RESUMEN
Background: Robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE), video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE), and open esophagectomy (OE) all have significant roles in the management of esophageal cancer (EC). Few studies have compared efficacy and safety between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the short-term outcomes between RAE, VAMIE, and OE for resectable EC after neoadjuvant treatment. Methods: Ninety-eight patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent esophagectomy. A retrospective study was performed including 98 consecutive patients treated from January 2021 to August 2022 who received neoadjuvant treatment (including immunochemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy) followed by RAE, VAMIE or OE. Evaluated endpoints in the present study consisted of pathological outcomes, intraoperative and postoperative outcomes, as well as postoperative complications. Results: No significant differences were seen in the operating time, blood loss, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, R0 resection, and number of dissected lymph nodes between the three RAE, VAMIE, or OE groups. The achievement rate of right recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node removal (P=0.01) and the total cost (P<0.001) were higher in RAE. The postoperative hospital stay of OE was longer than the other two groups (P<0.05). There were no significant differences in postoperative complications. Conclusions: Compared to VAMIE, no clear benefit exists for RAE in the treatment of resectable EC after neoadjuvant therapy. OE resulted in a longer hospital stay. Although the rate of successful right RLN node removal was higher with RAE, the clinical relevance for this is yet unclear.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been demonstrated to offer realistic three-dimensional visual clarity, flexible movement and so on. The high cost is the main reason hampering universal application. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of RAMIE versus video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE). METHODS: The PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were systematically searched up to June 1, 2021, for studies comparing RAMIE and VAMIE. RESULTS: Nineteen studies were enrolled, which consisted of a total of 4,714 patients, including 2,306 patients in the RAMIE group and 2,408 patients in the VAMIE group. In RAMIE patients, higher numbers of total lymph nodes (MD =0.171, 95% CI: 0.086-0.255, P<0.001) and lymph nodes along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) (MD =0.219, 95% CI: 0.097-0.340, P<0.001) were removed. In RAMIE patients in the McKown group, higher numbers of total lymph nodes (MD =0.173, 95% CI: 0.080-0.265, P<0.001) and lymph nodes along the left RLN (MD =0.220, 95% CI: 0.090-0.350, P=0.001) were removed, while in those in the ESCC group, higher numbers of total lymph nodes (MD =0.249, 95% CI: 0.091-0.407, P=0.002) and lymph nodes along the left RLN (MD =0.239, 95% CI: 0.102-0.377, P=0.001) were removed. DISCUSSION: This study indicated that the main advantage of RAMIE was a greater number of harvested lymph nodes, which may be beneficial to diagnosis and local control. RCTs with larger sample sizes and studies reporting long-term outcomes are needed to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of RAMIE and VAMIE.