Short-term Perioperative Outcomes Research Articles

Short- and Long-term Outcomes of One-stage Radical Resection and Anastomosis without Preoperative Decompression and Diverting Stoma between Incomplete Obstructive and Non-obstructive Left-sided Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Observational Study

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and long-term outcomes of a one-stage resection and anastomosis approach without preoperative decompression in patients with left-sided incomplete obstructive colorectal cancer. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 571 patients diagnosed with pT3-4NanyM0 left-sided colorectal cancer who underwent radical resection and primary anastomosis without preoperative decompression or a diverting stoma from April 2012 to December 2019. Of these, 97 (17%) patients presented with incomplete obstruction, while 474 (83%) had no obstruction. Incomplete obstruction was characterized by the inability of a small-caliber endoscope to pass through the tumor without necessitating emergency surgery or decompression due to bowel obstruction. We compared perioperative short-term outcomes, as well as the 5-year overall survival rate and the 5-year relapse-free survival rate between the two groups. Patients in the incomplete obstruction group experienced significantly longer median intervals between admission and surgery (6 vs. 2 days, P<0.001), higher complication rates (25.8% vs. 15%, P=0.016), and longer median postoperative hospital stays (10 vs. 9 days, P=0.002). However, the rates of anastomotic leakage (2.1% vs. 2.3%, P=1), the 5-year overall survival (91.5% vs. 93.7%, P=0.436), and the 5-year relapse-free survival (80.2% vs. 85.6%, P=0.195) were comparable between the groups. The outcomes regarding anastomotic leakage and long-term survival for one-stage resection and anastomosis without preoperative decompression in cases of incomplete obstructive colorectal cancer are promising. This management strategy appears feasible and safe with appropriate preoperative bowel preparation.

Volume-Outcome Relationship of Norwood Procedures: Insights from the National Pediatric Cardiology - Quality Improvement Collaborative Database.

Prior investigations of the center-specific case volume on outcomes in hypoplastic left heart syndrome have conflicting results. This study utilized the National Pediatric Cardiology Quality Improvement Collaborative (NPC-QIC) registry to investigate the center volume-outcome relationship in patients following the Norwood procedure with consideration of pre-operative high-risk features. Between 2016 and 2023, centers were categorized by Norwood procedure volume into low (≤ 5 cases/year), medium (6 to 10 cases/year), and high-volume centers (> 10 cases/year). We compared pre-operative high-risk features between the center volume categories and assessed survival outcomes, focusing on 30-day and 1-year mortality. We further compared short-term perioperative morbidity outcomes. We analyzed 3,397 patients from 69 institutions participating in NPC-QIC. Twenty-nine centers were classified as a low-, 20 as medium-, and 20 as high-volume centers. There was no difference in frequency of preoperative high-risk features among the center categories in the majority of considered variables. There was no association between the volume categories and 30-day mortality. Low-volume and medium-volume were associated with higher risk of 1-year mortality. This difference remained when adjusing for the presence of high-risk features (Low: OR (95%CI) 1.40 (1.03-1.60), P=0.020; Medium: OR (95%CI) 1.28 (1.05-1.86), P=0.025). Post-operative comorbidities were more frequent in low-, and medium-volume centers, including the need for diagnostic and interventional catheterization. Patients undergoing Norwood procedure in low-, and medium-volume centers have worse 1-year mortality. The outcome characteristics are potentiated when adjusted for high-risk features with significantly higher survival and lower morbidity in patients treated in high-volume centers.

Short-term Outcomes in Infants after General Anesthesia with Low-dose Sevoflurane/Dexmedetomidine/Remifentanil versus Standard-dose Sevoflurane (the TREX Trial).

The Trial Remifentanil DEXmedetomidine (TREX) trial aimed to determine whether, in children less than 2 yr old, low-dose sevoflurane/dexmedetomidine/remifentanil anesthesia is superior to standard-dose sevoflurane anesthesia in terms of global cognitive function at 3 yr of age. The aim of the current secondary analyses was to compare incidence of intraoperative hypotension and bradycardia, postoperative pain, time to recovery, need for treatment of intraoperative hypotension and bradycardia, incidence of light anesthesia and need for treatment, need for postoperative pain medications, and morbidity and mortality outcomes at 5 days between the two arms. This phase III randomized active controlled, parallel group, assessor blinded, multicenter, superiority trial was performed in 20 centers in Australia, Italy, and the United States. A total of 455 infants less than 2 yr of age expected to undergo general anesthesia for at least 2 h were enrolled. They were randomized between low-dose sevoflurane/dexmedetomidine/remifentanil anesthesia and standard-dose sevoflurane. The short-term perioperative outcomes noted above were compared between these two groups. There was less hypotension (risk difference, -11.6%; 95% CI, -18.9 to -4.3%) and more bradycardia (risk difference, 18.2%; 95% CI, 8.8 to 27.7%) in the low-dose sevoflurane/dexmedetomidine/remifentanil anesthesia compared to the standard-dose sevoflurane arm. There were more patients with episodes of light anesthesia (89 vs. 4), and protocol abandonments (1 vs. 0) in the low-dose sevoflurane/dexmedetomidine/remifentanil anesthesia arm. Time from eye opening to postanesthesia care unit discharge was similar in both arms, as were morbidity and mortality. One patient in each arm suffered a life-threatening event, but neither suffered long-term sequelae. These early postoperative results suggest that in children less than 2 yr of age receiving greater than 2 h of general anesthesia, the low-dose sevoflurane/dexmedetomidine/remifentanil anesthesia technique and the standard sevoflurane anesthesia technique are broadly clinically similar, with no clear evidence to support choosing one technique over the other.

Contemporary short-term peri-operative outcomes of open primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection.

To provide current peri-operative outcomes and short-term complication rates for open primary retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND), with analysis of risk factors for complications. Using the Indiana University Testicular Cancer database, we performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent open primary RPLND over the study period (2018-2021). The primary outcomes of interest were the preoperative profile of patients undergoing surgery, complication rates, and identification of risk factors associated with complications. We used chi-squared, Fisher's exact and unpaired t-tests in our analyses. A total of 165 patients were identified. The median body mass index (BMI) was 28.6 kg/m2. Patients most often had clinical stage IIA (39%) or IIB testicular cancer (36%). The median estimated blood loss was 150 mL, with no transfusions required. Higher BMI was noted in patients that sustained any complication vs those with normal recovery (34.95 vs 28 kg/m2; P = 0.0042). The median length of hospital stay was 3 days. The overall complication rate was low (8.48%), with two major postoperative complications, including one case of chylous ascites (0.6%), and no deaths in the 30-day period. The study was limited by its retrospective design and short-term follow-up. We found that open primary RPLND has an acceptable morbidity profile, even among a predominantly overweight cohort. Low blood loss, short hospital stay, minimal chylous ascites risk, and rare major postoperative complications should be the benchmark for retroperitoneal lymph node dissection.

767. INFLUENCE OF NEOADJUVANT IMMUNOTHERAPY-CHEMOTHERAPY ON PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES IN LOCALLY ADVANCED ESOPHAGEAL ADENOCARCINOMA

Abstract Background This study evaluates the perioperative outcomes of patients with locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) who were treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) and chemotherapy versus a matched cohort of patients that received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) alone. Methods A single center non-randomized phase II trial was undertaken in locally advanced (cT3-4 and/or N+) EAC and 49 patients completed neoadjuvant Avelumab + DCF (Docetaxel, Cisplatin, 5FU) and esophagectomy between 2/2018 and 2/2020. These patients were matched to contemporary patients (1/2018-6/2020) who met inclusion criteria but received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (NAC) with a comparable Docetaxel based. The postoperative outcomes were then compared between the two groups. Results Ninety-nine patients with locally advanced EAC underwent esophagectomy and meet enrolment criteria for this study. Of these patients, 50 received NAC alone 49 received IO+NAC. Baseline characteristics such as age, gender and clinical stage were comparable between groups. Operative approach and rate of MIE (~60%) was similar in both groups. Overall and major complication rate were similar between groups (50 vs. 51%, p=0.91; 20 vs. 26%, p=0.44 respectively) with concordant rates of anastomotic leak (6 [12%] vs. 6 [12%], p=0.86) and respiratory complications (13 [26%] vs. 11 [22%], p=0.68) in NAC alone and IO+NAC group respectively. There were no significant differences in the LOS and 30- and 90-days mortality rates between the two groups. Conclusion The addition of immunotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma does not appear to significantly alter perioperative short-term outcomes after esophagectomy

Effect of Chronic Kidney Disease on 30-Day Outcomes in Endovascular Repair of Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) has been identified as an independent predictor of poorer long-term prognosis after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). However, its impact on short-term perioperative outcomes is conflicting, which can be important for preoperative risk stratification. This study aimed to evaluate the 30-day outcomes of patients with CKD following non-ruptured complex EVAR in a national registry. Patients who had EVAR for complex AAA were identified in ACS-NSQIP targeted database from 2012-2022. Complex AAA included juxtarenal, suprarenal, or pararenal proximal extent, Type IV thoracoabdominal aneurysm, and/or aneurysms treated with Zenith Fenestrated endograft. Exclusion criteria included age<18years, ruptured AAA, acute intraoperative conversion to open, emergency presentation, and dialysis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to compare 30-day postoperative outcomes of CKD and non-CKD patients, where demographics, baseline characteristics, aneurysm diameter, distant aneurysm extent, anesthesia, and concomitant procedures were adjusted. There were 695 (39.33%) and 1072 (60.67%) patients with and without CKD, respectively, who underwent EVAR for complex AAA. Patients with and without CKD have comparable 30-day mortality (aOR = 1.165, 95 CI = 0.646-2.099, P = 0.61). However, CKD patients had a higher risk of renal complications (aOR = 2.647, 95 CI = 1.399-5.009, P < 0.01) including higher progressive renal insufficiency (aOR = 3.707, 95 CI = 1.329-10.338, P = 0.01) and acute renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy (aOR = 2.533, 95 CI = 1.139-5.633, P = 0.02). All other 30-day outcomes were comparable between CKD and non-CKD patients. Patients with CKD had similar 30-day mortality and morbidity rates but a higher risk of postoperative renal complications. Therefore, meticulous preoperative planning and postoperative management, which may include optimal hydration, appropriate contrast use, and close renal function monitoring, are essential for patients with CKD after complex EVAR.

Clinical relevance of the 3-cm threshold in sigmoid diverticulitis with abscess: consensus or quandary?

PurposeDiverticular abscess is a common manifestation of acute complicated diverticulitis. We aimed to analyze the clinical course of patients with diverticular abscess initially treated conservatively.MethodsAll patients with diverticular abscess undergoing elective or urgent/emergency surgery from October 2004 to October 2022 were identified from our institutional database. Depending on the abscess size, patients were divided into group A (≤ 3 cm) and group B (> 3 cm). Conservative treatment failure was defined as clinical deterioration, persistent or recurrent abscess, or urgent/emergency surgery. Baseline characteristics and short-term perioperative outcomes were recorded and compared between both groups. Uni- and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify determinants of conservative treatment failure and overall ostomy formation.ResultsA total of 105 patients were enrolled into group A (n = 73) and group B (n = 32). Uni- and multivariate analyses revealed abscess size as the only significant factor of conservative therapy failure [OR 9.904; p < 0.0001], while overall ostomy formation was significantly affected by an increased body mass index (BMI) [OR 1.366; p = 0.026]. There were no significant differences in perioperative outcome with the exception of a longer total hospital stay in patients managed with abscess drainage compared to antibiotics alone prior surgery in group B (p = 0.045).ConclusionAbscess diameter > 3 cm is not just an arbitrary chosen cut-off value for drainage placement but has a prognostic impact on medical treatment failure in patients with complicated acute diverticulitis. In this subgroup, the choice between primary drainage and antibiotics does not appear to influence outcome at the cost of prolonged hospital stay after drainage insertion.

A Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Versus Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Following Lung Cancer Surgery at a Tertiary Hospital in the United Kingdom: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

Robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) is gaining popularity in lung resection surgeries; however, its quality outcome measures require further evaluation. This study compared the short-term perioperative outcomes of lung resection surgeries performed using RATS and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) at a tertiary hospital in the UK. We performed a retrospective comparative analysis of 496 patients who underwent lung resection surgery at Castle Hill Hospital in the UK between January 2021 and April 2024. In the pre-matched cohort, 162 patients underwent RATS compared to 334 who underwent VATS. Using propensity matching based on the patient's forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) percentage of predicted age and body mass index (BMI), we included 324 patients in the analysis. Of these, 162 underwent RATS, and 162 underwent VATS, demonstrating satisfactory performance indicators. The results from our analysis depicted that RATS had a significantly lower rate of prolonged air leak (≥7 minutes) than VATS (5.5% versus 7.1%, mean difference -1.32, 95% CI: -0.89-3.08, p = 0.034). RATS patients also had shorter duration of hospital stay (3.8 ± 4.1 days versus 4.7 ± 4.8, mean difference -0.901, 95% CI: -1.886-0.084; p = 0.073) and had more mediastinal lymph node dissections (39.5% versus 35.2%) than VATS. However, the proportion of patients who were upstaged after histopathological analysis of the resected lymph nodes was not different between the two groups. Furthermore, the groups had no significant differences regarding the infection rate, intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) use, and theatre return. Robotic and video-assisted technologies produced equivalent results for the majority of the short-term outcomes evaluated. Additional research is necessary to confirm RATS's efficacy and determine its potential advantages over VATS for lung resection surgeries.

Safety and perioperative outcomes of uniportal versus multiportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.

Uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (U-VATS) has recently become an alternative approach for many minimally invasive thoracic procedures, but although its surgical effectiveness has been proven, still its feasibility and safety are debated and unclear. the objective of this study was to compare the safety and perioperative outcomes of U-VATS versus multiportal VATS (M-VATS). This was a comparative follow-up randomised controlled clinical trial, carried out on 36 randomly selected eligible patients, and fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria for VATS, they were assigned randomly into two groups: Study Group I including 18 patients undergoing U-VATS with conventional treatment using standard chest tube drainage and Control Group II including 18 patients undergoing M-VATS) with the same conventional treatment using standard chest tube drainage and served as a comparable control group. Patients in the U-VATS Group 1 had faster operation time, and with reduced blood loss, pleural drainage and post-operative hospitalisation, they also experienced lower average post-operative pain score on comparison with those in M-VATS Group II (P < 0.001), respectively. For either group, there were no hospital deaths or infections. There was no noticeable difference between the two groups in terms of the number of resected lymph nodes or the rates of intraoperative or post-operative complications (P > 0.05). U-VATS is feasible and safe in eligible selected patients with favourable short-term perioperative outcomes (operative time, duration of pleural drainage, post-operative pain, early ambulation, duration of hospital stay as well as the risk of perioperative complications), and it can be considered the preferred approach in minimally invasive thoracic procedures that open up for the possibility of fast-track thoracic surgeries.

Evaluation of the economic impact of the robotic approach in major and postero-superior segment liver resections: a multicenter retrospective analysis.

Economic impact of robotic liver surgery (RLS) is still a debated issue due to the heterogeneity of liver resections considered and the lack of a rigorous methodology. Therefore, the aim of this study is to perform a time-driven activity-based costing (TD-ABC) comparing the costs of RLS, laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) and open liver surgery (OLS) in the context of complex liver resections and to compare short term perioperative outcomes. The institutional databases of two Italian high volume hepatobiliary centres were retrospectively reviewed from February 2021 to April 2022. Patients submitted to major hepatectomies or postero-superior liver resections were selected and divided into three groups according to the approach scheduled (RLS, LLS and OLS) and compared. Major contributors of perioperative expenses were calculated using the TD-ABC model and accurately quantifying each unit resource consumed per patient and the time spent performing each activity. A primary intention-to-treat analysis (ITT-A) including conversions in the RLS and LLS groups was performed. Forty-seven RLS, 101 LLS and 124 OLS were collected. LLS and RLS showed reduced blood loss, morbidity, mortality and hospital stay compared with open. A trend towards reduced conversion rate in RLS compared to LLS was registered. Total costs associated with RLS were estimated at €10,637 vs. €9,543 for LLS and vs. €13,960 for OLS. The higher intraoperative costs associated with RLS (+153.3% vs. OLS and +148.2% vs. LLS, P<0.001), primarily related to surgical equipment expenses, were slightly offset by the postoperative savings (-56.0% vs. OLS and -29.4% vs. LLS, P<0.001) resulting from significantly reduced hospital stays. RLS offers economic advantages over OLS, as initial higher costs are offset by better perioperative outcomes. The evolving robotic marketplace is expected to drive down RLS costs, promoting widespread adoption in minimally invasive procedures. Despite its higher costs than LLS, RLS's ability to enhance minimally invasive feasibility makes it a preferred choice for complex cases, reducing the need for conversions.

Influence of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy-Chemotherapy on Perioperative Outcomes in Locally Advanced Esophageal Adenocarcinoma.

This study evaluated the perioperative outcomes for patients who had locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) treated with neoadjuvant immunotherapy (IO) and chemotherapy versus a matched cohort of patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) alone. A single-center non-randomized phase 2 trial was undertaken with locally advanced (cT3-4 and/or N+) EAC, and 49 patients completed neoadjuvant avelumab + docetaxel, cisplatin, 5FU (DCF) and esophagectomy between February 2018 and February 2020. These patients were matched with contemporary patients (January 2018 to June 2020) who met the inclusion criteria but received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone (NAC) with a comparable docetaxel-based therapy. The postoperative outcomes then were compared between the two groups. For this study, 99 patients with locally advanced EAC underwent esophagectomy and met the enrolment criteria. Of these patients, 50 received NAC alone and 49 received IO + NAC. Baseline characteristics such as age, gender, and clinical stage were comparable between the two groups. Operative approach and rate of minimally invasive esophagectomy (~ 60%) were similar in the two groups. For the NAC-alone and IO + NAC groups, the respective overall and major complication rates were similar between the two groups (50% vs. 51% [p = 0.91] and 20% vs. 26% [p = 0.44], respectively), with concordant rates for anastomotic leak (6 [12%] vs. 6 [12%]; p = 0.86) and respiratory complications (13 [26%] vs. 11 [22%]; p = 0.68). The two groups did not differ significantly in terms of hospital length of stay or 30- and 90-day mortality rates. The addition of immunotherapy to neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced esophageal adenocarcinoma does not appear to alter perioperative short-term outcomes significantly after esophagectomy.

Benchmarks in Liver Resection for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma

IntroductionBenchmarking in surgery has been proposed as a means to compare results across institutions to establish best practices. We sought to define benchmark values for hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) across an international population.MethodsPatients who underwent liver resection for ICC between 1990 and 2020 were identified from an international database, including 14 Eastern and Western institutions. Patients operated on at high-volume centers who had no preoperative jaundice, ASA class <3, body mass index <35 km/m2, without need for bile duct or vascular resection were chosen as the benchmark group.ResultsAmong 1193 patients who underwent curative-intent hepatectomy for ICC, 600 (50.3%) were included in the benchmark group. Among benchmark patients, median age was 58.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] 49.0–67.0), only 28 (4.7%) patients received neoadjuvant therapy, and most patients had a minor resection (n = 499, 83.2%). Benchmark values included ≥3 lymph nodes retrieved when lymphadenectomy was performed, blood loss ≤600 mL, perioperative blood transfusion rate ≤42.9%, and operative time ≤339 min. The postoperative benchmark values included TOO achievement ≥59.3%, positive resection margin ≤27.5%, 30-day readmission ≤3.6%, Clavien-Dindo III or more complications ≤14.3%, and 90-day mortality ≤4.8%, as well as hospital stay ≤14 days.ConclusionsBenchmark cutoffs targeting short-term perioperative outcomes can help to facilitate comparisons across hospitals performing liver resection for ICC, assess inter-institutional variation, and identify the highest-performing centers to improve surgical and oncologic outcomes.

Short-term and long-term oncologic outcomes of self-expandable metallic stent compared with tube decompression for obstructive colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Patients with obstructive colorectal cancer managed by emergency surgery show high morbidity, mortality, and stoma formation rates. Decompression modalities, including the self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) and tube drainage (TD), have been used to improve surgical outcomes. However, there have been limited studies comparing the 2 modalities. We performed a meta-analysis on short- and long-term outcomes between SEMS and TD. PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar were searched. Data were pooled, and the overall effect size was calculated using random effect models. Outcome measures were perioperative short-term and 3-year survival outcomes. We included 20 nonrandomized studies that examined 2,047 patients in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed SEMS had better short-term outcomes in clinical success rate, decompression-related complications, laparoscopic surgery rate, stoma formation rate, and postoperative complication rate with a relative risk (RR) of 0.36 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.54; I2 = 20%), 0.32 (95% CI, 0.20-0.50; I2 = 0%), 0.47 (95% CI, 0.34-0.66; I2 = 87%), 0.34 (95% CI, 0.24-0.49; I2 = 52%), and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.54-0.89, I2 = 28%), respectively. However, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in 3-year overall survival (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.77-1.27; I2 = 0%). Although the long-term oncologic impact of SEMS is still unclear compared with TD, the results of this meta-analysis may suggest that SEMS insertion can be performed more successfully and safely and may have benefits for short-term perioperative outcomes compared with TD. Further studies are warranted to provide more definitive survival results.

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.

216. SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES OF 111 CASES OF MEDIASTINOSCOPIC ESOPHAGECTOMY FOR ALL ESOPHAGEAL CANCERS

Abstract Background Mediastinoscopic esophagectomy (ME) as a radical surgery for esophageal cancer is considered promising because of its low complication rate of pneumonia. In our hospital, ME with three-field lymphadenectomy is the first choice for radical esophagectomy and is indicated for all cases of esophageal cancer, including borderline resectable, locally invasive tumors, conversion surgery, and salvage surgery. However, there have been few reports of ME for highly advanced esophageal cancer, and its safety and feasibility are unknown. Methods From April 2018 to April 2023, we retrospectively investigated all cases of radical esophagectomy at our hospital. Patient characteristics and perioperative short-term outcomes were investigated. Results cStage 0/I/II/III/IV were 7/20/26/37/21 respectively. 70% of patients were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. ME was performed in 111 cases, thoracoscopy and thoracotomy in 0 cases. The conversion rate from ME to thoracotomy was 0.9%. The mean operation time was 547 min and blood loss was 215 mL. Postoperative complications of classified as grade II in the CD classification occurred in 19.8%, and more than grade IIIa occurred in 13.5%. The mean postoperative hospital stay was 20 days. The number of dissected lymph nodes was 47. The completion rate of R0 surgery was 94%. Conclusion ME for all esophageal cancers, including borderline resectable tumors and locally invasive tumors, was safe and feasible. ME with three-field lymphadenectomy may be the first choice for radical esophagectomy.

Vascular anatomical study of persistent descending mesocolon in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

Persistent descending mesocolon (PDM) is a rare congenital atypia of fixation of the descending colon, and currently, very few detailed studies exist on its vascular anatomy. This study was conducted to evaluate the features of the vascular anatomy of PDM to help avoid intraoperative lethal injury and subsequent postoperative complications in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 534 patients who underwent laparoscopic left-sided colorectal surgery. PDM was diagnosed using preoperative axial computed tomography (CT) view. The vascular anatomical features were compared between PDM and non-PDM cases based on three-dimensional (3D)-CT angiography findings. Additionally, the perioperative short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in the 534 patients were also compared between PDM and non-PDM cases. Of the total 534 patients, 13 patients (2.4%) presented with PDM. No branching pattern of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) specific to PDM was found. In the running direction of the IMA and sigmoidal colic artery (SA), the midline-shift of IMA and the right-shift of SA were significantly more in PDM than in non-PDM cases, respectively (38.5% vs. 2.5%, P ≤ .0001; 61.5% vs. 4.6%, P ≤ .0001). The perioperative short-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in the 534 patients were similar between PDM and non-PDM cases. Because changes in the direction of the vascular running are often observed due to adhesions and shortening of the mesentery in PDM cases, performing a detailed preoperative evaluation of vascular anatomy using imaging modalities such as 3D-CT angiography is important.

Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: A propensity score matched analysis.

The existing literature on perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lung lobectomy is inconclusive. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of VATS and RATS lobectomy procedures for patients with non-small cell lung cancer to compare the short-term perioperative outcomes by propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. A total of 418 patients were enrolled in this study. After PSM, 71 patients each received VATS and RATS lobectomy for further analysis. RATS lobectomy was associated with a lower rate of conversion to thoracotomy (0% vs. 5.63%, p = 0.006), a lower rate of postoperative prolonged air leak (1.14% vs. 19.72%, p = 0.001) and a shorter duration of postoperative chest tube drainage (3 days interquartile range [IQR: 3, 4] vs. 4 days IQR [3-5], p = 0.027). Subgroup analysis indicated that after acquiring proficiency in the RATS procedure, its disadvantages diminished while its advantages were enhanced. In terms of rate of conversion to thoracotomy, length of hospital stays, and duration of postoperative chest tube drainage, RATS was comparable to uniportal VATS and superior to triportal VATS. RATS has advantages over VATS in terms of early chest tube removal, early discharge, lower thoracotomy rate, less postoperative air leak, and a potential trend of more lymph node dissection numbers. These advantages are more pronounced after acquiring proficiency in RATS.

Comparison of three-dimensional and two-dimensional thoracoscopic segmentectomy in lung cancer

Thoracoscopic segmentectomy is considered to be a safe and effective procedure for early lung cancer. A three-dimensional (3D) thoracoscope can provide high resolution and accurate images. We compared the outcomes from using two-dimensional (2D) and 3D video systems in thoracoscopic segmentectomy for lung cancer. The data of consecutive patients diagnosed with lung cancer that underwent 2D or 3D thoracoscopic segmentectomy in Changhua Christian Hospital from January 2014 to December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Tumor characteristics and perioperative short-term outcomes (operative time, blood loss, incision numbers, length of stay and complication) were compared between 2D and 3D thoracoscopic segmentectomy. Among the 192 patients, 68 patients underwent segmentectomy with a 2D thoracoscopic system and 124 patients had 3D thoracoscopic surgery. Patients undergoing 3D thoracoscopic segmentectomy had a shorter operative time (174.19±64.63min vs. 207.06±72.99min, p=0.002), less blood loss (34.40±43.58ml vs. 50.81±57.61ml, p=0.028), fewer incisions (1.50±0.716 vs. 2.19± .058, p<0.001) and a shorter length of stay (5.67±3.44 days vs. 8.18±11.862 days, p=0.029). The postoperative complications were similar between the two groups. Surgical mortality was not found in any patient. Our finding suggests that the incorporation of a 3D endoscopic system could facilitate thoracoscopic segmentectomy in lung cancer patients.

301. LONG TERM RESULTS OF SINGLE AND MULTI-INCISION MINIMALLY INVASIVE ESOPHAGECTOMY (MIE) FOR TREATING ESOPHAGEAL CANCER: A PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHED STUDY

Abstract Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is widely accepted as the standard treatment for esophageal cancer. It provides similar oncological outcomes with less pain and morbidity compared to open surgery. We first described MIE with single-incision both in the laparoscopic and thoracoscopic phase in 2015. Compared to multi-portal approach, short-term result showed comparable perioperative outcome with significantly reduced pain after surgery. With accumulated clinical experience, we compared our long-term follow-up result for single-incision MIE versus multi-incision MIE. Patients with esophageal cancer, receiving MIE at our institute from 2008 to 2022 were included. 337 patients underwent single-incision MIE, while 467 patients received multi-incision MIE. Matching based on propensity scores produced 290 patients in each group. The baseline characteristics between the two groups were similar after matching. Overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) were not compromised in single-incision MIE compared to multiple-incision MIE (5-year OS: 42.9% vs. 21.2%, p &amp;lt; 0.001; 5-year PFS: 35.1% vs. 17.1%, p &amp;lt; 0.001). The operation time was shorter (505.7 min vs. 562.4 min, p &amp;lt; 0.001). Single-incision MIE had larger mean number of dissected lymph nodes (45.6 vs 37.4, p &amp;lt; 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of short-term complications (single vs multi: 20.3% vs 15.9%, p = 0.196) and R1/2 rate (single vs multi: 11.5% vs 9.0%, p = 0.340). Single-incision MIE is safe, feasible and effective for patients with esophageal cancer. Its long-term oncological outcomes are not compromised when compared to multiple-incision MIE, while its short-term perioperative outcomes are comparable to multi-incision approach. Three-dimensional imaging may play a role in higher quality oncological resection with more lymphatic clearance for single-incision MIE compared to multiple-incision MIE.

SP8.2.1 Robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral hepatic sectionectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Aims To evaluate comparative outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic left lateral hepatic sectionectomy (LLS). Methods A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and bibliographic reference lists with application of a combination of free text and controlled vocabulary search adapted to thesaurus headings, search operators and limits was conducted. Overall, minor (Clavien–Dindo grade&amp;lt;III) and major (Clavien–Dindo grade&amp;gt;III) postoperative complications, mortality, volume of blood loss, conversion to an open procedure, procedure time, length of hospital stay, cost-effectiveness, and R1 resection were the evaluated outcome measures. Results Seven comparative observational studies reporting a total of 319 patients of whom 150 underwent robotic LLS and the remaining 169 patients underwent laparoscopic LLS were included. The robotic approach was associated with significantly longer procedure time (MD: 29.40 minutes, p=0.01) and higher cost (MD: $4170, p&amp;lt;0.00001) compared to the laparoscopic approach. There was no significant difference in overall postoperative morbidity (OR: 1.29, p=0.62), Clavien-Dindo grade &amp;lt;III (OR: 1.65, p=0.49), Clavien-Dindo grade &amp;gt; III (OR: 1.18, p=0.85), perioperative mortality (RD: 0.00, p=1.00), volume of blood loss (MD: 1.96 mls, p=0.91), conversion to an open procedure (RD: -0.02, p=0.46), length of hospital stay (MD: 0.22 day, p=0.52) or R1 resection (RD:0.00, p=1.00) between two groups. Conclusions Meta-analysis of the best available evidence (level 2) demonstrated that robotic LLS is associated with significantly longer procedure time and higher cost and similar perioperative outcomes compared to the laparoscopic approach. Future randomised studies are required to evaluate short-term perioperative, long-term oncological and surgeon-centred outcomes.