Determining the learning curve of minimally invasive antireflux surgery: systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression.

The rapid uptake of minimally invasive antireflux surgery has led to interest in learning curves for this procedure. This study ascertains the learning curve in laparoscopic and robotic-assisted antireflux surgery. A systematic review of the literature pertaining to learning curves in minimally invasive fundoplication with or without hiatal hernia repair was performed using PubMed, Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. A meta-regression analysis was undertaken to identify the number of cases to achieve surgical proficiency, and a meta-analysis was performed to compare outcomes between cases that were undertaken during a surgeon's learning phase and experienced phase. Twenty-five studies met the eligibility criteria. A meta-regression analysis was performed to quantitatively investigate the trend of number of cases required to achieve surgical proficiency from 1996 to present day. Using a mixed-effects negative binomial regression model, the predicted learning curve for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted antireflux surgery was found to be 24.7 and 31.1 cases, respectively. The meta-analysis determined that surgeons in their learning phase may experience a moderately increased rate of conversion to open procedure (odds ratio [OR] 2.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28, 4.64), as well as a slightly increased rate of intraoperative complications (OR 1.60; 95% CI 1.08, 2.38), postoperative complications (OR 1.98; 95% CI 1.36, 2.87), and needing reintervention (OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.16, 2.34). This study provides an insight into the expected caseload to be competent in performing antireflux surgery. The discrepancy between outcomes during and after the learning curve for antireflux surgery suggests a need for close proctorship for learning surgeons.

Para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia following esophagectomy-the new price of minimally invasive surgery?

Esophageal Cancer is the seventh commonest cancer worldwide with poor overall survival. Significant morbidity related to open esophagectomy has driven practice toward hybrid, totally minimally invasive and robotic procedures. With the increase in minimally invasive approaches, it has been suggested that there might be an increased incidence of subsequent para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia. To assess the incidence, modifiable risk factors and association with operative approach of this emerging complication, we evaluated outcomes following esophagectomy from two Australian Centers. Prospectively collected databases were examined to identify patients who developed versus did not develop a para-conduit hernia. Patient characteristics, disease factors, treatment factors, operative and post-operative factors were compared for these two groups. A total of 24 of 297 patients who underwent esophagectomy were diagnosed with a symptomatic para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia (8.1%). The significant risk factor for hernia was a minimally invasive abdominal approach (70.8% vs. 35.5%; P = 0.004, odds ratio = 12.876, 95% CI 2.214-74.89). Minimally invasive thoracic approaches were not associated with increased risk. Minimally invasive abdominal approaches to esophagectomy doubled the risk of developing a para-conduit diaphragmatic hernia. Effective operative solutions to address this complication are required.

Increased risk of diaphragmatic herniation following esophagectomy with a minimally invasive abdominal approach.

OBJECTIVE: Diaphragmatic herniation is a rare complication following esophagectomy, associated with risks of aspiration pneumonia, bowel obstruction, and strangulation. Repair can be challenging due to the presence of the gastric conduit. We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the incidence and risk factors associated with diaphragmatic herniation following esophagectomy, the timing and mode of presentation, and outcomes of repair. METHODS: A systematic search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines was performed using four major databases. A meta-analysis of diaphragmatic herniation incidence following esophagectomies with a minimally invasive abdominal (MIA) approach compared with open esophagectomies was conducted. Qualitative analysis was performed for tumor location, associated symptoms, time to presentation, and outcomes of postdiaphragmatic herniation repair. RESULTS: This systematic review consisted of 17,052 patients from 32 studies. The risk of diaphragmatic herniation was 2.74 times higher in MIA esophagectomy compared with open esophagectomy, with pooled incidence of 6.0% versus 3.2%, respectively. Diaphragmatic herniation was more commonly seen following surgery for distal esophageal tumors. Majority of patients (64%) were symptomatic at diagnosis. Presentation within 30 days of operation occurred in 21% of cases and is twice as likely to require emergent repair with increased surgical morbidity. Early diaphragmatic herniation recurrence and cardiorespiratory complications are common sequelae following hernia repair. CONCLUSIONS: In the era of MIA esophagectomy, one has to be cognizant of the increased risk of diaphragmatic herniation and its sequelae. Failure to recognize early diaphragmatic herniation can result in catastrophic consequences. Increased vigilance and decreased threshold for imaging during this period is warranted.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of gastric cancer treatment in patients with positive peritoneal cytology.

Gastric cancer patients with positive peritoneal cytology as the only marker of metastatic disease have poor prognoses. There is no universal consensus on the most appropriate treatment regimen for this particular patient group. We reviewed and analyzed published data to determine the optimal treatment regimen for patients with peritoneal cytology-positive gastric adenocarcinomas. Six electronic databases were explored [PubMed, Cochrane (Systematic Reviews and Controlled Trials), PROSPERO, DARE, and EMBASE]. The primary outcome was overall survival with secondary outcomes including patterns of recurrence and treatment-related morbidity. Six studies were included for data extraction. There was no significant heterogeneity between studies. The use of S1 monotherapy was associated with a significant survival benefit (HR 0.48; 95% CI 0.32-0.70; p = 0.0002). Intraoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy (IIPC) with adjuvant chemotherapy showed a trend toward improvement in overall survival (HR 0.70; 9 % CI 0.47-1.04; p = 0.08). A recent randomized controlled trial examining extensive intraperitoneal lavage (EIPL) with IIPC showed a significant improvement in overall survival (5-year overall survival, 43.8% for EIPL-IPC group compared with 4.6% for IPC group). However, these promising results need to be validated in larger prospective randomized trials.