TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparisons of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted, video-assisted, and open esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant treatment
T2 - a retrospective study
AU - Wu, Ziheng
AU - Liu, Jiacong
AU - Zhang, Lichen
AU - Tang, Muhu
AU - Shu, Wenbo
AU - van der Wilk, Berend J.
AU - Anker, Christopher J.
AU - He, Zhehao
AU - Wang, Luming
AU - Lv, Wang
AU - Zhu, Linhai
AU - Hu, Jian
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.
PY - 2024/3/29
Y1 - 2024/3/29
N2 - Background: Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE), video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE), and open esophagectomy (OE) all have significant roles in the management of esophageal cancer (EC). Few studies have compared efficacy and safety between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the short-term outcomes between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: Ninety-eight patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent esophagectomy. A retrospective study was performed including 98 consecutive patients treated from January 2021 to August 2022 who received neoadjuvant treatment (including immunochemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) followed by RAE, VAMIE or OE. Evaluated endpoints in the present study consisted of pathological outcomes, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as postoperative complications. Results: No significant differences were seen in the operating time, blood loss, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, R0 resection, and number of dissected lymph nodes between the three RAE, VAMIE, or OE groups. The achievement rate of right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node removal (P=0.01) and the total cost (P<0.001) were higher in RAE. The postoperative hospital stay of OE was longer than the other two groups (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications. Conclusions: Compared to VAMIE, no clear benefit exists for RAE in the treatment of resectable EC after neoadjuvant therapy. OE resulted in a longer hospital stay. Although the rate of successful right RLN node removal was higher with RAE, the clinical relevance for this is yet unclear.
AB - Background: Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE), video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE), and open esophagectomy (OE) all have significant roles in the management of esophageal cancer (EC). Few studies have compared efficacy and safety between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the short-term outcomes between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: Ninety-eight patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent esophagectomy. A retrospective study was performed including 98 consecutive patients treated from January 2021 to August 2022 who received neoadjuvant treatment (including immunochemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) followed by RAE, VAMIE or OE. Evaluated endpoints in the present study consisted of pathological outcomes, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as postoperative complications. Results: No significant differences were seen in the operating time, blood loss, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, R0 resection, and number of dissected lymph nodes between the three RAE, VAMIE, or OE groups. The achievement rate of right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node removal (P=0.01) and the total cost (P<0.001) were higher in RAE. The postoperative hospital stay of OE was longer than the other two groups (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications. Conclusions: Compared to VAMIE, no clear benefit exists for RAE in the treatment of resectable EC after neoadjuvant therapy. OE resulted in a longer hospital stay. Although the rate of successful right RLN node removal was higher with RAE, the clinical relevance for this is yet unclear.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85188795725&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.21037/jtd-24-75
DO - 10.21037/jtd-24-75
M3 - Article
C2 - 38617777
AN - SCOPUS:85188795725
SN - 2072-1439
VL - 16
SP - 2019
EP - 2031
JO - Journal of Thoracic Disease
JF - Journal of Thoracic Disease
IS - 3
ER -