE (hMIE) with neck-abdominal first approach to standard open esophagectomy (OE).

METHODS

Data from a cohort of 301 patients were retrospectively analyzed. All participants received either hMIE or OE for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma at Tokyo Medical and Dental University between January 2003 and December 2013. Analyses included propensity score matching and the Kaplan-Meier statistical method to determine overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) of the cohort.

RESULTS

After one-to-one propensity score matching, there were 68 patient pairs. The hMIE group had significantly lower incidence of severe postoperative complications (20.1% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.026) and severe respiratory complications (7.4% vs. 0%; p = 0.058) than the OE group. The 5-year oncological outcomes of the two groups were almost equivalent (OS: OE, 55.0%; hMIE, 69.0%; p = 0.063 and DFS: OE, 54.0%; hMIE, 62.0%; p = 0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

This study compared hMIE with neck-abdominal first approach to standard OE. The results showed significantly less severe postoperative complications for hMIE with neck-abdominal first approach in comparison with OE, without a compromise in long-term oncological outcomes.

Evaluating the Surgeon's Experience as a Risk Factor for Post-Esophagectomy Chylothorax on a Four-Year Cohort

Background: Chylothorax (CHT) is a known post-operative complication after esophageal surgery with vaguely defined risk factors.

Methods: This is a retrospective chart review of 70 consecutive patients with operable cancer over a period of four years (January 2013 to December 2016). Ivor Lewis and McKeown interventions were performed. Thoracic duct is identified and ligated routinely. Factors related to the patient, the tumor, and the operating surgeon were analyzed.

Results: Incidence of CHT was 10%. Surgeons with less than five years of esophageal surgery experience had the most CHT, 71% (p=0.001). No association was found between tumor location, type, body mass index (BMI), neoadjuvant therapy, response to neoadjuvant therapy or male sex, and CHT. The odds of developing CHT were 17 times higher in patients operated by a junior surgeon (odds ratio, OR=17.67, confidence interval, CI 2.68-116.34, p=0.003). Four patients (5.7%) had anastomotic leaks, none of them had CHT. Senior surgeons had less operative time and harvested more lymph nodes (p=0.0002 and p=0.1086 respectively).

Conclusion: Surgeon’s experience might be considered a major risk factor to develop CHT. This finding needs to be confirmed by a larger multicentric series taking into consideration the human factor.

Propensity score-matched comparison between open and minimal invasive hybrid esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

This study compared the outcome between patients who had an open and those who had a hybrid esophagectomy for T1 or T3 esophageal adenocarcinoma (eAC). No clear data are available concerning this question based on T-category.

METHODS

Two groups of patients with esophagectomy and high intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy for eAC were analyzed: hybrid (laparoscopy + right thoracotomy) (n = 835) and open (laparotomy + right thoracotomy) (n = 188). Outcome criteria were 30- and 90-day mortality, R0-resection rate (R0), number of resected lymph nodes (rLNs), and 5-year survival rate (5y-SR). For each type of surgery, three patient groups were analyzed: pT1-carcinoma (group-1), cT3Nx and neoadjuvant chemoradiation (group-2), and pT3N0-3 without neoadjuvant therapy (group-3). The comparison was based on a propensity score matching in relation of 1:2 for open versus hybrid.

RESULTS

In group-1 (38 open vs 76 hybrid) R0-resection (100%), 30-day mortality (0%), 90-day mortality (2.6% vs 0%), and rLNs (median 29.5 vs 28.5) were not significantly different. The pN0-rate was 76% in the open and 92% in the hybrid group (p = 0.036). Accordingly, the 5y-SR was 69% and 87% (p = 0.016), but the prognosis of the subgroups pT1pN0 or pT1pN+ was not significantly different between open or hybrid. In group-2 (68 open vs 135 hybrid) R0-resection (97%), 30-day (0% vs 0.7%) and 90-day (4%) mortality, rLNs (28.5 vs 26), and 5y-SR (36% vs 41%) were not significantly different. In group-3 (37 open vs 75 hybrid) R0, postoperative mortality, rLNs, and 5y-SR were not significantly different.

CONCLUSION

In a propensity score-matched comparison of patients with an open or hybrid esophagectomy for esophageal adenocarcinoma the quality of oncologic resection, postoperative mortality and prognosis are not different.

Postoperative short-term outcomes of minimally invasive versus open esophagectomy for patients with esophageal cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis to synthesize the available evidence regarding short‐term outcomes between minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and open esophagectomy (OE).

Methods

Studies were identified by searching databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library up to March 2019 without language restrictions. Results of these searches were filtered according to a set of eligibility criteria and analyzed in line with PRISMA guidelines.

Results

There were 33 studies included with a total of 13 269 patients in our review, out of which 4948 cases were of MIE and 8321 cases were of OE. The pooled results suggested that MIE had a better outcome regarding all‐cause respiratory complications (RCs) (OR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.41–0.78, P = <0.001), in‐hospital duration (SMD = −0.51; 95% CI = −0.78−0.24; P = <0.001), and blood loss (SMD = −1.44; 95% CI = −1.95−0.93; P = <0.001). OE was associated with shorter duration of operation time, while no statistically significant differences were observed regarding other outcomes. Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed for a number of different postoperative events.

Conclusions

Our study indicated that MIE had more favorable outcomes than OE from the perspective of short‐term outcomes. Further large‐scale, multicenter randomized control trials are needed to explore the long‐term survival outcomes after MIE versus OE.

Intraoperative fluid therapy and postoperative complications during minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a single-center retrospective study

PURPOSE

Compared with open thoracotomy, minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) methods, such as transhiatal or thoracoscopic esophagectomy, likely have lower morbidity. However, the relationship between intraoperative fluid management and postoperative complications after MIE remains unclear. Thus, we investigated the association of cumulative intraoperative fluid balance and postoperative complications in patients undergoing MIE.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study examined patients undergoing thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer in the prone position. Postoperative complications included pneumonia, arrhythmia, thrombotic events and acute kidney injury (AKI). We compared patients with higher and lower intraoperative fluid balance (higher and lower than the median). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the odds ratio of intraoperative fluid balance status on the incidence of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

In total, 135 patients were included in the study. Postoperative complications occurred in 43 (32%), including cardiac arrhythmia (n = 12, 9%), thrombosis (n = 20, 15%), pneumonia (n = 13, 10%), and AKI required hemodialysis (n = 1, 1%). Patients with a higher fluid balance had higher incidence of complications than those with a lower fluid balance (46% vs. 18%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, ASA-PS ≥ III, blood loss, and the use of radical surgery, the higher intraoperative fluid balance group was significantly and independently associated with postoperative complications (adjusted OR 5.31, 95% CI 2.26-13.6, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position, a greater intraoperative positive fluid balance was independently associated with a higher incidence of complications.

Oncological Outcomes After Radical Esophagectomy from a Tertiary Cancer Center

Although esophageal cancers have poor survival outcomes, evidence suggests that preoperative chemoradiation followed by surgery have improved survival outcomes. Minimally invasive surgery has equivalent oncological outcomes with less complication compared with open surgery, but there is insufficient data available in South Indian population. Our aim was to analyze the perioperative outcome and survival between minimally invasive and open transhiatal esophagectomy group. Data from patients operated for esophageal cancer in our department from the year 2015 to 2018 were collected retrospectively using medical records. Among 55 carcinoma esophagus patients, squamous histology (67%) and lower third location (57%) being predominant. Twenty-six patients underwent video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS)-assisted esophagectomy and 18 patients underwent open transhiatal esophagectomy. Eleven patients were inoperable. Sixteen patients in VATS arm and three patients in transhiatal arm received preoperative chemoradiation. VATS arm has lesser intraoperative blood loss, early pulmonary recovery with early intercostal drain removal, and lesser hospital stay but longer mean operating time of 171 min versus 140 min (P < 0.01). It has higher mean nodal harvest of 15 versus 7 nodes (P 0.01) and higher overall median survival of 36 months (95% CI, 29.3 to 42.7) as against 23 months (95% CI, 17.8 to 29.2) for transhiatal arm (P < 0.01). VATS-assisted esophagectomy is less morbid procedure with early postoperative recovery, better oncological outcomes, and improved survival compared with transhiatal arm which is equivalent to apex centers in India.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Right versus left thoracic approach oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Oesophageal cancer is one of the most common malignant tumours and has been identified as one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Surgery is considered to be the optimal treatment for patients with resectable oesophageal cancer. Oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer can significantly extend the survival period of patients and provide a potential opportunity for a cure. However, there is still controversy regarding which thoracic approach (right or left) during oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer can lead to better surgical outcomes globally. This systematic review and meta-analysis will be performed to determine which thoracic approach during oesophagectomy will achieve longer patient survival and will be more beneficial for patients.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cancerlit, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar databases for relevant clinical trials published in any language before 1 October 2019. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, propensity score-matched comparative studies and prospective cohort studies of interest, published or unpublished, that meet the inclusion criteria will be included. Subgroup analysis of the type of operation, tumour pathological stage and ethnicity will be performed.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019124133.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Because this study will be based on published or unpublished records and studies, there is no need for ethics approval. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Novel prognostic score of postoperative complications after transthoracic minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a retrospective cohort study of 90 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomy is the standard treatment for esophageal cancer, but has a high rate of postoperative complications. Some studies reported the various scoring system to estimate the postoperative complications. However, there were according to various surgical methods and included intra- and post-operative factors. Recently, minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is becoming the first-line treatment for esophageal cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the risk factors of postoperative complications and to establish a useful system for predicting postoperative complications after transthoracic MIE.

METHODS

From 2007 to 2015, 90 patients who underwent transthoracic MIE at our department were enrolled. Patients were divided into two groups according to postoperative complication: patients with major complications (n = 32) and without major complications (n = 58). Major complication was defined as ≥ IIIa in the Clavien-Dindo classification.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis identified four independent risk factors for predicting postoperative complications: age [≥ 70 years; odd ratio (OR) 6.88; p = 0.001]; sex (male; OR 5.24; p = 0.031); total protein level (< 6.7 mg/dl; OR 6.51; p = 0.002), and C-reactive protein level (≥ 0.15; OR, 6.58; p = 0.001). These four factors were used to establish a score. The complication rate for scores 0-4 were 0, 11, 36, 71, 100%, respectively. The frequency of major complications was significantly associated with the score (p < 0.001). Receiver operator characteristic curves to predict the score with regard to major complications showed an area under the curve value of 0.798 (95% confidence interval: 0.696-0.871, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our novel score may help to decide surgical intervention for esophagectomy and provide appropriate resources for perioperative management.

Anastomosis after Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy

BACKGROUND

Esophagectomies are a notoriously difficult procedure that have undergone drastic changes over the last decade. In particular, the adoption of minimally invasive esophagectomies (MIEs) as the gold standard.

METHODS

We examine the evolution of the MIE, the support for this method, and our preferred methods for the creation of anastomoses following the resection.

RESULTS

The submission of techniques that, after many years of practice, have become our standard methods for anastomosing the Neo-esophagus to the remnant esophagus both at the neck, and within the thorax.

CONCLUSION

No matter which MIE technique is chosen, these anastomotic methods are readily available. Each is provided with step-by-step instructions, performed with standard laparoscopic instruments, and in a safe and reproducible manner.

Internal hernia to the retrosternal space is a rare complication after minimally invasive esophagectomy: three case reports

Background

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is considered a beneficial approach to esophageal cancer, although a hiatal hernia occurs more frequently in this approach than in open esophagectomy with reconstruction via the mediastinal route. Development of an internal hernia to the retrosternal space is not a recognized complication of reconstruction via the retrosternal route after esophagectomy. We herein report three cases of the development of an internal hernia to the retrosternal space after minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Case presentation

Thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy with cervical anastomosis by retrosternal route reconstruction was performed in all three cases. All patients were men ranging in age from 60 to 80 years. Two patients had abdominal pain, and one had experienced syncope. All patients were diagnosed by computed tomography with an internal hernia to the retrosternal space and thoracic cavity (retrosternal hernia) without ischemic change to the incarcerated intestine. Two patients received medical therapy to relieve their intra-abdominal pressure, which allowed for a successful reduction of the intestine into the abdomen. Open laparotomy was performed to repair the hernia in the third patient. After reducing the intestine into the abdomen, reefing of the retrosternal orifice was performed, and the gastric conduit was anchored to the abdominal wall. No relapse occurred in three cases throughout follow-up.

Conclusion

Hiatal hernia is a well-recognized complication after minimally invasive esophagectomy; however, retrosternal hernia is a rare complication following this procedure. Based on the present report, if no ischemic change is present in the herniated intestine, two types of potentially curative treatments are available: medical or surgical. As minimally invasive esophagectomy is performed more frequently, retrosternal hernia may become an increasingly more common complication in the near future.

Clinical analysis of minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy in a single center by a single medical group

OBJECTIVE

McKeown esophagectomy followed by cervical and abdominal procedures has been commonly used for invasive esophageal carcinoma. This minimally-invasive operative procedure in the lateral prone position has been considered to be the most appropriate method. We describe our experiences in minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy (MIME) for esophageal cancer.

METHODS

Between March 2016 and February 2018, a total of 82 patients underwent MIME by a single group in our department (a single center). All procedure, operation, oncology, and complication data were reviewed.

RESULTS

All MIME procedures were completed successfully, with no conversions to open surgery. The median operative time was 260 min, and median blood loss was 100 ml. The average number of total harvested lymph nodes was 20.1 in the chest and 13.5 in the abdomen. There were no deaths within 30 postoperative days. Twenty cases (24.4%) developed postoperative complications, including anastomotic leak in 4 (4.9%), single lateral recurrent nerve palsy in 4 (4.9%), bilateral recurrent nerve palsy in 1 (1.2%), pulmonary problems in 3 (3.7%), chyle leak in 1 (1.2%), and other complications in 7 (including pleural effusions in 4, incomplete ileus in 2, and neck incision infection in 1; 8.54%). Average postoperative hospitalization time was 12 d. Blood loss, operation time, morbidity rate, and the number of harvested lymph nodes were analyzed by evaluating learning curves in different periods. Significant differences were found in operative time (P=0.006), postoperative hospitalization days (P=0.015), total harvested lymph nodes (P=0.003), harvested thoracic lymph nodes (P=0.006), and harvested abdominal lymph nodes (P=0.022) among different periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical outcomes following MIME for esophageal cancer are safe and acceptable. The MIME procedure for stages I and II could be performed proficiently and reached an experience plateau after approximately 25 cases.