scholarly journals RAMIE: tradition drives innovation—feasibility of a robotic-assisted intra-thoracic anastomosis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simone Giacopuzzi ◽  
Jacopo Weindelmayer ◽  
Giovanni de Manzoni
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Circular Stapler ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Robotic Hand ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Hybrid Techniques ◽  
End To End

AbstractDue to the difficulties in the intra-thoracic esophagogastric anastomosis creation, totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE) did not encountered a large diffusion, preferring hybrid techniques or cervical anastomosis. Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has gained popularity due to an easy reproducibility of the open anastomotic technique. In this feasibility study, we described the RAMIE technique introduced in our Center, providing innovative details for a mechanical end-to-end anastomosis. With patient in prone position, esophagectomy is conducted through the meso-esophagus plan. Robotic hand-sewn purse-string is realized above Azygos vein. A 4-cm thoracotomy in the fifth intercostal space is performed by enlarging the trocar incision. The tubulization is performed to create an access pouch for the introduction of the circular stapler. After the creation of the end-to-end anastomosis, the access pouch is resected and a robotic over-sewn is realized. From January 2020 until July 2020, ten patients were enrolled. No restriction in term of age, BMI, ASA grade or previous surgery were applied. Median operative time was 700 min. R0 resection was achieved in all cases with a good lymph node harvesting. No anastomotic leak or stricture were observed. One chyle leak was treated conservatively. Median length of stay was 8 days and 90 days mortality was 0%. This study evidenced how robotic surgery allowed us to perform the same anastomosis of our open technique with good oncological results and morbidity and length of stay comparable with our previous results. Of note, longer operative time has been recorded. Further studies after the completion of the learning curve are necessary to address more definite conclusions.

PS01.176: OPEN VERSUS HYBRID VERSUS MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY FOR PATIENTS WITH ESOPHAGEAL CANCER: A PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHED ANALYSIS

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 99-100
Author(s):  
Els Visser ◽  
David Edholm ◽  
Mark Smithers ◽  
Janine Thomas ◽  
Sandra Brosda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽  
Respiratory Complications ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy

Abstract Background MIE is becoming more common and is considered safe. There are few studies supporting laparoscopy in favor of laparotomy for the abdominal part of a three-field esophagectomy and long term survival data are scarce. The objective was to compare open esophagectomy (OE), with hybdrid thoracoscopic-laparotomic esophagectomy (HMIE) and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) with regard to surgical outcomes, postoperative complications and survival. Methods A prospective database of esophageal resection for cancer at a single centre identified 243 OE, 688 HMIE and 80 MIE procedures. Propensity scores were used to match 80 patients in each group adjusting for age, gender, weight, clinical stage, neoadjuvant treatment, and year of surgery. Results Respiratory complications were more common after OE (49%) than after MIE (31%, P = 0.02). Median operative time was longer for MIE (330 minutes) versus HMIE or OE (both 300 minutes, P < 0.001). Median length of stay was shorter following MIE (12 days) compared with HMIE (14 days) and OE (15 days), P = 0.001. There were no significant differences between groups with respect to other complications, median number of lymph nodes examined (22–23 for all groups), or R0 resection rate (range 85–91%) for all groups. There was no difference in 5-year overall survival between groups. Conclusion Compared with OE and HMIE, MIE was associated with shorter length of stay and fewer respiratory complications, but longer operative time. Thus, there may be additional benefit for MIE without comprising oncological outcomes. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy

2009 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 319-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette U. Laxa ◽  
Kristi L. Harold ◽  
Dawn E. Jaroszewski
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Anastomotic Stricture ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Postoperative Bleeding ◽  
Circular Stapler ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy

Objective Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) can be performed a variety of ways using different techniques for the anastomosis. End-to-end anastomosis (EEA) transoral circular staplers have traditionally been used in gastric bypass surgery with good success. An evaluation of the safety and utility of the EEA transoral circular stapler for esophageal anastomoses in MIE is reviewed. Methods A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent transthoracic MIE with EEA-stapled transoral anastomoses between January 2008 and May 2009 was performed. Patient demographics, indication for esophagectomy, perioperative treatments, intraoperative data, postoperative complications, hospital length of stay, and in-hospital mortality were evaluated. Results Twenty-six consecutive patients underwent MIE with EEA circular-stapled transthoracic anastomoses. Twenty-three were male with a mean age of 64 years (32–88). Indications for esophagectomy included esophageal cancer (24), high-grade dysplasia (1), and refractory stricture (1). Fifteen patients (63%) had neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation. There were no conversions to open thoracotomy or laparotomy. Mean operative time was 6.0 hours. Eight patients (31%) suffered postoperative complications; including leak from the gastric conduit staple line requiring operative intervention (1), postoperative bleeding requiring multiple transfusions (1), aspiration pneumonia (1), acute respiratory distress syndrome (1), myocardial infarction (1), chylothorax (1), and anastomotic stricture (2). Median hospital length of stay was 9 days (range 6–43). There were no in-hospital mortalities. Conclusions In our series, the EEA circular stapler seems technically feasible and relatively safe for an intrathoracic anastomosis in MIE.

Costs and benefits of different methods of esophagectomy for esophageal cancer

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 513-517 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alongkorn Yanasoot ◽  
Kamtorn Yolsuriyanwong ◽  
Sakchai Ruangsin ◽  
Supparerk Laohawiriyakamol ◽  
Somkiat Sunpaweravong
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Approach ◽  
Costs And Benefits ◽  
Invasive Approach ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Open Esophagectomy

Background A minimally invasive approach to esophagectomy is being used increasingly, but concerns remain regarding the feasibility, safety, cost, and outcomes. We performed an analysis of the costs and benefits of minimally invasive, hybrid, and open esophagectomy approaches for esophageal cancer surgery. Methods The data of 83 consecutive patients who underwent a McKeown’s esophagectomy at Prince of Songkla University Hospital between January 2008 and December 2014 were analyzed. Open esophagectomy was performed in 54 patients, minimally invasive esophagectomy in 13, and hybrid esophagectomy in 16. There were no differences in patient characteristics among the 3 groups Minimally invasive esophagectomy was undertaken via a thoracoscopic-laparoscopic approach, hybrid esophagectomy via a thoracoscopic-laparotomy approach, and open esophagectomy by a thoracotomy-laparotomy approach. Results Minimally invasive esophagectomy required a longer operative time than hybrid or open esophagectomy ( p = 0.02), but these patients reported less postoperative pain ( p = 0.01). There were no significant differences in blood loss, intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, or postoperative complications among the 3 groups. Minimally invasive esophagectomy incurred higher operative and surgical material costs than hybrid or open esophagectomy ( p = 0.01), but there were no significant differences in inpatient care and total hospital costs. Conclusion Minimally invasive esophagectomy resulted in the least postoperative pain but the greatest operative cost and longest operative time. Open esophagectomy was associated with the lowest operative cost and shortest operative time but the most postoperative pain. Hybrid esophagectomy had a shorter learning curve while sharing the advantages of minimally invasive esophagectomy.

PS01.212: OUTCOMES OF HYBRID VERSUS FULLY MINIMALLY INVASIVE 2-STAGE ESOPHAGECTOMY FOR CANCER OF THE DISTAL ESOPHAGUS AND GASTRO-ESOPHAGEAL JUNCTION

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 110-110
Author(s):  
Kanatheepan Shanmuganathan ◽  
Temisanren Akitikori ◽  
Oluwasunmisola Soile ◽  
Aadil Hussain ◽  
Neda Farhangmehr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Anastomotic Leak ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Hospital Length ◽  
Leak Rate ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Cardiac Complications ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Anastomotic Leak Rate

Abstract Background Esophagectomy is associated with high complication rate and mortality. Numerous approaches have been introduced over the last two decades, with the ambition of reducing rate of complications, morbidity and mortality. Two-stage minimally invasive esophagectomies include hybrid (laparoscopic/thoracotomic) and fully minimally invasive and have recently gained popularity in the treatment of distal esophageal and gastro-esophageal junction cancer. We aim to compare the short-term outcomes between 2-stage hybrid and fully minimally invasive esophagectomy with intrathoracic hand-sewn anastomosis. Methods A retrospective analysis of a 4-year period prospectively collected data of 100 consecutive 2-stage minimally invasive esophagectomies was conducted. All operations were performed in a UK tertiary centre by a single surgical team between 2014 and 2018. All 3-stage and open esophagectomies were excluded from the study. A comparison of anastomotic leak rate, ITU length of stay, hospital length of stay, pulmonary complications, cardiac complications and 30 and 90-day mortality rates was made. Statistical analysis was performed using Graph-Prism 7.04. Results Seventy patients underwent hybrid and 30 underwent fully minimally invasive esophagectomy with intra-thoracic manual anastomosis. Chest infection and anastomotic leak rate were higher in the hybrid group (21.4% vs 16.8% and 10% vs 3.3%); however, cardiac complications were two times more common in fully minimally invasive compared to hybrid esophagectomies (3.3% vs 1.4%). Fully minimally invasive esophagectomies were associated with a shorter ITU stay as well as hospital length of stay compared to hybrid esophagectomies (5.5 vs 6.2 days, P = 0.47 and 10.5 vs 15.6 days P = 0.0018). Complete tumour resection (R0) rate was slightly higher in hybrid compared to fully minimally invasive esophagectomies (70.8% vs 64.3%). Thirty and 90-day mortality rate was 6.67% (1 cardiac and 1 respiratory arrest) in fully minimally invasive and 1.43% in hybrid esophagectomies. None of the mortality cases were related to surgical complications like anastomotic leak or conduit necrosis. Conclusion In our study 2-stage fully minimally invasive esophagectomy is associated with reduced post-operative complication rates compared to 2-stage hybrid oesophagectomy. Further larger studies are needed to assess the 30- and 90-day mortality risk associated with both procedures. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

scholarly journals Attaining Proficiency in Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy While Maximizing Safety during Procedure Development

2016 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 268-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inderpal S. Sarkaria ◽  
Nabil P. Rizk ◽  
Rachel Grosser ◽  
Debra Goldman ◽  
David J. Finley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Team Approach ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Dedicated Team ◽  
Median Operative Time

Objective Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) is an emerging complex operation with limited reports detailing morbidity, mortality, and requirements for attaining proficiency. Our objective was to develop a standardized RAMIE technique, evaluate procedure safety, and assess outcomes using a dedicated operative team and 2-surgeon approach. Methods We conducted a study of sequential patients undergoing RAMIE from January 25, 2011, to May 5, 2014. Intermedian demographics and perioperative data were compared between sequential halves of the experience using the Wilcoxon rank sum test and the Fischer exact test. Median operative time was tracked over successive 15-patient cohorts. Results One hundred of 313 esophageal resections performed at our institution underwent RAMIE during the study period. A dedicated team including 2 attending surgeons and uniform anesthesia and OR staff was established. There were no significant differences in age, sex, histology, stage, induction therapy, or risk class between the 2 halves of the study. Estimated blood loss, conversions, operative times, and overall complications significantly decreased. The median resected lymph nodes increased but was not statistically significant. Median operative time decreased to approximately 370 minutes between the 30th and the 45th cases. There were no emergent intraoperative complications, and the anastomotic leak rate was 6% (6/100). The 30-day mortality was 0% (0/100), and the 90-day mortality was 1% (1/100). Conclusions Excellent perioperative and short-term patient outcomes with minimal mortality can be achieved using a standardized RAMIE procedure and a dedicated team approach. The structured process described may serve as a model to maximize patients’ safety during development and assessment of complex novel procedures.

Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy without Pyloroplasty: Analysis of 109 Cases

2010 ◽  
Vol 76 (10) ◽  
pp. 1135-1138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ninh T. Nguyen ◽  
Chirag Dholakia ◽  
Xuan-Mai T. Nguyen ◽  
Kevin Reavis
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Emptying ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Delayed Gastric Emptying ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Gastric Function ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Botox Injection

Pyloroplasty is performed during esophagectomy to avoid delayed gastric emptying. However, studies have shown that gastric function is minimally impaired even without a pyloroplasty when a gastric tube rather than the whole stomach is used for reconstruction. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of minimally invasive esophagectomy without performance of a pyloroplasty. We performed a retrospective review of 145 patients who underwent a minimally invasive esophagectomy. The 30-day mortality was 2.1 per cent with an in-hospital mortality of 3.4 per cent. Of the 140 patients with more than 90 days follow-up, 31 patients had a pyloroplasty and 109 patients did not. One (3.2%) of 31 patients with pyloroplasty versus six (5.5%) of 109 patients without pyloroplasty developed delayed gastric emptying. There was no significant difference in the leak rate between the two groups (9.7% vs 9.6%, respectively). Total operative time was significantly shorter in the group without pyloroplasty (360 vs 222 minutes with a pyloroplasty, P < 0.01). Patients with delayed gastric emptying responded well to endoscopic pyloric dilation or Botox injection. The routine performance of a pyloroplasty during minimally invasive esophagectomy can be safely omitted with a reduction in operative time and minimal adverse effects on postoperative gastric function.

FA04.03: MIE VERSUS RAMIE: PROMISING RESULTS OF A SINGLE-CENTER AND SINGLE-SURGEON ANALYSIS

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Peter Grimminger ◽  
Evangelos Tagkalos ◽  
Edin Hadzijusufovic ◽  
Benjamin Babic ◽  
Hauke Lang
Keyword(s):  
Esophageal Cancer ◽  
Lymph Node ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Circular Stapler ◽  
Reconstruction Technique ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Icu Stay

Abstract Background Robot assisted surgery for esophageal cancer is rapidly increasing, especially high-volume centers with access to a robot. The fully robotic minimally invasive esophagectomy using 4 robotic arms in the abdomen and thorax (RAMIE4) is performed as standard procedure in our department. In this analysis we compare the results of our first 50 RAMIE4 procedures with our last 50 fully minimally-invasive esophagectomies (MIE), which was our standard prior the robotic era. Methods Between April 2016 and March 2018, the data from 100 consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma undergoing modified Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy, performed by the same surgeon using the identical intrathoracic anastomotic reconstruction technique (circular stapler). 50 patients were treated with MIE and the other 50 with RAMIE4. Demographic data, extracted lymph nodes and R-status were compared. Complications occurred were compered according to the Dindo-Clavien classification. Results Demographic data did not show significant differences between the groups. The overall 30- and 90- mortality rates were 1% (1/100) and 3% (3/100) respectively (P = 0.305 and P = 0.499 respectively). In the RAMIE group the median lymph node harvest was significantly higher (27 vs. 23; P = 0.045), the median hospital stay was less in the RAMIE group, however not significantly (11.5d vs 13d; P = 0.112), the median ICU stay was significantly lower in the RAMIE group compared to MIE (1d vs 2.5d; P = 0.002). The complications according to the Dindo-Calvien classification were not significantly different between the two groups (P = 0.091). Conclusion In this study we were able to demonstrate the superiority of robotic assisted lymph node dissection for esophageal cancer surgery in a highly comparable setting. In addition the perioperative parameters, especially ICU stay seem to be in favor of RAMIE. The future potential of standardized RAMIE and RAMIE4 seems to be high. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

PS01.232: SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES OF ROBOT-ASSISTED MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 115-116
Author(s):  
Haiqi He ◽  
Junke Fu ◽  
Guangjian Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Pulmonary Complications ◽  
Invasive Technique ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Robotic Esophagectomy ◽  
Laparoscopic Esophagectomy

Abstract Background Surgical resection with radical lymphadenectomy is a pivotal component in the multidisciplinary therapy of esophageal cancer. Minimally invasive esophagectomy was shown to be effective in reducing the morbidity and was adopted increasingly. As a novel minimally invasive technique, robot-assisted esophagectomy remains in the initial stage ofapplication. This study describes the single-institution experience of robotic esophagectomy. Methods Between March 2016 and October 2017, 20 consecutive patients underwent robot assisted esophagectomy at our institute. The thoracic and abdominal mobilization were all performed with the assistance of the robot. We retrospectively collected the operative data and postoperative outcomes. Results The majority of patients were male (80%), and the median age was 62 years. The average operative time was 342 minutes (range 280–440). The average blood loss was 112 ml (range 50–400). No patient experienced conversion to a thoracotomy or laparotomy. R0 resection was achieved in all patients, the mean number of dissected lymph nodes was 19 (range 8–32). No 90-day operative mortality was observed, and postoperative complications were present in 8 of 20 patients (40.0%). Pulmonary complications were the most common event and were observed in 3 patients. Two patients experienced an anastomotic leak. Conclusion Our study demonstrated that robot-assisted esophagectomy is a safe and technically feasible alternative to conventional thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

464 IS OPEN LEFT THORACO-ABDOMINAL ESOPHAGECTOMY A VIABLE OPTION IN THE ERA OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY?

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fredrik Klevebro ◽  
Piers R Boshier ◽  
Carmen Mueller ◽  
Jonathan Cools-Lartigue ◽  
Lorenzo Ferri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Lymph Nodes ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽  
Postoperative Mortality ◽  
R0 Resection ◽  
Resection Rate ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy

Abstract   The aim of the study was to evaluate short-term and oncological outcomes of left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy (LTE) compared to minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. LTE facilitates complete resection of esophageal cancer particularly for bulky tumors, but there are concerns that this approach is associated with significant morbidity. Methods Prospectively entered esophagectomy databases from two high volume North American centers were reviewed for patients undergoing LTE or MIE in the 2012–2018. Patient demographics, tumour characteristics, operative outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and pathologic surrogates of oncologic efficacy (R0 resection rate, and number of resected lymph nodes) were compared. In total 247 patients were included in the study, LTE was applied in 170 (68.8%) patients, and MIE in 77 (31.2%) patients. Results LTE patients had more neoadjuvant treatment (LTE = 78.2%, MIE = 34.2%, P &lt; 0.001). There was no difference in overall postoperative complications (LTE = 56.9%, MIE = 55.0%, P = 0.799), severe complications (Clavien Dindo&gt;2—LTE = 26.1%, MIE17.0%, P = 0.184), pulmonary complications (LTE = 31.9%, MIE = 20.0%, P = 0.085), pneumonia (LTE = 15.2%, MIE = 13.6%, P = 0.768), anastomotic leak (LTE = 7%, MIE = 10%, P = 0.396), or postoperative mortality (LTE = 0%, MIE = 1.3%, P = 0.140). Median length of stay was 7 days in both groups. R0 resection rate was 93.8% and 95.5% respectively (P = 0.631). Median number of resected lymph nodes was 24 for LTE and 22 for MIE (P = 0.226). LTE had more stage II-IV tumors (LTE = 67.8%, MIE = 40.7%, P &lt; 0.001), and more node positive resections (LTE = 52.5%, MIE = 31.4%, P = 0.003). Conclusion LTE was used for larger tumors with greater lymph node burden in patients that were more likely to have received neoadjuvant treatment compared to MIE. Despite this the postoperative morbidity was equal to that of MIE, with no difference in short-term or oncological results in this cohort.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document