Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Updates in Surgery 3/2021

01-06-2021 | Esophageal Cancer | Review Article

Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, a review of the technique

Authors: Konstantinos Chouliaras, Steven Hochwald, Moshim Kukar

Published in: Updates in Surgery | Issue 3/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Esophageal resection is a key component of the multidisciplinary management of esophageal cancer. Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy is gaining widespread approval amongst few centers with promising early data. There is significant variability in the operative approach utilized by different centers and this review describes, step-by-step, the operative technique at a high-volume tertiary center. The cornerstone of management is individualized surgical approach, based on patient, tumor and technical factors. Although our approach is based on aforementioned factors, our preferred approach is an Ivor Lewis esophagectomy and this review focuses on that. The procedure is broken down into three key parts, starting with an abdominal exploration and creation of the gastric conduit, placement of jejunostomy tube, moving to thoracic mobilization and creation of the side-side 6 cm stapled esophagogastric anastomosis with a final abdominal portion to assure proper positioning of the conduit and reducing redundancy. This approach is fully robotic and a side to side anastomosis facilitates the creation of a widely patent anastomosis therefore minimizing the risk of anastomotic leaks and strictures. Our experience with minimally invasive esophagectomy, as has been previously published, is associated with a 5.1% of anastomotic leak and 7.6% of anastomotic stricture. The robotic platform further optimizes this technique and helps us safely accomplish a side to side stapled anastomosis. Superior instrument dexterity in a restricted thoracic space is facilitated by intracorporeal suturing and robotic stapling. Thus, it obviates the need for a larger thoracotomy incision, which is typically needed for an EEA anastomosis, and that is traditionally associated with higher stricture rate.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Pohl H, Sirovich B, Welch HG (2010) Esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence: are we reaching the peak? Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 19(6):1468–1470CrossRef Pohl H, Sirovich B, Welch HG (2010) Esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence: are we reaching the peak? Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 19(6):1468–1470CrossRef
2.
4.
go back to reference Biere SSAY, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, Bonavina L, Rosman C, Garcia JR et al (2012) Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 379(9829):1887–1892CrossRefPubMed Biere SSAY, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, Bonavina L, Rosman C, Garcia JR et al (2012) Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 379(9829):1887–1892CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Straatman J, van der Wielen N, Cuesta MA, Daams F, Roig Garcia J, Bonavina L et al (2017) Minimally invasive versus open esophageal resection: three-year follow-up of the previously reported randomized controlled trial: the TIME Trial. Ann Surg 266(2):232–236CrossRefPubMed Straatman J, van der Wielen N, Cuesta MA, Daams F, Roig Garcia J, Bonavina L et al (2017) Minimally invasive versus open esophageal resection: three-year follow-up of the previously reported randomized controlled trial: the TIME Trial. Ann Surg 266(2):232–236CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Mariette C, Markar SR, Dabakuyo-Yonli TS, Meunier B, Pezet D, Collet D et al (2019) Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 380(2):152–162CrossRefPubMed Mariette C, Markar SR, Dabakuyo-Yonli TS, Meunier B, Pezet D, Collet D et al (2019) Hybrid minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 380(2):152–162CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Franchetti Y, Catalano PJ, Swanson S, Sugarbaker DJ et al (2015) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: results of a prospective phase II multicenter trial-the eastern cooperative oncology group (E2202) study. Ann Surg 261(4):702–707CrossRefPubMed Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Franchetti Y, Catalano PJ, Swanson S, Sugarbaker DJ et al (2015) Minimally invasive esophagectomy: results of a prospective phase II multicenter trial-the eastern cooperative oncology group (E2202) study. Ann Surg 261(4):702–707CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, Levy RM, Keeley S, Shende M et al (2012) Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg 256(1):95–103CrossRefPubMed Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, Levy RM, Keeley S, Shende M et al (2012) Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg 256(1):95–103CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Ben-David K, Tuttle R, Kukar M, Rossidis G, Hochwald SN (2016) Minimally invasive esophagectomy utilizing a stapled side-to-side anastomosis is safe in the western patient population. Ann Surg Oncol 23(9):3056–3062CrossRefPubMed Ben-David K, Tuttle R, Kukar M, Rossidis G, Hochwald SN (2016) Minimally invasive esophagectomy utilizing a stapled side-to-side anastomosis is safe in the western patient population. Ann Surg Oncol 23(9):3056–3062CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference van Hillegersberg R, Boone J, Draaisma WA, Broeders IA, Giezeman MJ, Borel Rinkes IH (2006) First experience with robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagolymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 20(9):1435–1439CrossRefPubMed van Hillegersberg R, Boone J, Draaisma WA, Broeders IA, Giezeman MJ, Borel Rinkes IH (2006) First experience with robot-assisted thoracoscopic esophagolymphadenectomy for esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 20(9):1435–1439CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference van der Sluis PC, van der Horst S, May AM, Schippers C, Brosens LAA, Joore HCA et al (2019) Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy versus open transthoracic esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 269(4):621–630CrossRefPubMed van der Sluis PC, van der Horst S, May AM, Schippers C, Brosens LAA, Joore HCA et al (2019) Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy versus open transthoracic esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 269(4):621–630CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Peng JS, Nurkin SJ, Hochwald SN, Kukar M (2020) Technique for robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with 6-cm linear stapled side-to-side anastomosis. Ann Surg Oncol 27(3):824CrossRefPubMed Peng JS, Nurkin SJ, Hochwald SN, Kukar M (2020) Technique for robotic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy with 6-cm linear stapled side-to-side anastomosis. Ann Surg Oncol 27(3):824CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference van Hagen PHM, van Lanschot JJ et al (2012) Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer. N Engl J Med 366:2074–2084CrossRefPubMed van Hagen PHM, van Lanschot JJ et al (2012) Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for esophageal or junctional cancer. N Engl J Med 366:2074–2084CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Shapiro J, van Lanschot JJB, Hulshof MCCM, van Hagen P, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BPL et al (2015) Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 16(9):1090–1098CrossRefPubMed Shapiro J, van Lanschot JJB, Hulshof MCCM, van Hagen P, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Wijnhoven BPL et al (2015) Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for oesophageal or junctional cancer (CROSS): long-term results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 16(9):1090–1098CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Alderson D, Cunningham D, Nankivell M, Blazeby JM, Griffin SM, Crellin A et al (2017) Neoadjuvant cisplatin and fluorouracil versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine followed by resection in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (UK MRC OE05): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 18(9):1249–1260CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Alderson D, Cunningham D, Nankivell M, Blazeby JM, Griffin SM, Crellin A et al (2017) Neoadjuvant cisplatin and fluorouracil versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and capecitabine followed by resection in patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma (UK MRC OE05): an open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 18(9):1249–1260CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Haverkamp L, Seesing MF, Ruurda JP, Boone J, Hillegersberg RV (2017) Worldwide trends in surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer. Dis Esophagus 30(1):1–7PubMed Haverkamp L, Seesing MF, Ruurda JP, Boone J, Hillegersberg RV (2017) Worldwide trends in surgical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer. Dis Esophagus 30(1):1–7PubMed
20.
go back to reference Singh D, Maley RH, Santucci T et al (2001) Experience and technique of stapled mechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. Ann Thorac Surg 71:419–424CrossRefPubMed Singh D, Maley RH, Santucci T et al (2001) Experience and technique of stapled mechanical cervical esophagogastric anastomosis. Ann Thorac Surg 71:419–424CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Orringer MB, Marshall B, Iannettoni MD (2000) Eliminating the cervical esophagogastric anastomotic leak with a side-to-side stapled anastomosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 119:277–288CrossRefPubMed Orringer MB, Marshall B, Iannettoni MD (2000) Eliminating the cervical esophagogastric anastomotic leak with a side-to-side stapled anastomosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 119:277–288CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Ercan S, Rice TW, Murthy SC, Rybicki LA, Blackstone EH (2005) Does esophagogastric anastomotic technique influence the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129(3):623–631CrossRefPubMed Ercan S, Rice TW, Murthy SC, Rybicki LA, Blackstone EH (2005) Does esophagogastric anastomotic technique influence the outcome of patients with esophageal cancer? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 129(3):623–631CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Liu QX, Min JX, Deng XF, Dai JG (2014) Is hand sewing comparable with stapling for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy? A meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 20(45):17218–17226CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Liu QX, Min JX, Deng XF, Dai JG (2014) Is hand sewing comparable with stapling for anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy? A meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 20(45):17218–17226CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
go back to reference Deng XF, Liu QX, Zhou D, Min JX, Dai JG (2015) Hand-sewn vs linearly stapled esophagogastric anastomosis for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 21(15):4757–4764CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Deng XF, Liu QX, Zhou D, Min JX, Dai JG (2015) Hand-sewn vs linearly stapled esophagogastric anastomosis for esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 21(15):4757–4764CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
go back to reference Okusanya OT, Sarkaria IS, Hess NR, Nason KS, Sanchez MV, Levy RM et al (2017) Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE): the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center initial experience. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 6(2):179–185CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Okusanya OT, Sarkaria IS, Hess NR, Nason KS, Sanchez MV, Levy RM et al (2017) Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE): the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center initial experience. Ann Cardiothorac Surg 6(2):179–185CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
27.
go back to reference Sarkaria IS, Rizk NP, Grosser R, Goldman D, Finley DJ, Ghanie A et al (2016) Attaining proficiency in robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy while maximizing safety during procedure development. Innov (Phila) 11(4):268–273CrossRef Sarkaria IS, Rizk NP, Grosser R, Goldman D, Finley DJ, Ghanie A et al (2016) Attaining proficiency in robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy while maximizing safety during procedure development. Innov (Phila) 11(4):268–273CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Yang Y, Zhang X, Li B, Li Z, Sun Y, Mao T et al (2019) Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE) versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: protocol for a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial (RAMIE trial, robot-assisted minimally invasive Esophagectomy). BMC Cancer 19(1):608CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yang Y, Zhang X, Li B, Li Z, Sun Y, Mao T et al (2019) Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE) versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: protocol for a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial (RAMIE trial, robot-assisted minimally invasive Esophagectomy). BMC Cancer 19(1):608CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
go back to reference Chao YK, Li ZG, Wen YW, Kim DJ, Park SY, Chang YL et al (2019) Robotic-assisted esophagectomy vs video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (REVATE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 20(1):346CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Chao YK, Li ZG, Wen YW, Kim DJ, Park SY, Chang YL et al (2019) Robotic-assisted esophagectomy vs video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (REVATE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 20(1):346CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Zhang Y, Han Y, Gan Q, Xiang J, Jin R, Chen K et al (2019) Early outcomes of robot-assisted versus thoracoscopic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched study. Ann Surg Oncol 26(5):1284–1291CrossRefPubMed Zhang Y, Han Y, Gan Q, Xiang J, Jin R, Chen K et al (2019) Early outcomes of robot-assisted versus thoracoscopic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a propensity score-matched study. Ann Surg Oncol 26(5):1284–1291CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Robotic-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, a review of the technique
Authors
Konstantinos Chouliaras
Steven Hochwald
Moshim Kukar
Publication date
01-06-2021
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Updates in Surgery / Issue 3/2021
Print ISSN: 2038-131X
Electronic ISSN: 2038-3312
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-021-01000-y

Other articles of this Issue 3/2021

Updates in Surgery 3/2021 Go to the issue