RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) palsy is a common complication in esophagectomy and its main risk factor is reportedly intraoperative procedure associated with surgeons' experience. We aimed to improve surgeons' recognition of the RLN during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) by developing an artificial intelligence (AI) model. METHODS: We used 120 RAMIE videos from four institutions to develop an AI model and eight other surgical videos from another institution for AI model evaluation. AI performance was measured using the Intersection over Union (IoU). Furthermore, to verify the AI's clinical validity, we conducted the two experiments on the early identification of RLN and recognition of its location by eight trainee surgeons with or without AI. RESULTS: The IoUs for AI recognition of the right and left RLNs were 0.40 ± 0.26 and 0.34 ± 0.27, respectively. The recognition of the right RLN presence in the beginning of right RLN lymph node dissection (LND) by surgeons with AI (81.3%) was significantly more accurate (p = 0.004) than that by surgeons without AI (46.9%). The IoU of right RLN during right RLN LND recognized by surgeons with AI (0.59 ± 0.18) was significantly higher (p = 0.010) than that by surgeons without AI (0.40 ± 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons' recognition of anatomical structures in RAMIE was improved by our AI system with high accuracy. Especially in right RLN LND, surgeons could recognize the RLN more quickly and accurately by using the AI model.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Esophagogastric bypass is performed for esophageal strictures. Mucus retention, known as mucocele, sometimes occurs at the stricture oral side of the remnant esophagus. It is often asymptomatic and is expected to be naturally decompressed, but it may cause respiratory failure depending on the case. Herein, we report a case in which we successfully performed thoracoscopic esophageal drainage as emergency airway management due to tracheal compression by a mucocele after esophagogastric bypass for unresectable esophageal cancer with esophagobronchial fistula. CASE PRESENTATION: A 56-year-old man underwent esophageal bypass surgery for an unresectable esophageal carcinoma with an esophagobronchial fistula following chemotherapy and radiation therapy. Nine months after bypass surgery, he experienced severe dyspnea due to tracheal compression caused by mucus retention on the oral side of the esophageal tumor. We planned thoracoscopic surgery for mucus retention drainage through the right thoracic cavity to secure the airway as an emergency procedure under general anesthesia. Intubation can be performed safely by guiding bronchoscopy in the semi-supine position. Upper esophageal dilation was observed on the cranial side of the azygos arch. We dissected the mediastinal pleura of the upper thoracic esophagus and exposed its wall. A 12-Fr silicone drain was placed in the esophagus through the right chest wall and 120 ml of white fluid was aspirated. He was discharged 9 days after surgery without complications and resumed treatment with an immune checkpoint inhibitor 23 days after surgery. Thereafter, he continued chemotherapy for esophageal cancer, but died of tumor progression and lung metastasis 35 months after bypass surgery and 25 months after thoracoscopic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Thoracoscopic esophageal drainage could be performed safely as emergency airway management, shorten the period of discontinuance, and allow cancer treatment to be resumed promptly. We believe that this thoracoscopic procedure is an effective and less invasive method if the percutaneous approach is difficult.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND/AIM: To evaluate complications and risk factors associated with transumbilical incision as an organ removal site in laparoscopic pancreatectomy (LP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 52 patients who underwent LP between 2009 and 2017 were included in this study. The development of superficial surgical site infection (SSI) and transumbilical port-site incisional hernia was recorded. RESULTS: None of the patients had SSI. However, three (5.77%) presented with transumbilical incisional hernia. No variables were significantly associated with the risk of transumbilical incisional hernia. CONCLUSION: No evident risk factors correlated with hernia formation. Hence, incisional hernia might have occurred at a certain probability. In some cases, it was caused by technical problems. However, the use of transumbilical incision as an organ removal site was feasible, and a new incision for organ removal alone was not required.