RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Delayed gastric emptying (DGE) is a common complication after esophagectomy. BOTOX injections and pyloric surgeries (PS), including pyloroplasty (PP) and pyloromyotomy (PM), are performed intraoperatively as prophylaxis against DGE. This study compares the effects of pyloric BOTOX injection and PS for preventing DGE post-esophagectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed Moffitt's IRB-approved database of 1364 esophagectomies, identifying 475 patients receiving BOTOX or PS during esophageal resection. PS was further divided into PP and PM. Demographics, clinical characteristics, and postoperative outcomes were compared using Chi-Square, Fisher's exact test, Wilcoxon rank-sum, and ANOVA. Propensity-score matching was performed between BOTOX and PP cohorts. RESULTS: 238 patients received BOTOX, 108 received PP, and 129 received PM. Most BOTOX patients underwent fully minimally invasive robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (81.1% vs 1.7%) while most PS patients underwent hybrid open/Robotic Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (95.7% vs 13.0%). Anastomotic leak (p = 0.57) and pneumonia (p = 0.75) were comparable between groups. However, PS experienced lower DGE rates (15.9% vs 9.3%; p = 0.04) while BOTOX patients had less postoperative weight loss (9.7 vs 11.45 kg; p = 0.02). After separating PP from PM, leak (p = 0.72) and pneumonia (p = 0.07) rates remained similar. However, PP patients had the lowest DGE incidence (1.9% vs 15.7% vs 15.9%; p = < 0.001) and the highest bile reflux rates (2.8% vs 0% vs 0.4%; p = 0.04). Between matched cohorts of 91 patients, PP had lower DGE rates (18.7% vs 1.1%; p = < 0.001) and less weight loss (9.8 vs 11.4 kg; p = < 0.001). Other complications were comparable (all p > 0.05). BOTOX was consistently associated with shorter LOS compared to PS (all p = < 0.001). CONCLUSION: PP demonstrates lower rates of DGE in unmatched and matched analyses. Compared to BOTOX, PS is linked to reduced DGE rates. While BOTOX is associated with more favorable LOS, this may be attributable to difference in operative approach. PP improves DGE rates after esophagectomy without improving other postoperative complications.
RESUMEN
Background: Surgical resection of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers is a very complex procedure with step learning curve. New technologies have made minimally invasive surgery possible, but challenges still remain for wide spread adoption of these techniques. This article aims to describe the outcomes and salient technical points of a totally minimally invasive, laparoscopic, robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (LRAMIE). Methods: Retrospective observational cohort study performed at a specialty cancer center using a prospectively maintained institutional database. Patients undergoing LRAMIE (laparoscopic abdomen, robotic chest) from 2014-2023 were included. Patients undergoing transhiatal and three-field esophagectomy were excluded. Operative and postoperative outcomes were compared over the study period to identify potential associations between outcomes over time. Results: Two-hundred patients were identified who underwent LRAMIE. Median age was 65 years and most were male (87.5%). The open conversion rate was 1% (n=2), which occurred within the first 30 cases. Operative time and blood loss were improved at the 60-case mark (P<0.001). Anastomotic stricture rate improved after 50 cases, and leak rate improved after 80 cases. Postoperative length of stay improved at both 50 and 100 cases with a median LOS of 6 days after 100 cases. Rate of postoperative pneumonia, 30- and 90-day mortality were reduced after 100 cases, although not statistically significant for mortality due to too few events. Conclusions: Totally minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy at a high-volume center is a safe procedure. Operative outcomes improved significantly after 50-80 cases, followed by improvement in anastomotic results and postoperative outcomes, with corresponding excellent oncologic outcomes.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The blood urea nitrogen to serum albumin ratio (BAR) is an emerging prognostic parameter of interest. The utility of BAR as a prognostic factor has not been analyzed in lung cancer patients undergoing pulmonary lobectomy. We evaluated the ability of High BAR to predict worse outcomes after robotic-assisted pulmonary lobectomy (RAPL) for lung cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 400 patients who underwent RAPL from September 2010 to March 2022 by one surgeon. Patients were stratified by Low BAR (<6.25 mg/g) and High BAR (≥6.25 mg/g). Patients' demographics, tumor characteristics, comorbidities, surgical complications, outcomes, and survival were collected and compared by High and Low BAR groups. The primary outcome of interest was 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Receiver operator curves (ROC) confirmed that 6.25 was an optimal threshold for estimating mortality based on Low and High BAR. There were no differences in surgical complications or outcomes between the Low and High BAR groups. The ability of BAR to predict 30-day mortality was evaluated with the area under the curve (AUC) analysis, which showed that higher BAR could not predict mortality (AUC=0.655; 95% CI, 0.435-0.875; p=0.166). Similarly, survival analysis revealed no difference in five-year overall survival between the Low and High BAR groups (p=0.079). CONCLUSION: High BAR did not predict worse outcomes after RAPL for lung cancer in our study. Further studies are needed to better determine the prognostic ability of BAR in lower-risk populations.