Robotic versus open Ivor–Lewis esophagectomy: A more accurate lymph node dissection without burdening the leak rate

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundRobotic‐assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) combines the beneficial effects of minimally invasive surgery on postoperative complications, especially on pulmonary ones, with the safety of the anastomosis performed in open surgery. Moreover, RAMIE could allow a more accurate lymphadenectomy.MethodsWe reviewed our database to identify all patients with adenocarcinoma of the esophagus treated by Ivor–Lewis esophagectomy in the period January 2014 to June 2022. Patients were divided according to the thoracic approach into RAMIE and open esophagectomy (OE) groups. We compared the groups for early surgical outcomes, 90‐day mortality as well as R0 rate, and the number of lymph nodes harvested.ResultsWe identified 47 patients in RAMIE and 159 patients in the OE group. Baseline characteristics were comparable. Operative time was significantly longer for RAMIE procedures (p < 0.01); however, we did not observe the difference in overall (RAMIE 55.5% vs. OE 61%, p = 0.76) and severe complications rate (RAMIE 17% vs. OE 22.6%, p = 0.4). The anastomotic leak rate was 2.1% after RAMIE and 6.9% after OE (p = 0.56). We did not report the difference in 90‐day mortality (RAMIE 2.1% vs. OE 1.9%, p = 0.65). In the RAMIE group, we observed a significantly higher number of thoracic lymph nodes harvested, with a median of 10 lymph nodes in the RAMIE group versus 8 in the OE group (p < 0.01).ConclusionsIn our experience, RAMIE has morbimortality rates comparable to OE. Moreover, it allows a more accurate thoracic lymphadenectomy which results in a higher thoracic lymph nodes retrieval rate.