E M de Groot1, L Goense1, B F Kingma1, J W van den Berg1, J P Ruurda1, R van Hillegersberg2. 1. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, POBOX 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, Netherlands. 2. Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, POBOX 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, Netherlands. r.vanhillegersberg@umcutrecht.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence on the added value of robotic-assistance in the abdominal phase during esophagectomy is scarce. In 2003, our center implemented the robotic thoracic phase for esophagectomy. In November 2018 the robot was also implemented in the abdominal phase. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the abdominal phase during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent full RAMIE with intrathoracic anastomosis for esophageal cancer were included. Patients were extracted from a prospectively maintained institutional database. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was performed for abdominal operation time and abdominal lymph node yield. Intraoperative, postoperative and oncological outcomes including collected lymph nodes per abdominal lymph node station were reported. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2021, 70 consecutive patients were included. The majority of the patients had an adenocarcinoma (n = 55, 77%) and underwent neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy (n = 65, 95%). The median operative time for the abdominal phase was 180 min (range 110-233). The CUSUM analysis for abdominal operation time showed a plateau at case 22. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions during the abdominal phase. The most common postoperative complications were pneumonia (n = 18, 26%) and anastomotic leakage (n = 14, 20%). Radical resection margins were achieved in 69 (99%) patients. The median total lymph node yield was 42 (range 23-83) and the median abdominal lymph node yield was 16 (range 2-43). The CUSUM analysis for abdominal lymph node yield showed a plateau at case 21. Most abdominal lymph nodes were collected from the left gastric artery (median 4, range 0-20). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that a robotic abdominal phase was safely implemented for RAMIE without compromising intraoperative, postoperative and oncological outcomes. The learning curve is estimated to be 22 cases in a high-volume center with experienced upper GI robotic surgeons.
BACKGROUND: Evidence on the added value of robotic-assistance in the abdominal phase during esophagectomy is scarce. In 2003, our center implemented the robotic thoracic phase for esophagectomy. In November 2018 the robot was also implemented in the abdominal phase. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the abdominal phase during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent full RAMIE with intrathoracic anastomosis for esophageal cancer were included. Patients were extracted from a prospectively maintained institutional database. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was performed for abdominal operation time and abdominal lymph node yield. Intraoperative, postoperative and oncological outcomes including collected lymph nodes per abdominal lymph node station were reported. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2021, 70 consecutive patients were included. The majority of the patients had an adenocarcinoma (n = 55, 77%) and underwent neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy (n = 65, 95%). The median operative time for the abdominal phase was 180 min (range 110-233). The CUSUM analysis for abdominal operation time showed a plateau at case 22. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions during the abdominal phase. The most common postoperative complications were pneumonia (n = 18, 26%) and anastomotic leakage (n = 14, 20%). Radical resection margins were achieved in 69 (99%) patients. The median total lymph node yield was 42 (range 23-83) and the median abdominal lymph node yield was 16 (range 2-43). The CUSUM analysis for abdominal lymph node yield showed a plateau at case 21. Most abdominal lymph nodes were collected from the left gastric artery (median 4, range 0-20). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that a robotic abdominal phase was safely implemented for RAMIE without compromising intraoperative, postoperative and oncological outcomes. The learning curve is estimated to be 22 cases in a high-volume center with experienced upper GI robotic surgeons.
Authors: Subhasis Chatterjee; Scott A LeMaire; Hiruni S Amarasekara; Susan Y Green; Matt D Price; Matthew S Yanoff; Qianzi Zhang; Rajeev Raghavan; Ourania Preventza; Kim I de la Cruz; Joseph S Coselli Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2018-12-21 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Felix Berlth; Carolina Mann; Eren Uzun; Evangelos Tagkalos; Edin Hadzijusufovic; Richard Hillegersberg; Hecheng Li; Jan Hendrik Egberts; Hauke Lang; Peter Philipp Grimminger Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2020-11-26 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: Pieter C van der Sluis; Jelle P Ruurda; Sylvia van der Horst; Lucas Goense; Richard van Hillegersberg Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: M F J Seesing; A Wirsching; P S N van Rossum; T J Weijs; J P Ruurda; R van Hillegersberg; D E Low Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: Jelle P Ruurda; Werner A Draaisma; Richard van Hillegersberg; Inne H M Borel Rinkes; Hein G Gooszen; Lucas W M Janssen; Rogier K J Simmermacher; Ivo A M J Broeders Journal: Dig Surg Date: 2005-09-28 Impact factor: 2.588
Authors: E M de Groot; G M Kuiper; A van der Veen; L Fourie; L Goense; S van der Horst; J W van den Berg; R van Hillegersberg; J P Ruurda Journal: Updates Surg Date: 2022-08-17
Authors: Gregory T Kennedy; Olugbenga T Okusanya; Jane J Keating; Daniel F Heitjan; Charuhas Deshpande; Leslie A Litzky; Steven M Albelda; Jeffrey A Drebin; Shuming Nie; Philip S Low; Sunil Singhal Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Pieter C van der Sluis; Sylvia van der Horst; Anne M May; Carlo Schippers; Lodewijk A A Brosens; Hans C A Joore; Christiaan C Kroese; Nadia Haj Mohammad; Stella Mook; Frank P Vleggaar; Inne H M Borel Rinkes; Jelle P Ruurda; Richard van Hillegersberg Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Pieter C van der Sluis; Jelle P Ruurda; Sylvia van der Horst; Roy J J Verhage; Marc G H Besselink; Margriet J D Prins; Leonie Haverkamp; Carlo Schippers; Inne H M Borel Rinkes; Hans C A Joore; Fiebo Jw Ten Kate; Hendrik Koffijberg; Christiaan C Kroese; Maarten S van Leeuwen; Martijn P J K Lolkema; Onne Reerink; Marguerite E I Schipper; Elles Steenhagen; Frank P Vleggaar; Emile E Voest; Peter D Siersema; Richard van Hillegersberg Journal: Trials Date: 2012-11-30 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Leonie Haverkamp; Hylke J F Brenkman; Maarten F J Seesing; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Misha D P Luyer; Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen; Bas P L Wijnhoven; Jan J B van Lanschot; Wobbe O de Steur; Henk H Hartgrink; Jan H M B Stoot; Karel W E Hulsewé; Ernst J Spillenaar Bilgen; Jeroen E Rütter; Ewout A Kouwenhoven; Marc J van Det; Donald L van der Peet; Freek Daams; Werner A Draaisma; Ivo A M J Broeders; Henk F van Stel; Miangela M Lacle; Jelle P Ruurda; Richard van Hillegersberg Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-07-29 Impact factor: 4.430