Hybrid robotic versus hybrid laparoscopic Ivor Lewis oesophagectomy: a case-matched analysis

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Robotic-assisted oesophagectomy for cancer has been increasingly employed worldwide; however, the benefits of this technique compared to conventional minimally invasive oesophagectomy are unclear. Since 2016, hybrid robotic minimally invasive oesophagectomy (R-HMIE) has increasingly replaced hybrid laparoscopic minimally invasive oesophagectomy (HMIE) as the standard of care in our institution. The aim of this study was to compare these procedures. METHODS: Over a 10-year period, 686 patients underwent oesophagectomy at our institution. Out of these patients, 128 patients with cancer were treated with a hybrid minimally invasive technique. Each patient who underwent R-HMIE was matched according to gender, age, comorbidity, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, Union International Contre le Cancer stage, localization, histology and neoadjuvant treatment with a patient who underwent HMIE. Perioperative parameters were extracted from our database and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: After the matching procedure, 88 patients were included in the study. Between HMIE and R-HMIE, no significant differences (P > 0.05) were found in operating time (median 281 vs 300 min), R0 resection rate (n = 42 vs 42), harvested lymph nodes (median 28 vs 24), hospital stay (median 19 vs 17 days) and intensive care unit stay (median 7 vs 6.5 days). Regarding surgical complications, no difference could be observed either (n = 42 vs 44). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive oesophagectomy remains a challenging operation with high morbidity even in a high-volume institution. According to our intra- and short-term results, we have found no difference between R-HMIE and HMIE.