Similar Quality of Life After Conventional and Robotic Transhiatal Esophagectomy.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) for minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) have demonstrated benefits compared with open transthoracic or 3-hole esophagectomy. PROs, including quality of life (QoL) and fear of recurrence (FoR), comparing open transhiatal esophagectomy (THE) and transhiatal robotic-assisted MIE (Th-RAMIE) have been limited. METHODS: At a single, high-volume academic center, patients undergoing THE and Th-RAMIE with gastric conduit for clinical stage I to III esophageal cancer from 2013 to 2018 were evaluated. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire in Esophageal Cancer (QLQ-OES18), and the FoR survey were administered preoperatively and at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Linear mixed-effects models were used for QoL and FoR score comparisons. Perioperative outcomes were also compared. RESULTS: A total of 309 patients (212 in the group and 97 in the Th-RAMIE group) were included. The Th-RAMIE cohort had a significantly higher number of lymph nodes harvested (14 ± 0.8 vs 11.2 ± 0.4; P = .01), a shorter length of stay (days, 10.0 ± 6.7 vs 12.1 ± 7.0; P = .03), lower rates of postoperative ileus (5% vs 15%; P = .02), and fewer opioids prescribed at discharge (71% vs 85%; P = .03). After adjustment, there were no significant differences in QLQ-C30, QLQ-OES18, and FoR scores between the groups out to 1 year postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: There were no clear patient-reported benefits of Th-RAMIE over THE for esophageal cancer. However, Th-RAMIE conferred several perioperative benefits.