Early Quality of Life Outcomes After Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy

被引:49
|
作者
Sarkaria, Inderpal S.
Rizk, Nabil P.
Goldman, Debra A.
Sima, Camelia
Tan, Kay See
Bains, Manjit S.
Adusumilli, Prasad S.
Molena, Daniela
Bott, Matthew
Atkinson, Thomas
Jones, David R.
Rusch, Valerie W.
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, Thorac Div, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021 USA
[2] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, New York, NY 10021 USA
来源
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY | 2019年 / 108卷 / 03期
关键词
CANCER STATISTICS; MULTICENTER; EXPERIENCE; THERAPY;
D O I
10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.11.075
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background. Minimally invasive esophagectomy may improve some perioperative outcomes over open approaches; effects on quality of life are less clear. Methods. A prospective trial of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and open esophagectomy was initiated, measuring quality of life via the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal and Brief Pain Inventory. Mixed generalized linear models assessed associations between quality of life scores over time and by surgery type. Results. In total, 106 patients underwent open esophagectomy; 64 underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (98% RAMIE). The groups did not differ in age, sex, comorbidities, histologic subtype, stage, or induction treatment (P = .42 to P > .95). Total Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Esophageal scores were lower at 1 month (P < .001), returned to near baseline by 4 months, and did not differ between groups (P = .83). Brief Pain Inventory average pain severity (P = .007) and interference (P = .004) were lower for RAMIE. RAMIE had lower estimated blood loss (250 vs 350 cm(3); P < .001), shorter length of stay (9 vs 11 days; P < .001), fewer intensive care unit admissions (8% vs 20%; P = .033), more lymph nodes harvested (25 vs 22; P = .05), and longer surgical time (6.4 vs 5.4 hours; P < .001). Major complications (39% for RAMIE vs 52% for open esophagectomy; P > .95), anastomotic leak (3% vs 9%; P = .41), and 90-day mortality (2% vs 4%; P = .85) did not differ between groups. Pulmonary (14% vs 34%; P = .014) and infectious (17% vs 36%; P = .029) complications were lower for RAMIE. Conclusions. RAMIE is associated with lower immediate postoperative pain severity and interference and decreased pulmonary and infectious complications. Ongoing data accrual will assess mid-term and long-term outcomes in this cohort. (C) 2019 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons
引用
收藏
页码:920 / 928
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The da Vinci Xi Robotic Four-Arm Approach for Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy
    Grimminger, Peter Philipp
    Hadzijusufovic, Edin
    Ruurda, Jelle Piet-Hein
    Lang, Hauke
    van Hillegersberg, Richard
    THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGEON, 2018, 66 (05): : 407 - 409
  • [32] Correction to: Circular vs. linear stapling after minimally invasive and robotic-assisted esophagectomy: a pooled analysis
    Alida Finze
    Johanna Betzler
    Svetlana Hetjens
    Christoph Reissfelder
    Mirko Otto
    Susanne Blank
    Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery, 2022, 407 : 3907 - 3907
  • [33] Minimally Invasive and Robotic-Assisted Thymus Resection
    Limmer, Karl K.
    Kernstine, Kemp H.
    THORACIC SURGERY CLINICS, 2011, 21 (01) : 69 - +
  • [34] On the Kinematics of Robotic-assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery
    From, Pal Johan
    MODELING IDENTIFICATION AND CONTROL, 2013, 34 (02) : 69 - 82
  • [35] Robotic-assisted minimally invasive liver resection
    Wu, Yao-Ming
    Hu, Rey-Heng
    Lai, Hong-Shiee
    Lee, Po-Huang
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2014, 37 (02) : 53 - 57
  • [36] Minimally invasive robotic-assisted lumbar laminectomy
    Altorfer, F. C. S.
    Kelly, M. J.
    Avrumova, F.
    Burkhard, M. D.
    Sneag, D. B.
    Chazen, J. L.
    Tan, E.
    Lebl, D. R.
    BONE & JOINT OPEN, 2024, 5 (09): : 809 - 817
  • [37] Minimally Invasive Robotic-Assisted Patellofemoral Arthroplasty
    Hassebrock, Jeffrey D.
    Makovicka, Justin L.
    Wong, Michael
    Patel, Karan A.
    Scott, Kelly L.
    Deckey, David G.
    Chhabra, Anikar
    ARTHROSCOPY TECHNIQUES, 2020, 9 (04): : E425 - E433
  • [38] A Flexible Instrument for Robotic Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy
    Tucan, Paul
    Birlescu, Iosif
    Pusca, Alexandru
    Gherman, Bogdan
    Jucan, Daniela
    Antal, Tiberiu
    Vaida, Calin
    Pisla, Adrian
    Chablat, Damien
    Pisla, Doina
    NEW TRENDS IN MECHANISM AND MACHINE SCIENCE, EUCOMES 2024, 2024, 165 : 63 - 71
  • [39] Safety and efficacy of robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy
    Moudgill, Neil
    Sharma, Priya
    Rosato, Ernest
    Chojnacki, Karen
    Weksler, Benny
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2010, 211 (03) : S39 - S39
  • [40] Intraoperative Near-Infrared Fluorescence Imaging as an Adjunct to Robotic-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy
    Sarkaria, Inderpal S.
    Bains, Manjit S.
    Finley, David J.
    Adusumilli, Prasad S.
    Huang, James
    Rusch, Valerie W.
    Jones, David R.
    Rizk, Nabil P.
    INNOVATIONS-TECHNOLOGY AND TECHNIQUES IN CARDIOTHORACIC AND VASCULAR SURGERY, 2014, 9 (05) : 391 - 393