Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT: Background:Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) reduces postoperative respiratory complications and enables meticulous mediastinal lymphadenectomy. However, whether adding a robotic abdominal procedure to a robotic thoracic procedure can result in better outcomes is unclear. We examined outcomes after total-RAMIE (T-RAMIE) and compared them with the outcomes after hybrid-RAMIE (H-RAMIE). Methods:Total of 227 patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer were included. T-RAMIE was defined as esophagectomy performed robotically in both the thoracic and abdominal cavities. Laparotomy was used instead of the robotic procedure in H-RAMIE. T-RAMIE was performed in 144 patients (63.4%), and propensity score matching produced 49 matched pairs from each group. Early and long-term clinical outcomes between the two groups were compared. Results:T-RAMIE was mostly performed for upper or mid-thoracic squamous cell carcinoma (n=119, 82.6%) and cervical anastomosis, and three-field lymphadenectomy was performed in 113 (78.5%) and 54 (37.5%) patients, respectively. One laparotomy conversion was necessary because of severe obesity. The propensity-matched analysis demonstrated that T-RAMIE showed a comparable 90-day mortality rate with H-RAMIE (0% vs. 6.1%, P=0.083). The incidence rates of total (63.3% vs. 63.3%; P=1.000), abdominal (8.2% vs. 14.3%; P=0.366), and respiratory complications (10.2% vs. 10.2%; P=1.000) were not different between two groups. The number of harvested abdominal lymph nodes was similar (12.4±9.0 vs. 12.3±8.9; P=0.992). Median follow-up duration for T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE was 16.3 and 23.5 months, respectively. Two-year overall survival rate (86.2% in T-RAMIE vs. 77.6% in H-RAMIE; P=0.150) and recurrence-free survival (76.6% in T-RAMIE vs. 62.2% in H-RAMIE; P=0.280) were comparable between the two groups. Conclusions:In this matched analysis, T-RAMIE and H-RAMIE showed comparable early outcomes and long-term survival. The low tendencies of early mortality and conversion rate of T-RAMIE suggest that it might be a safe alternative to open stomach mobilization and abdominal lymphadenectomy.

SUBMITTER: Na KJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6988082 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

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

Na Kwon Joong KJ Park Samina S Park In Kyu IK Kim Young Tae YT Kang Chang Hyun CH

Journal of thoracic disease 20191201 12

<h4>Background</h4>Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) reduces postoperative respiratory complications and enables meticulous mediastinal lymphadenectomy. However, whether adding a robotic abdominal procedure to a robotic thoracic procedure can result in better outcomes is unclear. We examined outcomes after total-RAMIE (T-RAMIE) and compared them with the outcomes after hybrid-RAMIE (H-RAMIE).<h4>Methods</h4>Total of 227 patients who underwent robotic esophagectomy for esoph ...[more]

PMID: 32030248

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTotal pharyngolaryngoesophagectomy (TPLE) is associated with major complications and is extremely invasive. In 2011, our institution introduced thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left hemi-prone position and laparoscopic reconstruction with a gastric tube in patients undergoing TPLE. Herein, we describe the use of this operative method in 26 patients, focusing on the technical aspects of the surgery.Materials and methodsFrom January 2011 to December 2018, 26 patients underwent minimally invasive TPLE with gastric tube reconstruction in our institute. The thoracoscopic procedure was performed with the patient in the semi-prone position. The patient was then moved to the supine position, and the laparoscopic procedure and pharyngolaryngectomy were started simultaneously. After pharyngolaryngectomy, microvascular anastomoses or free jejunal flap interposition were performed at the site of the gastric tube reconstruction. The data from these 26 patients were retrospectively analyzed.ResultsThe median age was 66 years, and 3.8% of the patients were female. The Union for International Cancer Control stages of esophageal cancer were 0 (n = 2), I (n = 4), II (n = 7), III (n = 8), and IV (n = 5). Eight patients had concomitant esophageal cancer and head and neck cancer. Reconstruction with only a narrow gastric tube was used in 16 patients, while free jejunal flap interposition was used in 10 patients. The surgical procedures resulted in minimal complications. Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥1 included anastomotic leakage in two patients and pneumonia in one.ConclusionThoracoscopic esophagectomy in the left hemi-prone position and laparoscopic reconstruction with a gastric tube in patients undergoing TPLE was safe and effective. The complications were improved via the development of various procedures. Further improvement is necessary before this thoracoscopic approach is established as a standard procedure for TPLE.

Project description:ImportanceAvailable data comparing the long-term results of hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (HMIE) with that of open esophagectomy are conflicting, with similar or even better results reported for the minimally invasive esophagectomy group.ObjectiveTo evaluate the long-term, 5-year outcomes of HMIE vs open esophagectomy, including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and pattern of disease recurrence, and the potential risk factors associated with these outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsThis randomized clinical trial is a post hoc follow-up study that analyzes the results of the open-label Multicentre Randomized Controlled Phase III Trial, which enrolled patients from 13 different centers in France and was conducted from October 26, 2009, to April 4, 2012. Eligible patients were 18 to 75 years of age and were diagnosed with resectable cancer of the middle or lower third of the esophagus. After exclusions, patients were randomized to either the HMIE group or the open esophagectomy group. Data analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis from November 19, 2019, to December 4, 2020.InterventionsHybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy (laparoscopic gastric mobilization with open right thoracotomy) was compared with open esophagectomy.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end points of this follow-up study were 5-year OS and DFS. The secondary end points were the site of disease recurrence and potential risk factors associated with DFS and OS.ResultsA total of 207 patients were randomized, of whom 175 were men (85%), and the median (range) age was 61 (23-78) years. The median follow-up duration was 58.2 (95% CI, 56.5-63.8) months. The 5-year OS was 59% (95% CI, 48%-68%) in the HMIE group and 47% (95% CI, 37%-57%) in the open esophagectomy group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71; 95% CI, 0.48-1.06). The 5-year DFS was 52% (95% CI, 42%-61%) in the HMIE group vs 44% (95% CI, 34%-53%) in the open esophagectomy group (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.55-1.17). No statistically significant difference in recurrence rate or location was found between groups. In a multivariable analysis, major intraoperative and postoperative complications (HR, 2.21; 95% CI, 1.41-3.45; P < .001) and major pulmonary complications (HR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.21-3.10; P = .005) were identified as risk factors associated with decreased OS. Similarly, multivariable analysis of DFS identified overall intraoperative and postoperative complications (HR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.28-2.90; P = .002) and major pulmonary complications (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.19-2.86; P = .006) as risk factors.Conclusions and relevanceThis study found no difference in long-term survival between the HMIE and open esophagectomy groups. Major postoperative overall complications and pulmonary complications appeared to be independent risk factors in decreased OS and DFS, providing additional evidence that HMIE may be associated with improved oncological results compared with open esophagectomy primarily because of a reduction in postoperative complications.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00937456.

Dataset Information

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

Publications

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

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets