BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare robot-assisted esophagectomy (RE) with thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). METHODS: A total of 105 patients who underwent RE (n=62) or TE (n=43) due to ESCC were included in this study. Early postoperative outcomes and long-term survivals between the two groups were compared. RESULTS: The RE and TE groups were comparable in preoperative clinical characteristics. Total operation times were not significantly different between the two groups (490 minutes in RE vs. 458 minutes in TE; P=0.118). The total number of dissected lymph nodes was significantly greater in the RE group (37.3±17.1 vs. 28.7±11.8; P=0.003), and intergroup differences were significant for numbers of lymph nodes dissected from the upper mediastinum (10.7±9.7 in RE vs. 6.3±9.3 in TE; P=0.032) and the abdomen (12.2±8.7 in RE vs. 7.8±7.1 in TE; P=0.007). Five-year overall survival was not different between the two groups (69% in RE and 59% in TE; P=0.737). CONCLUSIONS: Better quality lymphadenectomy could be achieved in RE although survival benefit was not clear. Prospective randomized studies comparing the RE and TE are necessary.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to compare robot-assisted esophagectomy (RE) with thoracoscopic esophagectomy (TE) for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). METHODS: A total of 105 patients who underwent RE (n=62) or TE (n=43) due to ESCC were included in this study. Early postoperative outcomes and long-term survivals between the two groups were compared. RESULTS: The RE and TE groups were comparable in preoperative clinical characteristics. Total operation times were not significantly different between the two groups (490 minutes in RE vs. 458 minutes in TE; P=0.118). The total number of dissected lymph nodes was significantly greater in the RE group (37.3±17.1 vs. 28.7±11.8; P=0.003), and intergroup differences were significant for numbers of lymph nodes dissected from the upper mediastinum (10.7±9.7 in RE vs. 6.3±9.3 in TE; P=0.032) and the abdomen (12.2±8.7 in RE vs. 7.8±7.1 in TE; P=0.007). Five-year overall survival was not different between the two groups (69% in RE and 59% in TE; P=0.737). CONCLUSIONS: Better quality lymphadenectomy could be achieved in RE although survival benefit was not clear. Prospective randomized studies comparing the RE and TE are necessary.
Authors: Surya S A Y Biere; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Kirsten W Maas; Luigi Bonavina; Camiel Rosman; Josep Roig Garcia; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Jean H G Klinkenbijl; Markus W Hollmann; Elly S M de Lange; H Jaap Bonjer; Donald L van der Peet; Miguel A Cuesta Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Kamal Nagpal; Kamran Ahmed; Amit Vats; Danny Yakoub; David James; Hutan Ashrafian; Ara Darzi; Krishna Moorthy; Thanos Athanasiou Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-01-28 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Nabil P Rizk; Hemant Ishwaran; Thomas W Rice; Long-Qi Chen; Paul H Schipper; Kenneth A Kesler; Simon Law; Toni E M R Lerut; Carolyn E Reed; Jarmo A Salo; Walter J Scott; Wayne L Hofstetter; Thomas J Watson; Mark S Allen; Valerie W Rusch; Eugene H Blackstone Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Pasquale Scognamiglio; Björn-Ole Stüben; Asmus Heumann; Jun Li; Jakob R Izbicki; Daniel Perez; Matthias Reeh Journal: Visc Med Date: 2021-11-12