Cargando…

Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy — a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques

BACKGROUND: Oncological esophageal surgery has evolved significantly in the last decades. From open esophagectomy over (hybrid) minimally invasive surgery, nowadays, robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) approaches are applied. Current techniques require an analysis of possible adv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Grimminger, Peter P., Staubitz, Julia I., Perez, Daniel, Ghadban, Tarik, Reeh, Matthias, Scognamiglio, Pasquale, Izbicki, Jakob R., Biebl, Matthias, Fuchs, Hans, Bruns, Christiane J., Lang, Hauke, Becker, Thomas, Egberts, Jan-Hendrik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8523396/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34145494
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11605-021-05044-8
_version_ 1784585291981389824
author Grimminger, Peter P.
Staubitz, Julia I.
Perez, Daniel
Ghadban, Tarik
Reeh, Matthias
Scognamiglio, Pasquale
Izbicki, Jakob R.
Biebl, Matthias
Fuchs, Hans
Bruns, Christiane J.
Lang, Hauke
Becker, Thomas
Egberts, Jan-Hendrik
author_facet Grimminger, Peter P.
Staubitz, Julia I.
Perez, Daniel
Ghadban, Tarik
Reeh, Matthias
Scognamiglio, Pasquale
Izbicki, Jakob R.
Biebl, Matthias
Fuchs, Hans
Bruns, Christiane J.
Lang, Hauke
Becker, Thomas
Egberts, Jan-Hendrik
author_sort Grimminger, Peter P.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Oncological esophageal surgery has evolved significantly in the last decades. From open esophagectomy over (hybrid) minimally invasive surgery, nowadays, robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) approaches are applied. Current techniques require an analysis of possible advantages and disadvantages indicating the direction towards a novel gold standard. METHODS: Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomies, performed in the period from April 2017 to June 2019 in five German centers (Berlin, Cologne, Hamburg, Kiel, Mainz), were included in this study. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative parameters were assessed. Cases were grouped for hybrid (H-RAMIE) versus totally robot-assisted (T-RAMIE) approaches. Postoperative parameters and complications were compared using risk ratios. RESULTS: A total of 175 operations were performed as T-RAMIE and 67 as H-RAMIE. Patient age (median age 62 years) and sex (83.1% male) were similarly distributed in both groups. Median duration of esophagectomy was significantly lower in the T-RAMIE group (385 versus 427 min, p < 0.001). The risks of “overall morbidity” (32.0 versus 47.8%; risk ratio [RR], 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5, 1.1–2.1; p = 0.026), “anastomotic leak” (10.3 versus 22.4%; RR, CI: 2.2, 1.2–4.1; p = 0.020), and “respiratory failure” (1.1 versus 7.5%; RR, CI: 6.5, 1.3–32.9; p = 0.019) were significantly higher in case of H-RAMIE. CONCLUSIONS: In the five participating German centers, T-RAMIE was the preferred procedure (72.3% of operations). In comparison to H-RAMIE, T-RAMIE was associated with a significantly reduced risk of postoperative morbidity, anastomotic leak, and respiratory failure as well as a significantly reduced time necessary for esophagectomy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8523396
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85233962021-10-22 Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy — a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques Grimminger, Peter P. Staubitz, Julia I. Perez, Daniel Ghadban, Tarik Reeh, Matthias Scognamiglio, Pasquale Izbicki, Jakob R. Biebl, Matthias Fuchs, Hans Bruns, Christiane J. Lang, Hauke Becker, Thomas Egberts, Jan-Hendrik J Gastrointest Surg Original Article BACKGROUND: Oncological esophageal surgery has evolved significantly in the last decades. From open esophagectomy over (hybrid) minimally invasive surgery, nowadays, robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) approaches are applied. Current techniques require an analysis of possible advantages and disadvantages indicating the direction towards a novel gold standard. METHODS: Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomies, performed in the period from April 2017 to June 2019 in five German centers (Berlin, Cologne, Hamburg, Kiel, Mainz), were included in this study. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative parameters were assessed. Cases were grouped for hybrid (H-RAMIE) versus totally robot-assisted (T-RAMIE) approaches. Postoperative parameters and complications were compared using risk ratios. RESULTS: A total of 175 operations were performed as T-RAMIE and 67 as H-RAMIE. Patient age (median age 62 years) and sex (83.1% male) were similarly distributed in both groups. Median duration of esophagectomy was significantly lower in the T-RAMIE group (385 versus 427 min, p < 0.001). The risks of “overall morbidity” (32.0 versus 47.8%; risk ratio [RR], 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5, 1.1–2.1; p = 0.026), “anastomotic leak” (10.3 versus 22.4%; RR, CI: 2.2, 1.2–4.1; p = 0.020), and “respiratory failure” (1.1 versus 7.5%; RR, CI: 6.5, 1.3–32.9; p = 0.019) were significantly higher in case of H-RAMIE. CONCLUSIONS: In the five participating German centers, T-RAMIE was the preferred procedure (72.3% of operations). In comparison to H-RAMIE, T-RAMIE was associated with a significantly reduced risk of postoperative morbidity, anastomotic leak, and respiratory failure as well as a significantly reduced time necessary for esophagectomy. Springer US 2021-06-18 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8523396/ /pubmed/34145494 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11605-021-05044-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Grimminger, Peter P.
Staubitz, Julia I.
Perez, Daniel
Ghadban, Tarik
Reeh, Matthias
Scognamiglio, Pasquale
Izbicki, Jakob R.
Biebl, Matthias
Fuchs, Hans
Bruns, Christiane J.
Lang, Hauke
Becker, Thomas
Egberts, Jan-Hendrik
Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy — a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques
title Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy — a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques
title_full Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy — a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques
title_fullStr Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy — a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques
title_full_unstemmed Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy — a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques
title_short Multicenter Experience in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy — a Comparison of Hybrid and Totally Robot-Assisted Techniques
title_sort multicenter experience in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy — a comparison of hybrid and totally robot-assisted techniques
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8523396/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34145494
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11605-021-05044-8
work_keys_str_mv AT grimmingerpeterp multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT staubitzjuliai multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT perezdaniel multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT ghadbantarik multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT reehmatthias multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT scognamigliopasquale multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT izbickijakobr multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT bieblmatthias multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT fuchshans multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT brunschristianej multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT langhauke multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT beckerthomas multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques
AT egbertsjanhendrik multicenterexperienceinrobotassistedminimallyinvasiveesophagectomyacomparisonofhybridandtotallyrobotassistedtechniques