Early Quality of Life Outcomes After Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy

Abstract

Minimally invasive esophagectomy may improve some perioperative outcomes over open approaches; effects on quality of life are less clear. A prospective trial of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and open esophagectomy was initiated, measuring quality of life via the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal and Brief Pain Inventory. Mixed generalized linear models assessed associations betweenquality of life scores over time and by surgerytype. In total, 106 patients underwent open esophagectomy; 64 underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (98% RAMIE). The groups did not differ in age, sex, comorbidities, histologic subtype, stage, or induction treatment (P= .42 to P > .95). Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal scores were lower at 1 month (P < .001), returned to near baseline by 4 months, and did not differ between groups (P= .83). Brief PainInventory average pain severity (P= .007) and interference (P= .004) were lower for RAMIE. RAMIE had lower estimated blood loss (250 vs 350 cm3; P < .001), shorter length of stay (9 vs 11 days; P < .001), fewer intensive care unit admissions (8% vs 20%; P= .033), more lymph nodes harvested (25 vs 22; P= .05), and longer surgical time (6.4 vs 5.4 hours; P < .001). Major complications (39% for RAMIE vs 52% for open esophagectomy; P > .95), anastomotic leak (3% vs 9%; P= .41), and 90-day mortality (2% vs 4%; P= .85) did not differ between groups. Pulmonary (14% vs 34%; P= .014) and infectious (17% vs 36%; P= .029) complications were lower for RAMIE. RAMIE is associated with lower immediate postoperative pain severity and interference and decreased pulmonary and infectious complications. Ongoing data accrual will assess mid-term and long-term outcomes in this cohort.