Does the Approach Matter? Comparing Survival in Robotic, Minimally Invasive, and Open Esophagectomies

Abstract

Our objective was to determine how surgical approach impacts overall survival and postoperative outcomes when comparing robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), and open esophagectomy (OE). The National Cancer Database was queried for patients diagnosed with pathologic Stage 0 to III esophageal cancer from 2010 to 2015. Primary outcome measures evaluated were length of stay, 30-day unplanned readmissions, mortality rates at 30 and 90 days, and overall survival rates. The surgical cohorts underwent 1:1 propensity score matching, and Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were compared by surgical approach. Cox proportional hazards regression was utilized to estimate factors associated with overall survival. Of 5,553 patients that met criteria, 28.4% were MIE, 7.8% RAMIE, and 63.8% OE. From 2010 to 2015, an increasing trend was seen for both minimally invasive approaches, with MIE surpassing the number of OEs. Unplanned 30-day readmissions and 30-day and 90-day mortality rates were not significantly different between the different groups. Median length of stay was significantly shorter in MIE (9 [interquartile range (IQR), 8 to 14] days) and RAMIE (9 [IQR, 7 to 14] days), compared with OE (10 [IQR, 8 to 15] days; p < 0.001). MIE and RAMIE had comparable survival rates compared with OE, with no significant differences in median overall survival estimates after propensity score matching (log-rank p= 0.603), with a trend for increased survival in MIE (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.89 to 1.06; p= 0.530) and RAMIE (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 0.95; p= 0.012). Both minimally invasive approaches had a significantly higher median lymph node counts (MIE: 15 [IQR, 9 to 22]; RAMIE: 17 [IQR, 11 to 24]; OE: 13 [IQR, 8 to 20]), which may highlight important differences in postoperative upstaging. Trends in MIE use is surpassing the open approach. Minimally invasive approaches are becoming the preferred approach, with noninferior long-term results compared with OEs. A significantly higher lymph node yield was seen for RAMIE and MIE.