Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy Provides Significant Survival Advantage Compared with Open or Hybrid Esophagectomy for Patients with Cancers of the Esophagus and Gastroesophageal Junction

Objective During totally minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), the gastric conduit is typically constructed via laparoscopy. Trauma from laparoscopic instruments, inability to palpate the gastroepiploic arcade, and challenges in optimal positioning of the stomach for intra-abdominal stapling have led to the widespread use of laparotomy as part of hybrid MIE procedures. Our objective was to evaluate the safety of transthoracic extracorporeal gastric conduit preparation. We hypothesize that this alternative technique is equivalent in safety to the laparoscopic approach. Methods This is a retrospective comparison of laparoscopic and transthoracic extracorporeal gastric conduit preparation with regard to anastomotic and respiratory outcomes. Results During a 3-year period, 30 patients underwent MIE with a right intrathoracic anastomosis (extracorporeal conduit, 15; laparoscopic conduit, 15). Mean age (58.6 vs 67 years, P = 0.59), tumor location (gastroesophageal junction vs middle and lower esophageal, P = 0.27), and histology (adenocarcinoma vs other 26.7%, P = 0.68) were similar between groups. Anastomotic technique and operating surgeon were the same for all patients. Patients in the laparoscopic gastric conduit group were more likely to have undergone induction chemoradiotherapy (40% vs 80%, P = 0.030). There was no significant difference between groups with respect to anastomotic complications, including anastomotic leak and anastomotic stricture (20% vs 13.3%, P = 0.70). Transthoracic gastric conduit preparation was not associated with increased respiratory complications (8% vs 12%, P = 0.09). Conclusions Transthoracic gastric conduit preparation is a simple, minimally invasive alternative laparotomy for gastric conduit preparation during MIE. No additional incision is required. The technique may help surgeons overcome shortcomings of the laparoscopic approach without impacting perioperative risk.

Download Full-text

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

Diseases of the Esophagus ◽

10.1093/dote/doab052.464 ◽

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 < 0.001). There was no difference in overall postoperative complications (LTE = 56.9%, MIE = 55.0%, P = 0.799), severe complications (Clavien Dindo>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 < 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.

Download Full-text

P72 IS OPEN LEFT THORACO-ABDOMINAL ESOPHAGECTOMY A VIABLE OPTION IN THE ERA OF MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY?

Diseases of the Esophagus ◽

10.1093/dote/doz092.72 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 32 (Supplement_2) ◽

Author(s):

F Klevebro ◽

P Boshier ◽

C Mueller ◽

J Cools-Lartigue ◽

L 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 Aim To evaluate short-term and oncological outcomes of left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy compared to minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction Background and Methods Left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy (LTE) facilitates complete resection of esophageal cancer particularly for bulky tumors, but there are concerns that this approach is associated with significant morbidity. 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. Results In total 247 patients were included in the study, LTE was applied in 170 (68.8%) patients, and MIE in 77 (31.2%) patients. LTE patients had more neoadjuvant treatment (LTE=78.2%, MIE=34.2%, P<0.001). There was no difference in overall postoperative complications (LTE=56.9%, MIE=55.0%, P=0.799), severe complications (Clavien Dindo>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<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.

Download Full-text

Minimally invasive left-sided esophagectomy (MILO): a novel approach for locally advanced tumors of the gastroesophageal junction

Diseases of the Esophagus ◽

10.1093/dote/doaa059 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

J A Gossage

Keyword(s):

Minimally Invasive ◽

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽

Abdominal Cavity ◽

Gastroesophageal Junction ◽

Locally Advanced ◽

Hybrid Approach ◽

Two Phase ◽

Invasive Esophagectomy ◽

Novel Approach ◽

The Uk

Summary Recent national audit has shown that levels of minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer have increased to around 45% in the UK. The hybrid approach is the most common, with a laparoscopic abdominal phase and an open thoracic dissection. A number of centers have now adopted a two-phase Ivor–Lewis minimally invasive esophagectomy using a laparoscopic abdominal phase, followed by a thoracoscopic chest phase with a mini-thoracotomy to extract the specimen. The two-phase nature of the procedure lengthens the operative time and makes returning to the abdominal cavity difficult. The thoracotomy incision can also be painful and may reduce respiratory function post operatively. This report describes a novel single-phase minimally invasive left-sided technique with a mini-laparotomy for specimen extraction. This method offers excellent hiatal exposure, avoids a thoracotomy, and shortens the procedure time. Minimally invasive left-sided esophagectomy is a new useful approach for tumors located at the gastroesophageal junction.

Download Full-text

Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma, a randomized controlled trial (ROBOT-2 trial)

BMC Cancer ◽

10.1186/s12885-021-08780-x ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

E. Tagkalos ◽

P. C. van der Sluis ◽

F. Berlth ◽

A. Poplawski ◽

E. Hadzijusufovic ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lymph Node ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Esophageal Adenocarcinoma ◽

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽

Gastroesophageal Junction ◽

Western World ◽

Invasive Esophagectomy ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Link Type ◽

Resectable Esophageal

Abstract Background For patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction, radical esophagectomy with 2-field lymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of the multimodality treatment with curative intent. Both conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) were shown to be superior compared to open transthoracic esophagectomy considering postoperative complications. However, no randomized comparison exists between MIE and RAMIE in the Western World for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Methods This is an investigator-initiated and investigator-driven multicenter randomized controlled parallel-group superiority trial. All adult patients (age ≥ 18 and ≤ 90 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0–3, M0) esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and with European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 will be assessed for eligibility and included after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 218) with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction are randomized to either RAMIE (n = 109) or MIE (n = 109). The primary outcome of this study is the total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes specified per lymph node station. Conclusion This is the first randomized controlled trial designed to compare RAMIE to MIE as surgical treatment for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction in the Western World. The hypothesis of the proposed study is that RAMIE will result in a higher abdominal and mediastinal lymph node yield specified per station compared to conventional MIE. Short-term results and the primary endpoint (total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes per lymph node station) will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient within this trial. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04306458. Registered 13th March 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04306458; Date of first enrolment 18.01.2021; Target sample size 218; Recruitment status: Recruiting; Protocol version 2; Issue date 10.03.2020; Rev. 02.02.2021; Authors ET, PCvdS, PPG.

Download Full-text

Trimodality treatment for advanced esophageal cancer: Impact of minimally invasive esophagectomy.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2011.29.4_suppl.125 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽

pp. 125-125

Author(s):

D. G. Williams ◽

S. Carpenter ◽

H. J. Ross ◽

H. Paripati ◽

J. B. Ashman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Esophageal Cancer ◽

Minimally Invasive ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽

Gastroesophageal Junction ◽

Locally Advanced ◽

Operating Time ◽

Advanced Esophageal Cancer ◽

Invasive Esophagectomy ◽

Open Esophagectomy

125 Background: Esophageal cancer is best managed by multimodality therapy, frequently with chemotherapy (C) or chemo- radiotherapy (CRT) preceding resection. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is increasingly accepted, but studies of MIE in advanced esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer after induction CRT are lacking. This report presents the data on MIE as part of tri-modality therapy for esophageal cancer at Mayo Clinic in Arizona (MCA). Methods: Patients (pts) who underwent CRT before or after MIE for cancer at MCA between November 2006 and May of 2010 were reviewed retrospectively. Results: 46 pts (40 males, and 6 females) met study criteria and were reviewed. Median age was 62 years (41-88 years). 45 pts (98%) had adenocarcinoma and one pt had squamous carcinoma. Initial clinical stage was IIA in 10 pts (22%), IIB in 3 pts (7%), III in 26 pts (55%), and IVA in 7 pts (15%) with positive celiac nodes. 43 pts (93%) underwent preoperative CRT with additional intra-operative radiotherapy in 4 pts. Median operating time was 354 min (range 211-567 min), median blood loss was 225 ml (range 50-1,400 ml), and median hospital stay was 8 days (range 5-48 days). 19 pts (41%), including the 3 who did not undergo preoperative CRT, received postoperative C or CRT due to either residual disease at resection or to local recurrence. 30 of 43 pts undergoing MIE after CRT were down staged (11 CR [25.6%], 10 near CR [23.3%]) demonstrating a major response to neoadjuvant therapy in 48.9% of pts. One pt died in hospital (from ARDS and sepsis subsequent to aspiration pneumonia) and two pts died within 30 days of surgery (one from pulmonary embolism, and the other from unknown causes) for a 30 day surgical mortality of 6.5%. 29 pts (63%) had a complication of surgery including 11 (24%) minor and 18 (39%) major complications. After a median follow-up of 13 months (range 0.9-43 months) 16 pts were diagnosed with recurrent disease and 10 of these pts have died of their disease. Conclusions: CRT with MIE is associated with an acceptable morbidity and mortality level for pts with locally advanced esophageal cancer. These results compare favorably with morbidity, mortality, and recurrence rates in open esophagectomy pts. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Download Full-text

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

Diseases of the Esophagus ◽

10.1093/dote/doab052.691 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

Fredrik Klevebro ◽

Shiwei Han ◽

Stephen Ash ◽

C Mueller ◽

Jonathan Cools-Lartigue ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Minimally Invasive ◽

Lymph Nodes ◽

Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽

Gastroesophageal Junction ◽

Neoadjuvant Treatment ◽

Length Of Hospital Stay ◽

High Volume ◽

R0 Resection ◽

Resection Rate ◽

Invasive Esophagectomy

Abstract Left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy (LTE) facilitates complete resection of esophageal cancer particularly for bulky tumors, but there are concerns that this approach is associated with significant morbidity. The aim of the current study was to evaluate short-term and oncological outcomes of left thoracoabdominal esophagectomy compared to minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. Methods Prospectively entered esophagectomy databases from three high volume centers were reviewed for patients undergoing LTE or MIE 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 844 patients were included in the study, LTE was applied in 654 (77.5%) patients, and MIE in 190 (22.5%) patients. Results LTE patients had more neoadjuvant treatment (LTE = 74.5%, MIE = 64.9%, P = 0.027). There was no difference in overall postoperative complications (LTE = 61.9%, MIE = 64.6%, P = 0.517), severe complications (Clavien Dindo >IIIa (LTE = 26.6%, MIE 26.5%, P = 0.982), pneumonia (LTE = 29.8%, MIE = 26.3%, P = 0.349), anastomotic leak (LTE = 7.7%, MIE = 9.9%, P = 0.348), or in-hospital mortality (LTE = 1.5%, MIE = 2.1%, P = 0.584). Median length of stay was 11 days after LTE vs. 8 days after MIE (P < 0.001). R0 resection rate was 92.4% and 95.6% respectively (P = 0.144). Median number of resected lymph nodes was 25 for LTE and 28 for MIE (P = 0.017). LTE had more node positive resections (LTE = 57.6%, MIE = 44.0%, P = 0.001). Conclusion LTE was used for tumors with greater lymph node burden in patients that were more likely to have received neoadjuvant treatment compared to MIE. MIE was associated with significantly shorter length of hospital stay, however postoperative morbidity and Clavien-Dindo scores were equal to that of MIE in this cohort.

Download Full-text