Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy Research Articles

Use of a mobilized, perfused, falciform ligament patch for repair of paraconduit herniation after robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Use of a mobilized, perfused, falciform ligament patch for repair of paraconduit herniation after robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Robotic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy Is Safe and Cost Equivalent Compared to Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in a Tertiary Referral Center.

In recent decades, robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been increasingly adopted for patients with esophageal cancer (EC) or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). However, concerns regarding its costs compared to conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) have emerged. This study examined outcomes and costs of RAMIE versus total MIE in 128 patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for EC/GEJ at our department between 2017 and 2021. Surgical costs were higher for RAMIE (EUR 12,370 vs. EUR 10,059, p < 0.001). Yet, median daily (EUR 2023 vs. EUR 1818, p = 0.246) and total costs (EUR 30,510 vs. EUR 29,180, p = 0.460) were comparable. RAMIE showed a lower incidence of postoperative pneumonia (8% vs. 25%, p = 0.029) and a trend towards shorter hospital stays (15 vs. 17 days, p = 0.205), which may have equalized total costs. Factors independently associated with higher costs included readmission to the intensive care unit (hazard ratio [HR] = 7.0), length of stay (HR = 13.5), anastomotic leak (HR = 17.0), and postoperative pneumonia (HR = 5.4). In conclusion, RAMIE does not impose an additional financial burden. This suggests that RAMIE may be considered as a valid alternative approach for esophagectomy. Attention to typical cost factors can enhance postoperative care across surgical methods.

Reducing the Risks of Esophagectomies: A Retrospective Comparison of Hybrid versus Full-Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) Approaches.

This retrospective analysis aimed to assess and compare the short-term perioperative outcomes and morbidity of hybrid and full-Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE) surgical techniques. A total of 168 robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy procedures performed at Muenster University Hospital were included in the study, with 63 cases in the hybrid group and 105 cases in the full-robotic group. Demographic factors, comorbidities, and tumor stages showed no significant differences between the two groups. However, the full-RAMIE technique demonstrated superiority in terms of overall operative time, postoperative pain levels, and patient morphine consumption. Additionally, the full-RAMIE group exhibited better perioperative outcomes, with significantly shorter ICU stays and fewer occurrences of pneumonias and severe complications. While there was a trend favoring the full-RAMIE technique in terms of severe postoperative complications and anastomotic insufficiencies, further research is required to establish it as the gold standard surgical technique for Ivor Lewis esophagectomy.

From open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy to a hybrid robotic-assisted thoracoscopic approach: a single-center experience over two decades

PurposeRobotic-assisted procedures are increasingly used in esophageal cancer surgery. We compared postoperative complications and early oncological outcomes following hybrid robotic-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (Rob-E) and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (Open-E), performed in a single mid-volume center, in the context of evolving preoperative patient and tumor characteristics over two decades.MethodsWe evaluated prospectively collected data from a single center from 1999 to 2020 including 321 patients that underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, 76 underwent Rob-E, and 245 Open-E. To compare perioperative outcomes, a 1:1 case-matched analysis was performed. Endpoints included postoperative morbidity and 30-day mortality.ResultsPreoperative characteristics revealed increased rates of adenocarcinomas and wider use of neoadjuvant treatment over time. A larger number of patients with higher ASA grades were operated with Rob-E. In case-matched cohorts, there were no differences in the overall morbidity (69.7% in Rob-E, 60.5% in Open-E, p value 0.307), highest Clavien-Dindo grade per patient (43.4% vs. 38.2% grade I or II, p value 0.321), comprehensive complication index (median 20.9 in both groups, p value 0.401), and 30-day mortality (2.6% in Rob-E, 3.9% in Open-E, p value 1.000). Similar median numbers of lymph nodes were harvested (24.5 in Rob-E, 23 in Open-E, p value 0.204), and comparable rates of R0-status (96.1% vs. 93.4%, p value 0.463) and distribution of postoperative UICC stages (overall p value 0.616) were observed.ConclusionsOur study demonstrates similar postoperative complications and early oncological outcomes after Rob-E and Open-E. However, the selection criteria for Rob-E appeared to be less restrictive than those of Open-E surgery.

Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, a review of the technique.

Esophageal resection is a key component of the multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy is gaining widespread approval amongst few centers with promising early data. There is significant variability in the operative approach utilized by different centers and this review describes, step-by-step, theoperative technique at a high-volume tertiary center. The cornerstone of management is individualized surgical approach, based on patient, tumor and technical factors. Although our approach is based on aforementioned factors, our preferred approach is an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and this review focuses on that. The procedure is broken down into three key parts, starting with an abdominal exploration and creation of the gastric conduit, placement of jejunostomy tube, moving to thoracic mobilization and creation of the side-side 6cm stapled esophagogastric anastomosis with a final abdominal portion to assure proper positioning of the conduit and reducing redundancy. This approach is fully robotic and a side to side anastomosis facilitates the creation of a widely patent anastomosis therefore minimizing the risk of anastomotic leaks and strictures. Our experience with minimally invasive esophagectomy, as has been previously published, is associated with a 5.1% of anastomotic leak and 7.6% of anastomotic stricture. The robotic platform further optimizes this technique and helps us safely accomplish a side to side stapled anastomosis. Superior instrument dexterity in a restricted thoracic space is facilitated by intracorporeal suturing and robotic stapling. Thus, it obviates the need for a larger thoracotomy incision, which is typically needed for an EEA anastomosis, and that is traditionally associated with higher stricture rate.

Long-term outcomes after robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

Robotic assistance has gained acceptance in thoracic procedures, including esophagectomy. There is a paucity of data regarding long-term outcomes for robotic esophagectomy. We previously reported our initial series of robot-assisted Ivor Lewis (RAIL) esophagectomy. We report long-term outcomes to assess the efficacy of the procedure. We performed a retrospective review of 112 consecutive patients who underwent a RAIL. Patient demographics, diagnosis, pathology, operative characteristics, post-operative complications, and long-term outcomes were documented. Descriptive statistical analysis was performed for all the variables. Primary endpoints were mortality and disease-free survival. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Of the 112 patients, 106 had a diagnosis of cancer, with adenocarcinoma the dominant histology (87.5%). Of these 106 patients, 81 (76.4%) received neo-adjuvant chemoradiation. The 30-, 60-, and 90-day mortality was 1 (0.9%), 3 (2.7%), and 4 (3.6%), respectively. There were 9 anastomotic leaks (8%) and 18 (16.1%) patients had a stricture requiring dilation. All-patient OS at 1, 3, and 5years was 81.4%, 60.5%, and 51.0%, respectively. For cancer patients, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS was 81.3%, 59.2%, and 49.4%, respectively, and the DFS was 75.3%, 42.3%, and 44.0%. We have shown that long-term outcomes after RAIL esophagectomy are similar to other non-robotic esophagectomies. Given the potential advantages of robotic assistance, our results are crucial to demonstrate that RAIL does not result in inferior outcomes.

Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with combined stapled/sewn anastomosis

Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with combined stapled/sewn anastomosis

Robotic esophagectomy with chest anastomosis: technical aspects and clinical outcomes

The use of robotic platforms for thoracic surgery, including esophagectomy, is increasing. A robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with an anastomosis in the chest is a safe and feasible method of minimally-invasive esophagectomy. Further, this approach offers technical advantages over previous minimally-invasive techniques. In this review, we describe our technical approach to a robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy describing the abdominal and thoracic phases of the operation. We also review the most recent clinical outcomes of this approach and make comparisons with other techniques. Advantages and disadvantages to robotic esophagectomy are discussed.

VS03.04: MINIMALLY INVASIVE IVOR LEWIS ESOPHAGECTOMY WITH ROBOTIC ASSISTANCE AND IMMUNOFLUORESCENCE: MODULAR STEP UP APPROACH FOR SAFE INTRODUCTION OF NEW TECHNOLOGY

Abstract Description Minimally invasive technologies have improved outcomes after esophagectomy and the use of robotic technology in Europe is rapidly increasing. Aim of this study is to evaluate the introduction of new technologies in a center of excellence for upper gastrointestinal surgery. Methods A standardized teaching protocol of a complete OR team was performed in simulation and animal models at the center for the future of surgery (San Diego, CA) and IRCAD (Strasbourg, France) to receive certification as console surgeons. Starting 02/2017 the davinci xi and stryker ICG laparoscopy systems were introduced at our academic center (certified center of excellence for surgery of the upper gastrointestinal tract, n &gt; 300 esophageal cases/year). After simple training procedures based on our minimally invasive expertise were performed, difficulty was increased based on a modular step up approach to safely perform robotic thoracic assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Results From 02/2017–02/2018, a total of 35 robotic cases were performed. All cases were performed safely without operation-associated complications. Level of difficulty was increased based on our modular step up approach without quality compromises. Video documentation using the new technology is provided. Conclusion The standardized training protocol and our modular step up approach allowed safe introduction of the new technology used. All cases were performed safely without operation-associated complications. Disclosure All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Robotic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAMIE) with a Standardized Intrathoracic Circular End-to-side Stapled Anastomosis and a Team of Two (Surgeon and Assistant Only).

Robotic-assisted surgery is rapidly increasing, especially in general surgery. It has been shown for years that the minimal invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is possible using a robotic system, for example, da Vinci Xi, Intuitive Surgical. In the past, most robotic esophageal resections have been performed thoracoscopically, and the anastomosis was mostly sutured at the neck. Due to the increase of usable instruments and technical progress, it is possible to perform the total abdominothoracic esophagectomy with an intrathoracic sutured anastomosis robotically. In this article, we would like to present the standardized operation technique and tricks for the robotic-assisted (da Vinci Xi) Ivor Lewis MIE (RAMIE), especially the robotic technique in combination with a standardized intrathoracic circular end-to-side stapled esophagogastric anastomosis.

Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: technique and early outcomes.

Esophagectomy is pivotal for the long-term survival in patients with early stage and advanced esophageal cancer, and improved perioperative care and advanced surgical techniques have contributed to reduced postoperative morbidity. However, despite these advances, esophagectomy continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive esophageal surgery (MIE) has been increasingly used in patients undergoing surgery for esophageal cancer. Potential advantages of MIE include the decreased postoperative pain; lower postoperative wound infection, decreased pulmonary complications, and decreased length of hospitalization. Robotic esophageal surgery has the ability to overcome some of the limitations of laparoscopic and thoracoscopic approaches to esophagectomy while maintaining the benefits of the minimally invasive approach. In this article, we will review the clinical efficacy and outcomes associated with robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAIL).

Ruijin robotic thoracic surgery: robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy

We are going to share the experience of robotic surgery for esophageal carcinoma. A 46-year-old patient who has esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy in our center. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 8 without any perioperative complications. The postoperative pathologic stage was pT1N0M0.

Effect of body mass index on operative outcome after robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy: retrospective analysis of 129 cases at a single high-volume tertiary care center.

The impact of body weight on outcomes after robotic-assisted esophageal surgery for cancer has not been studied. We examined the short-term operative outcomes in patients according to their body mass index following robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy at a high-volume tertiary-care referral cancer center and evaluated the safety of robotic surgery in patients with an elevated body mass index. A retrospective review of all patients who underwent robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy between April 2010 and June 2013 for pathologically confirmed distal esophageal cancer was conducted. Patient demographics, clinicopathologic data, and operative outcomes were collected. We stratified body mass index at admission for surgery according to World Health Organization criteria; normal range is defined as a body mass index range of 18.5-24.9kg/m2. Overweight is defined as a body mass index range of 25.0-29.9kg/m2 and obesity is defined as a body mass index of 30kg/m2 and above. Statistics were calculated using Pearson's Chi-square and Pearson's correlation coefficient tests with a P-value of 0.05 or less for significance. One hundred and twenty-nine patients (103 men, 26 women) with median age of 67 (30-84) years were included. The majority of patients, 76% (N = 98) received neoadjuvant therapy. When stratified by body mass index, 28 (22%) were normal weight, 56 (43%) were overweight, and 45 (35%) were obese. All patients had R0 resection. Median operating room time was 407 (239-694) minutes. When stratified by body mass index, medians of operating room time across the normal weight, overweight and obese groups were 387 (254-660) minutes, 395 (310-645) minutes and 445 (239-694), respectively. Median estimated blood loss (EBL) was 150 (25-600) cc. When stratified by body mass index, medians of EBL across the normal weight, overweight and obese groups were 100 (50-500) cc, 150 (25-600) cc and 150 (25-600), respectively. Obesity significantly correlated with longer operating room time (P = 0.05) but without significant increased EBL (P = 0.348). Among the three body mass index groups there was no difference in postoperative complications including thrombotic events (pulmonary embolism and deep venous thrombosis) (P = 0.266), pneumonia (P = 0.189), anastomotic leak (P = 0.090), wound infection (P = 0.390), any cardiac events (P = 0.793) or 30days mortality (P = 0.414). Our data study demonstrates that patients with esophageal cancer and an elevated body mass index undergoing robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy have increased operative times but no significantly increased EBL during the procedure. Other potential morbidities did not differ with the robotic approach.

Readmission after robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: Earlier discharge, increased readmissions?

149 Background: Readmissions after esophagectomy are costly and incidence can be as high as 25%. The robotic assisted approach has potential benefits of earlier discharge compared to conventional techniques, however it is unclear what impact an earlier discharge will have on readmission rates. We sought to examine the impact of early discharge on readmission rates with robotic approaches. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients undergoing robotic assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAIL) from 2009-2015 was conducted. Clinicopathologic factors and surgical outcomes were recorded and compared. We then compared outcomes to a historical cohort from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare data (2002 to 2009). Length of stay, 30-day and 90-day readmissions, and mortality were determined. All statistical tests were two-sided and a p-value &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: We identified 147 patients who underwent RAIL. There were 78.9% (116) male with an average age 66 ±10 years. Adenocarcinoma was the predominant histology in 86% (126) patients, 9.52% (14) patients had squamous cell histology, and 4.76% (7) patients had other histology. Neoadjuvant therapy was administered to 77.6% (114) patients. In the SEER database 1,744 patients with esophageal cancer underwent esophagectomy: 80% of patients (1,390) were male, with a mean age of 73 years; 71.8% of tumors (1,251) were adenocarcinomas, and 38% of patients (667) received neoadjuvant therapy. Median length of stay was 13 days, 30-day mortality was 8.8% (158 patients), and 90 day mortality was 17.9% (302) compared to median LOH of 9 days, 30-day mortality of 0.6% (1) and 90-day mortality of 1.4% (2)% in the robotic cohort, p &lt; 0.0001, p = 0.007, and p &lt; 0.0001. Readmission rates at 30 and 90 days were 18.6% (212) and 31.3% (356) in the SEER patients, and 3.4% (5) and 5.4% (8) in the robotic cohort p = 0.001 and p &lt; 0.001. Conclusions: RAIL is a safe surgical technique that provides an alternative to conventional approaches to esophageal resection. Patients undergoing RAIL had lower mortality rates and LOH. Despite the lower LOH, RAIL was associated with lower 30 and 90-day readmissions.

Perioperative outcomes associated with robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in patient's undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NCR) for the treatment of esophageal cancer has been associated with increased perioperative morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive procedures utilizing robotic techniques have been shown to reduce perioperative complications and length of hospitalization (LOH). The purpose of this study is to compare perioperative outcomes between patients undergoing NCR and robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAIL) versus upfront RAIL. A database of esophagectomy patients was queried to identify RAIL patients. Differences in perioperative outcomes were analyzed between NCR and non NCR patients. Eighty-nine patients were identified who underwent RAIL Seventy-seven patients (87%) had NCR and 22 patients did not (13%). The median age was 66 (range, 44-83). The median age of the patients treated with NCR was younger {69 [44-83] vs. 64 [46-81] years respectively, P=0.05}. The patients who underwent NCR had a higher BMI then those who went straight to esophagectomy (31 vs. 27; P=0.001). There were no conversions to open laparotomy or thoracotomy in either group. There were no statistically significant differences in the mean operative times and estimated blood loss (EBL) between both groups. Complications occurred in 17 (19.1%) patients. There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of any complications between patients receiving NCR and those that did not receive NCR (P=0.11). There were no deaths in either group. The total number of days in hospital and total number of intensive care unit (ICU) days were also similar in both groups (P=0.25). There was no statistically significant difference in the mean number of lymph nodes harvested in the patients treated with NCR compared with those treated without NCR. We have demonstrated that RAIL is a safe and feasible option for patients with esophageal cancer. The administration of NCR to RAIL did not result in an increase in perioperative morbidity and mortality. The number of lymph nodes harvested and the completeness of resection was also similar between patients who received NCR and those who did not. Longer follow-up is required in order to determine long term oncologic outcome.

Robot-sewn Ivor-Lewis anastomosis: preliminary experience and technical details.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy with intra-thoracic anastomosis showed encouraging results but there is a lack of data to demonstrate the safety and feasibility. The aim of this study is to report our experience in RA-ILE (robotic-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy) with robotic hand-sewn anastomosis. This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent robotic-assisted esophagectomy in prone position with intrathoracic anastomosis for malignant neoplasm of the esophagus or esophago-gastric junction. From January 2012 to December 2014 we performed eight completely robot-assisted esophagectomy without intra-operative complication. The mortality rate at 30-day was zero. In two patients we observed a partial leakage of the gastric tube that required revision. The mean operative time was 499 ± 46 min including robotic set up and patient positioning. The median hospital-stay was 10 days. Complete (R0) resection was accomplished in all patients and the mean number of lymph nodes removed was 37.6 ± 14 .7. This preliminary experience suggests that robotic-assisted RA-ILE for malignant lesions is a real surgical option compared with conventional surgery with satisfactory results. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy With Real-Time Perfusion Assessment

Surgical resection is viewed as the most effective way to ensure both locoregional control and long-term survival in esophageal cancer. Although minimally invasive esophagectomy has been widely accepted as an alternative to open surgery, the role of robotic assistance has yet to be elucidated. We report our institutional experience with robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy using real-time perfusion assessment and demonstrate this as a safe and technically feasible alternative to traditional open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. A retrospective chart review of all patients undergoing robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy at a single institution from 2011 to 2014 was performed. Operative and postoperative outcomes were recorded. Fifty-four patients underwent robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy during the study period. Indication for surgery was cancer in 49 patients, 38 of whom underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. The average operative time was 6 hours 2 minutes, and the average blood loss was 74 mL. There was 1 postoperative mortality (1.9%). Three (5.5%) patients experienced an anastomotic leak. The average number of lymph nodes harvested in cancer patients was 16.2 (range, 3 to 35). The average length of stay was 12.9 days. Our study demonstrates that robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy using real-time perfusion assessment is a safe and technically feasible alternative to traditional open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. It allows for R0 resection with adequate lymph node harvesting and a short hospital stay.

Robotic assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in the elderly patient.

Robotic assisted approaches to esophagectomy have demonstrated decreased complications and length of hospitalization. We sought to examine the impact of age on outcomes in patients undergoing robotic assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (RAIL). A retrospective review of all patients undergoing RAIL from 2009-2013 was conducted. Statistical analysis was performed for the entire cohort and by stratifying patients into three age cohorts: ≤49, 50-69, ≥70. We identified 134 patients and found no statistically significant difference for operative time, length of hospitalization, adverse events (AE), or mortality. There was a higher median blood loss (150 cc) seen in cohorts 1 (50-600 cc) and 3 (50-400 cc) compared to cohort 2 [100 (range, 25-400) cc; P<0.01]. The overall AE rate was 10% (cohort 1), 22% (cohort 2), 35% (cohort 3), P=0.13. There were 5 (4%) leaks and 2 (1.5%) deaths, but this was not significantly different between cohorts (P=0.40, P=0.91, respectively). RAIL is a safe surgical technique for use in an aging patient population. There was no increased risk of AE or death in the elderly patients compared to younger patients undergoing the robotic approach.

Su1813 Atrial Fibrillation Is a Rare Complication After Robotic Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

S A T A b st ra ct s of manometric parameters. Patients submitted to HRM calibration showed an increase in mean LES pressure from 7.21 mm Hg before starting the operation, to 9.94 mm Hg after introducing CO2 pneumoperitoneum, 16 mm Hg after crural closure, 24 mm Hg after fundoplication and 25.73 mm Hg at the end of the operation and CO2 evacuation. The initial mean LES length was 3.15 cm, 3.7 cm after CO2 introduction, 5.1 cm after crural closure, 4.88 cm after fundoplication completion and 4.48 cm after CO2 evacuation, for a total mean increase of 1.33 cm. At one year from the operation, patients submitted to HRM calibration had a better pHmetric result with a mean DeMeester's score of 8.24 vs 23.05 (p = 0.039) and a mean acid exposure of 1.57% vs 5.7% (p = 0.017). Mean LES pressure was slightly higher for HRM calibrated patients, 12.04 vs 11.12 mm Hg, p = 0.04, as well as total LES length. 3.97 cm vs 3.48 cm, p = 0.4, and intraabdominal LES length, 2.5 vs 1.9 cm, p = 0.2. Conclusions. Intraoperative calibration of LNF with HRM gets better functional results than standard calibration using intraesophageal bougie. Both reflux control and pressure and length of LES are better when calibration is performed with HRM.

Concurrent Robotic-Assisted Pulmonary Lobectomy and Robotic-Assisted Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy for Synchronous Primary Lung and Esophageal Cancers: A Case Report

Concurrent Robotic-Assisted Pulmonary Lobectomy and Robotic-Assisted Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy for Synchronous Primary Lung and Esophageal Cancers: A Case Report