Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 4/2020

01-04-2020 | Esophageal Cancer

A successful clinical pathway protocol for minimally invasive esophagectomy

Authors: Robert E. Merritt, Peter J. Kneuertz, Desmond M. D’Souza, Kyle A. Perry

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 4/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Minimally invasive esophagectomy is associated with significant morbidity, which can substantially influence the hospital length of stay for patients. Anastomotic leak is the most devastating complication. Minimizing major postoperative complications can facilitate adherence to a clinical pathway protocol and can decrease hospital length of stay.

Methods

This is a retrospective study of 130 patients who underwent an elective laparoscopic and thoracoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal carcinoma between August 2014 and June 2018. A total of 112 patients (86%) underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation. All of the 130 patients underwent a laparoscopic gastric devascularization procedure a median of 15 days prior to the esophagectomy. The target discharge date was postoperative day number 8.

Results

Thirty patients (23.08%) had postoperative complications. Atrial fibrillation (20 patients) [15.38%] was the most frequent complication. Four patients (3.1%) developed an anastomotic leak. There was one postoperative death (0.77%) in the cohort of patients. The median length of stay was 8 days. The mean length of stay for patients without complications was 8 days ± 1.2 days and 12.4 days ± 7.1 days for patients with one or more complications (p = 0.002).

Conclusion

The development of postoperative complications after minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy significantly increases hospital length of stay. Performing the operation with a specialized tandem surgical team and including preoperative ischemic preconditioning of the stomach minimizes overall and anastomotic complications and facilitates on time hospital discharge as defined by a perioperative clinical pathway protocol.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Pennathaur A, Gibson MK, Jobe BA et al (2013) Oesophageal carcinoma. Lancet 321:400–412CrossRef Pennathaur A, Gibson MK, Jobe BA et al (2013) Oesophageal carcinoma. Lancet 321:400–412CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Kamangar F, Dores GM, Anderson WF (2006) Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities in different geographic regions of the world. J Clin Oncol 24:2137–2150CrossRef Kamangar F, Dores GM, Anderson WF (2006) Patterns of cancer incidence, mortality, and prevalence across five continents: defining priorities to reduce cancer disparities in different geographic regions of the world. J Clin Oncol 24:2137–2150CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Varghese TK Jr, Wood DE, Farjah F et al (2011) Variation in esophagectomy outcomes in hospitals meeting Leapfrog volume outcome standards. Ann Thorac Surg 91:1003–1009CrossRef Varghese TK Jr, Wood DE, Farjah F et al (2011) Variation in esophagectomy outcomes in hospitals meeting Leapfrog volume outcome standards. Ann Thorac Surg 91:1003–1009CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Rizk NP, Bach PB, Schrag D et al (2004) The impact of complications on outcomes after resection for esophageal and gastoesophageal junction carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg 198:42–50CrossRef Rizk NP, Bach PB, Schrag D et al (2004) The impact of complications on outcomes after resection for esophageal and gastoesophageal junction carcinoma. J Am Coll Surg 198:42–50CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O et al (2012) Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg 1:95–102CrossRef Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O et al (2012) Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg 1:95–102CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Low DE, Kunz S, Schembre D et al (2007) Esophagectomy—it’s not just about mortality anymore: standardized perioperative clinical pathways improve outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer. J Gastointest Surg 11:1395–1402CrossRef Low DE, Kunz S, Schembre D et al (2007) Esophagectomy—it’s not just about mortality anymore: standardized perioperative clinical pathways improve outcomes in patients with esophageal cancer. J Gastointest Surg 11:1395–1402CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Low DE (2015) Enhances recovery pathways lead to an improvement in postoperative outcomes following esophagectomy: systematic review and pooled analysis. Dis Esophagus 28:468–475CrossRef Markar SR, Karthikesalingam A, Low DE (2015) Enhances recovery pathways lead to an improvement in postoperative outcomes following esophagectomy: systematic review and pooled analysis. Dis Esophagus 28:468–475CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Strosberg DS, Merritt RE, Perry KA (2017) Preventing anastomotic complications: early results of laparoscopic gastric devascularization two weeks prior to minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 31:1371–1375CrossRef Strosberg DS, Merritt RE, Perry KA (2017) Preventing anastomotic complications: early results of laparoscopic gastric devascularization two weeks prior to minimally invasive esophagectomy. Surg Endosc 31:1371–1375CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Bass CS et al (2004) Fast tracking after Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy. Chest 126:1187–1194CrossRef Cerfolio RJ, Bryant AS, Bass CS et al (2004) Fast tracking after Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy. Chest 126:1187–1194CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Munitiz V, Martinez-de-Harro LF, Otiz A et al (2010) Effectiveness of written clinical pathway for enhanced recovery after transthoracic (Ivor Lewis) oesophagectomy. Br J Surg 97:714–718CrossRef Munitiz V, Martinez-de-Harro LF, Otiz A et al (2010) Effectiveness of written clinical pathway for enhanced recovery after transthoracic (Ivor Lewis) oesophagectomy. Br J Surg 97:714–718CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Findlay JM, Tustain E, Millo J et al (2015) The effect of formalizing enhanced recovery after esophagectomy with a protocol. Dis Esopahgus 28:567–573CrossRef Findlay JM, Tustain E, Millo J et al (2015) The effect of formalizing enhanced recovery after esophagectomy with a protocol. Dis Esopahgus 28:567–573CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Prise P, Ferrari C, Cossu A, Puccetti F et al (2018) Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway in esopahgectomy: is a reasonable prediction of hospital stay possible? Ann Surg 270(1):77–83CrossRef Prise P, Ferrari C, Cossu A, Puccetti F et al (2018) Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway in esopahgectomy: is a reasonable prediction of hospital stay possible? Ann Surg 270(1):77–83CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Gemmill EH, Hummes DJ, Catton JA (2015) Systematic review of enchanced recovery after gastro-esophageal cancer surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 97:173–179CrossRef Gemmill EH, Hummes DJ, Catton JA (2015) Systematic review of enchanced recovery after gastro-esophageal cancer surgery. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 97:173–179CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Nguyen NT, Nguyen XMT, Reavis KM et al (2012) Minimally invasive esophagectomy with and without gastric ischemic conditioning. Surg Endosc 26:1637–1641CrossRef Nguyen NT, Nguyen XMT, Reavis KM et al (2012) Minimally invasive esophagectomy with and without gastric ischemic conditioning. Surg Endosc 26:1637–1641CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Perry KA, Banarjee A, Liu J et al (2013) Gastric ischemic conditioning increases neovascularization and reduces inflammation and fibrosis during gastroesophageal anastomotic healing. Surg Endosc 27:753–760CrossRef Perry KA, Banarjee A, Liu J et al (2013) Gastric ischemic conditioning increases neovascularization and reduces inflammation and fibrosis during gastroesophageal anastomotic healing. Surg Endosc 27:753–760CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A successful clinical pathway protocol for minimally invasive esophagectomy
Authors
Robert E. Merritt
Peter J. Kneuertz
Desmond M. D’Souza
Kyle A. Perry
Publication date
01-04-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 4/2020
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-019-06946-0

Other articles of this Issue 4/2020

Surgical Endoscopy 4/2020 Go to the issue