Literature DB >> 22394116

Robot-assisted transhiatal esophagectomy: a 3-year single-center experience.

D H Dunn1, E M Johnson, J A Morphew, H P Dilworth, J L Krueger, N Banerji.   

Abstract

Minimally invasive esophagectomy has emerged as an important procedure for disease management in esophageal cancer (EC) with clear margin status, less morbidity, and shorter hospital stays compared with open procedures. The experience with transhiatal approach robotic esophagectomy (RE) for dissection of thoracic esophagus and associated morbidity is described here. Between March 2007 and November 2010, 40 patients with resectable esophageal indications underwent transhiatal RE at the institute. Clinical data for all patients were collected prospectively. Of 40 patients undergoing RE, one patient had an extensive benign stricture, one had high-grade dysplasia, and 38 had EC. Five patients were converted from robotic to open. Median operative time and estimated blood loss were 311 minutes and 97.2 mL, respectively. Median intensive care unit stay was 1 day (range, 0-16), and median length of hospital stay was 9 days (range, 6-36). Postoperative complications frequently observed were anastomotic stricture (n= 27), recurrent laryngeal nerve paresis (n= 14), anastomotic leak (n= 10), pneumonia (n= 8), and pleural effusion (n= 18). Incidence rates of laryngeal nerve paresis (35%) and leak rate (25%) were somewhat higher in comparison with that reported in literature. However, all vocal cord injuries were temporary, and all leaks healed following opening of the cervical incision and drainage. None of the patients died in the hospital, and 30-day mortality was 2.5% (1/40). Median number of lymph nodes removed was 20 (range, 3-38). In 33 patients with known lymph node locations, median of four (range, 0-12) nodes was obtained from the mediastinum, and median of 15 (range, 1-26) was obtained from the abdomen. R0 resection was achieved in 94.7% of patients. At the end of the follow-up period, 25 patients were alive, 13 were deceased, and 2 patients were lost to follow-up. For patients with EC, median disease-free survival was 20 months (range, 3-45). Transhiatal RE, by experience, is a feasible albeit evolving oncologic operation with low hospital mortality. The benefits include minimally invasive mediastinal dissection without thoracotomy or thoracoscopy. A reasonable operative time with minimal blood loss and postoperative morbidity can be achieved, in spite of the technically demanding nature of the procedure. Broader use of this technology in a setting of high-volume comprehensive surgical programs will almost certainly reduce the complication rates. Robotic tanshiatal esophagectomy with the elimination of a thoracic approach should be considered an option for the appropriate patient population in a comprehensive esophageal program.
© 2012 Copyright the Authors. Journal compilation © 2012, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22394116     DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2050.2012.01325.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Esophagus        ISSN: 1120-8694            Impact factor:   3.429


  25 in total

1.  Robotic assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in the elderly patient.

Authors:  Andrea Abbott; Ravi Shridhar; Sarah Hoffe; Khaldoun Almhanna; Matt Doepker; Nadia Saeed; Kenneth Meredith
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2015-02

2.  European Association of Endoscopic Surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery.

Authors:  Amir Szold; Roberto Bergamaschi; Ivo Broeders; Jenny Dankelman; Antonello Forgione; Thomas Langø; Andreas Melzer; Yoav Mintz; Salvador Morales-Conde; Michael Rhodes; Richard Satava; Chung-Ngai Tang; Ramon Vilallonga
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 3.  Esophagectomy from then to now.

Authors:  Caitlin Takahashi; Ravi Shridhar; Jamie Huston; Kenneth Meredith
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2018-10

4.  Initial experience from a large referral center with robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy for oncologic purposes.

Authors:  Sebastian G de la Fuente; Jill Weber; Sarah E Hoffe; Ravi Shridhar; Richard Karl; Kenneth L Meredith
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-04-03       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Review of robotics in foregut and bariatric surgery.

Authors:  Juan P Toro; Edward Lin; Ankit D Patel
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  The contemporary role of minimally invasive esophagectomy in esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Mohan K Mallipeddi; Mark W Onaitis
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 7.  The benefits and limitations of robotic assisted transhiatal esophagectomy for esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Jonathan C DeLong; Kaitlyn J Kelly; Garth R Jacobsen; Bryan J Sandler; Santiago Horgan; Michael Bouvet
Journal:  J Vis Surg       Date:  2016-09-08

Review 8.  Three-field lymph node dissection in treating the esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Qi-Xin Shang; Long-Qi Chen; Wei-Peng Hu; Han-Yu Deng; Yong Yuan; Jie Cai
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-10       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Extended lymphadenectomy in esophageal cancer is debatable.

Authors:  Fernando A M Herbella; Rafael M Laurino Neto; Marco E Allaix; Marco G Patti
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 3.352

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

Authors:  Ravi Shridhar; Andrea M Abbott; Matthew Doepker; Sarah E Hoffe; Khaldoun Almhanna; Kenneth L Meredith
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2016-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.