Hybrid Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy Research Articles

787. THE CHALLENGE OF GASTRO-ESOPHAGEAL ONCOLOGICAL SURGERY AFTER BARIATRIC PROCEDURES: EXPERIENCE OF A REFERRAL HIGH-VOLUME UPPER GI SURGICAL CENTER

Abstract Background The effectiveness of bariatric surgery for weight loss in morbidly obese patients has been well established and it's becoming more common as many surgeons are trained to perform them safely, even in older patients. Obesity is associated with reflux and hormonal imbalances that increase the risk of Barrett's esophagus, esophageal adenocarcinoma and gastric cancer. Bariatric procedures alter gastric anatomy, vascularization and lymphatic drainage and render subsequent upper gastrointestinal surgery for malignancies a technical challenge, that will present more and more in the future. We present laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass and gastric banding conversion to oncological respective surgeries. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of our referral high-volume center for upper gastrointestinal surgery and identified patients who underwent upper gastrointestinal oncologic surgery from January 1998 to May 2024. We selected all patients who had previously undergone bariatric surgery (laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, laparoscopic gastric bypass, gastric banding, or other less common procedures). Three patients met our criteria, and we recorded: demographic characteristics, surgical technique, oncologic surgical outcome, postoperative complications, long-term complications, and oncologic follow-up. Results A hybrid IvorLewis esophagectomy was performed years after a sleeve gastrectomy for distal esophageal adenocarcinoma. The sleeve was used for gastric pull-up, adequately vascularized by the right gastroepiploic artery as demonstrated by intraoperative indocyanine green. A patient developed adenocarcinoma of the cardia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, infiltrating the gastric pouch, the gastric remnant and liver S2. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, an open Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy was performed using the gastric remnant for a pull-up. In a third patient, a locally advanced adenocarcinoma of the stomach developed after gastric banding. After neoadjuvant chemotherapy, an open total gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy was performed. Conclusion We report three cases of successful esophago-gastric oncological surgery in patients with altered anatomy and vascularization due to previous bariatric surgery, without major postoperative complications or mortality. Oncologic benchmarks for both esophageal and gastric surgery were met as a high lymph node yield and oncologic margins were maintained. Our heterogeneous series suggests that sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass, and gastric banding surgery can be successfully converted to resective surgeries after a metachronous neoplasia diagnosis in high-volume upper gastrointestinal centers. These and similar modified reconstructive techniques are likely to be used in the future as metabolic surgery and esophago-gastric cancer are increasing.

Factors Influencing Postoperative Complications Following Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Complications arising following minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy often result from inadequate enteral nutrition, highlighting the need for proactive measures to prevent such issues. One approach involves identifying high-risk cases prone to complications and implementing percutaneous endoscopic jejunostomy (PEJ) tube placement during esophageal resection to ensure timely enteral nutrition. In this single-center, retrospective cohort study, we examined patients who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer at a high-volume center. The dataset encompassed demographic information, comorbidities, laboratory parameters, and intraoperative details. Our center utilized the EndoVac system pre-emptively to safeguard the anastomosis from harmful secretions and to enhance local oxygen partial pressure. All patients received pre-emptive EndoVac therapy and underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy in the early postoperative days. The need for multiple postoperative EndoVac cycles indicated complications, including anastomotic insufficiency and subsequent requirement for a PEJ. The primary objectives were identifying predictive factors for anastomotic insufficiency and the need for multi-cycle EndoVac therapy, quantifying their effects, and assessing the likelihood of postoperative complications. 149 patients who underwent minimally invasive or hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy were analyzed and 21 perioperative and demographic features were evaluated. Postoperative complications were associated with the body mass index (BMI) category, the use of blood pressure medication, and surgery duration. Anastomotic insufficiency as a specific complication was correlated with BMI and the Charlson comorbidity index. The odds ratio of being in the high-risk group significantly increased with higher BMI (OR = 1.074, p = 0.048) and longer surgery duration (OR = 1.005, p = 0.004). Based on our findings, high BMI and longer surgery duration are potential risk factors for postoperative complications following minimally invasive esophagectomy. Identifying such factors can aid in pre-emptively addressing nutritional challenges and reducing the incidence of complications in high-risk patients.

Clinical utility and applicability of the,Esophagus Complication Consensus Group' (ECCG) classification of anastomotic leakage following hybrid Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy.

Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains the leading surgical complication following Ivor-Lewis (IL) esophagectomy. Different treatment options of AL exist but outcome is difficult to compare due to a lack of generally accepted classifications. This retrospectivestudy was conducted to analyze the clinical significance of a recently proposed classification based on the management of AL. A cohort of 954 consecutive patients undergoing hybrid IL esophagectomy (laparoscopy/thoracotomy) was analysed. AL was defined according to the,Esophagus Complication Consensus Group' (ECCG) criteria depending on its treatment: conservative (AL type I), interventional endoscopic (AL type II), and surgical (AL type III). Primary outcome was single or multiple organ failure (Clavien-Dindo IVA/B) associated with AL. Overall morbidity was 63.0% and 8.8% (84/954 patients) developed an AL postoperatively. Three patients (3.5%) had an AL type I, 57 patients (67.9%) an AL type II and 24 patients (28.6%) an AL type III. For patients managed surgically, AL was diagnosed significantly earlier (median days: AL type III: 2 vs AL type II: 6, p < 0.001). Associated organ failure (CD IVA/B) was significantly lower for AL type II as compared to AL type III (21.1% versus 45.8%, p < 0.0001). In-hospital mortality was 3.5% for AL type II and 8.3% for AL type III (p = 0.789). There was no difference for re-admission to ICU and overall length of hospital stay. The proposed ECCG classification is simply to apply and discriminates the post-treatment severity of AL but does not aid to implement a treatment algorithm.

Introduction of laparoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy as hybrid procedure and comparison with open esophagectomy. A propensity-matched retrospective study.

Esophagectomy is associated with increased rate of postoperative complications, making it one of the procedures with the highest impact on patients' quality of life. Hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (HMIE) has been introduced in our clinic with the aim to reduce postoperative morbidity, without compromising on oncological outcomes. We conducted this survey to evaluate the perioperative morbidity of the new method during the introduction phase compared to open esophagectomy in two similarly matched groups of patients. This study included the first 17 patients who underwent HMIE for esophageal cancer at a high-volume tertiary center. After generating propensity scores using the variables age, body mass index, pulmonary comorbidities, cardiac comorbidities, histologic type, and neoadjuvant treatment, 17 patients in the hybrid group were matched with 17 patients in the open group. Surgical outcomes, oncological outcomes, and postoperative complications according to the guidelines of the Esophageal Complications Consensus Group were compared between the two groups. Surgical and oncological outcomes were comparable between the two approaches. The rate of postoperative complications, including surgical, gastrointestinal, and pulmonary complications, were similar in the two groups. Our hypothesis that laparoscopy could reduce postoperative complications was not confirmed. HMIE is a safe procedure, resulting in radical oncological resection and similar morbidity with open esophagectomy. Surgeons, who are proficient in open approach and laparoscopic anti-reflux and gastric surgery, can safely adopt the hybrid approach without significant learning curve associated morbidity.

792 OUTCOMES AFTER TOTALLY MINIMALLY INVASIVE VERSUS HYBRID OR OPEN IVOR LEWIS ESOPHAGECTOMY: RESULTS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL ESODATA STUDY GROUP.

Abstract To compare complications following totally minimally invasive (TMIE), laparoscopically assisted (hybrid) and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer. Three randomized trials have reported benefits for minimally invasive esophagectomy. Two studies compared TMIE versus open esophagectomy and another compared hybrid versus open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Only small retrospective studies compared TMIE with hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Methods Data were used from the International Esodata Study Group assessing patients undergoing TMIE, hybrid or open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Primary outcome was pneumonia, secondary outcomes included incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage, (major) complications, length of stay, escalation of care and 90-day mortality. Data were analyzed using multivariate multilevel models. Results In total, 4733 patients were included in this study (TMIE:1472, hybrid:1364 and open:1897). Patients undergoing TMIE had lower incidence of pneumonia compared to hybrid (10.9% vs 16.3%, Odds Ratio (OR):0.56, 95%CI: 0.40–0.80) and open esophagectomy (10.9% vs 17.4%, OR:0.60, 95%CI: 0.42–0.84) and had shorter length of stay (median 10 days (IQR 8–16)) compared to hybrid (14 (11–19), p = 0.041) and open esophagectomy (11 (9–16), p = 0.027). Patients undergoing TMIE had higher rate of anastomotic leakage compared to hybrid (15.1% vs 10.7%, OR:1.47, 95%CI: 1.01–2.13) and open esophagectomy (7.3%, OR:1.73, 95%CI: 1.26–2.38). No differences were reported between hybrid and open esophagectomy. Conclusion Compared to hybrid and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, TMIE resulted in a lower pneumonia rate, a shorter hospital length of stay but a higher anastomotic leakage rate. The impact of these individual complications on survival and long-term quality of life should be further investigated.

Revisional Therapy for Recurrent Symptoms After Heller Myotomy for Achalasia

PurposeSymptom recurrence after initial surgical management of esophageal achalasia occurs in 10–25% of patients. The aim of this study was to analyze safety and efficacy of revisional therapy after failed Heller myotomy (HM). MethodsA retrospective review of a prospective database was performed searching for patients with recurrent symptoms after primary surgical therapy for achalasia. Patients with previously failed HM were considered for the final analysis. The Foregut questionnaire, and the Atkinson and Eckardt scales were used to assess severity of symptoms. Objective investigations routinely included upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and barium swallow study. Redo treatments consisted of endoscopic pneumatic dilation (PD), laparoscopic HM, hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, or stapled cardioplasty. A yearly clinical and endoscopic follow-up was scheduled in all patients. ResultsOver a 20-year period, 26 patients with a median age of 66 years (IQR 19.5) underwent revisional therapy after failed HM for achalasia at a tertiary-care university hospital. The median time after index procedure was 10 years (IQR 21). Revisional therapy consisted of endoscopic pneumatic dilation (n=13), laparoscopic HM and fundoplication (n=10), esophagectomy (n=2), and stapled cardioplasty and fundoplication (n=1). Nine (34.6%) of these patients required further endoscopic or surgical treatments. There was no mortality, and the overall complication rate was 7.7%. At a median follow-up of 42 months (range 10–149), a significant decrease of dysphagia, regurgitation, chest pain, respiratory symptoms, and median Eckardt score (p<0.05) was noted. ConclusionIn specialized and multidisciplinary centers, revisional therapy for achalasia is feasible, safe, and effective.

Two-stage hybrid Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy as surgical strategy to reduce postoperative morbidity for high-risk patients

BackgroundIvor-Lewis esophagectomy (ILE) is the standard surgical care for esophageal cancer patients but postoperative morbidity impairs quality of life and reduces long-term oncological outcome. Two-stage ILE separating the abdominal and thoracic phase into two distinct surgical procedures has proven to enhance microcirculation of the gastric conduit and therefore most likely reduces complications. However, two-stage ILE has not been evaluated systematically in selected groups of patients scheduled for this procedure. This investigation aims to demonstrate the feasibility of two-stage ILE in high-risk patients.Patients and methodsIn this retrospective analysis of data obtained from a prospective database, a consecutive series of 275 hybrid ILE (hILE) were included. Patients were divided into two groups based on one- or two-stage hILE. Postoperative complications were assessed according to ECCG (Esophageal Complication Consensus Group) criteria and compared using the Clavien–Dindo score. Indication for two-stage esophagectomy was classified as pre- or intraoperative decision.Results34 out of 275 patients (12.7%) underwent two-stage hILE. Patients of the two-stage group were significantly older. In 21 of 34 patients (61.8%) the decision for a two-stage procedure was made prior to esophagectomy, in 13 (38.2%) patients intraoperatively after completion of the laparoscopic gastric mobilization. The most frequent preoperative reason to select the two-stage procedure was a stenosis of the coeliac trunc and superior mesenteric artery (n = 10). The predominant cause for an intraoperative change of strategy was a laparoscopically diagnosed hepatic fibrosis/cirrhosis (n = 5).Overall morbidity and major’ complications (CD > IIIa) were comparable for both groups (11.7% in both groups). The overall anastomotic leak rate was 12.4% and was non-significant lower for the two-stage procedure.ConclusionTwo-stage hILE is a feasible concept to individualize the surgical treatment of patients with well-defined clinical risk factors for postoperative morbidity. It can also be applied after completion of the abdominal phase of IL esophagectomy without compromising the patient safety.

Hybrid approaches to minimally invasive esophagectomy

Esophageal cancer resection usually requires a two-field or three-field surgical approach to perform the resection and the reconstruction. With the progress of anaesthesiology and surgical skills, the possibility to reduce the surgical trauma has grown up and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) has widespread worldwide. The hybrid approaches to MIE are the combination of minimally invasive approaches mixed to open approaches by applying the minimally invasive techniques at one level of the two stages (abdomen or thorax) of the procedure. The hybrid techniques can be decided prior to surgery in the surgical decision-making strategy to focus and to keep open approach for one the two stages, either because of expected surgical issues or to obtain a better exposure for confection of the intrathoracic anastomosis. Sometimes, the decision to opt for hybrid techniques can also results from the necessity to convert intraoperatively at both stages during total MIE. The most described hybrid techniques are represented by the laparoscopic hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy where the gastric mobilization is performed laparoscopically whereas the confection of the intrathoracic anastomosis is performed with an open approach. This technique appears safe, reproducible, and easy to teach. The recent MIRO trial has provided evidences that the unique use of laparoscopy for the abdominal part of the esophagectomy resulted in a strong benefit on postoperative respiratory outcomes, with the same magnitude to those observed with total MIE. The MIRO trial suggests that the maximum benefits of minimally invasive techniques are more provided by laparoscopy rather than thoracoscopy. Moreover the laparoscopic approach results in better short, mid and long-term outcomes compared to open approach, without any compromise regarding oncological outcomes. At last, laparoscopy seems to improve health-related quality of life. The laparoscopic approach has to be seen as a new standard approach and should be incorporated to all esophageal cancer resections whenever possible.

Totally minimally invasive vs hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for cancer: A comparative prospective study on safety and efficacy

Totally minimally invasive vs hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for cancer: A comparative prospective study on safety and efficacy

PS01.207: TRANSHIATAL AND INTERCOSTAL PLEURAL DRAINS AFTER HYBRID IVOR LEWIS ESOPHAGECTOMY: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS IN 100 CONSECUTIVE PATIENTS

Abstract Background In a previous proof of concept study, transhiatal pleural drain has been shown to be safe and effective after hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Aim of the present study was to compare short-term outcomes of trans-hiatal and intercostal pleural drainage. We hypothesized that a trans-hiatal pleural drain introduced through the sub-xyphoid port site incision at laparoscopy could reduce postoperative pain and enhance patient recovery. Methods This was an observational retrospective cohort study. Two methods of pleural drainage were compared in patients undergoing hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Patients treated with a transhiatal drain connected to a vacuum bag were compared to an historical cohort of patients treated with the conventional intercostal drain connected to under-water seal and suction. Postoperative morbidity, total and daily drainage output, serum albumin levels, and total dose of paracetamol and ketorolac administered on-demand were recorded. Postoperative complications were scored according to the Dindo-Clavien classification. Results Over a 2-year period, 50 patients with transhiatal drain and 50 with intercostal drains met the criteria for inclusion in the study. Demographic and clinico-pathological variables were similar in the two groups. No conversions from the portable vacuum system to underwater seal and suction occurred. There was no mortality nor statistical significant difference in the rate of grade ≥ 3 postoperative complications. The total volume of drain output and the serum albumin levels were similar in the two groups. The total dose of ketorolac was significantly reduced in patients with transhiatal drain (P &lt; 0.001). The length of hospital stay was similar in the two groups. No complications related to the method of pleural drain occurred up to 3 months after hospital discharge. There was only one hospital readmission in the transhiatal group due to severe nutritional impairment. Conclusion Transhiatal pleural drainage connected to a portable vacuum system can safely replace the intercostal drain after hybrid Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in selected patients. It has the potential to reduce postoperative pain and use of nonsteroidal antinflammatory drugs, and to enhance recovery from surgery. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Transhiatal Chest Drainage After Hybrid Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy: Proof of Concept Study

Intercostal pleural drainage is standard practice after transthoracic esophagectomy but has some drawbacks. We hypothesized that a transhiatal pleural drain introduced through the subxyphoid port site incision at laparoscopy can be as effective as the intercostal drainage and may enhance patient recovery. A proof of concept study was designed to assess a new method of pleural drainage in patients undergoing hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (laparoscopy and right thoracotomy). The main study aims were safety and efficacy of transhiatal pleural drainage with a 15 Fr Blake tube connected to a portable vacuum system. Pre- and postoperative data, mean duration, and total and daily output of drainage were recorded in an electronic database. Postoperative complications were scored according to the Dindo-Clavien classification. Between June 2015 and December 2016, 50 of 63 consecutive patients met the criteria for inclusion in the study. No conversions from the portable vacuum system to underwater seal and suction occurred. There was no mortality. The overall morbidity rate was 40%. Two patients (4%) required reoperation for hemothorax and chylothorax, respectively. Percutaneous catheter drainage for residual pneumothorax was necessary in 2 patients (4%) on postoperative day 2. The mean duration of drainage was 7 days (interquartile range [IQR] = 2), and the total volume of drain output was 1580 mL (IQR = 880). No pleural effusion on chest X-ray was detected at the 3-month follow-up visit. Transhiatal pleural drainage is safe and effective after hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and could replace the intercostal drain in selected patients.

Hybrid Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

The last 25 years have witnessed a steady increase in the use of minimally invasive esophagectomy for the treatment of esophageal cancer. However, it is unclear which the optimal minimally invasive approach is: totally minimally invasive or hybrid (laparoscopic assisted or thoracoscopic assisted)? The current evidence from nonrandomized control trials suggests that hybrid laparoscopic-assisted esophagectomy couples the benefits of laparoscopy and the advantages of thoracotomy, leading to reduced surgical trauma without jeopardizing survival compared with open esophagectomy. Compromised blood supply and tension on the anastomosis are two of the main factors that lead to anastomotic leakage. Recent studies have shown that a side-to-side mechanical intrathoracic esophagogastric anastomosis is associated with low anastomotic complications. This article discusses surgical aspects and outcomes of hybrid laparoscopic-assisted esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with robotic assisted gastric mobilization and thoracoscopic esophageal dissection and anastomosis.

Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (ILE) is one of the most commonly adopted technique which can be performed a variety of ways for the anastomosis. We developed a hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with robotic system and thoracoscopy.

Hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (laparoscopy and thoracotomy) ensures low complications and guarantees oncological results. A prospective study

Hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (laparoscopy and thoracotomy) ensures low complications and guarantees oncological results. A prospective study