Abstract

171 Background: Surgery is pivotal in the management of patients with esophageal cancer. Recent prospective data demonstrates advantages of minimally invasive techniques. However, varying surgical techniques precludes the recommendation of a standard approach. We sought to examine our outcomes with differing approaches to minimally invasive esophagectomy. Methods: We queried a prospective esophageal database to identify patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) from 1994 and 2014. Surgical approaches included trans-hiatal (TH), Ivor Lewis (IVL), and robotic assisted Ivor Lewis (RAIL). Demographics, operative variables and post-operative complications were all compared. Results: We identified 280 patients who underwent MIE with a mean age of 65.65 ± 10.5 and a median follow-up of 48 months. Fifty-seven patients underwent IVL, 78 underwent TH, and 145 underwent RAIL. The length of operation was significantly longer in IVL and RAIL approaches compared to TH (TH=242, IVL=320, RAIL=415, p=0.001). Estimated blood loss did not differ between cohorts (TH=150, IVL=125, RAIL=158, p=0.8). Anastomotic leakage, stricture, pneumonia, and wound infections were all higher in the TH compared to the trans-thoracic approaches p=0.04, p=0.02, p=0.01, and p<0.001 respectively. Operative mortality was low for each cohort and did not differ between approaches (TH=2.6%, IVL=0%, RAIL=2%, p=0.2). The median length of hospitalization also did not differ between groups (TH=10 days, IVL=8.5 days, and RAIL=9 days, p=0.15). Adequacy of oncologic resection was measured by margins and nodal harvest. There was decreased R1 resections in both the IVL and RAIL compared to TH (TH=8%, IVL=0%, and RAIL=0% p=0.04). Additionally, the mean number of lymph nodes harvested was lower in patients undergoing TH compared to IVL and RAIL groups (TH=9.2, IVL=12.8, and RAIL=20.6, p=0.05). Conclusions: In our large series comparing minimally invasive approaches to esophageal resection we have demonstrated improved operative outcomes and oncologic outcomes in trans-thoracic approaches compared to trans-hiatal approaches. We recommend that patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy be strongly considered for a trans-thoracic approach.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call