Introduction of Minimally Invasive transCervical oEsophagectomy (MICE) according to the IDEAL framework.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Klarenbeek BR
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10416700 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Introduction of Minimally Invasive transCervical oEsophagectomy (MICE) according to the IDEAL framework.
Klarenbeek Bastiaan R BR Fujiwara Hitoshi H Scholte Mirre M Rovers Maroeska M Shiozaki Atsushi A Rosman Camiel C
The British journal of surgery 20230801 9
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundMinimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy is a surgical technique that offers radical oesophagectomy without the need for transthoracic access. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of the minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy procedure and to report the refinement of this technique in a Western cohort.MethodsA single-centre prospective cohort study was designed as an IDEAL stage 2A study. Patients with oesophageal cancer (cT1b-4a N0-3 M0) who were scheduled for oesophagectomy with curative intent were eligible for inclusion in the study. The main outcome parameter was the postoperative pulmonary complication rate and the secondary outcomes were the anastomotic leakage, recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy, and R0 resection rates, as well as the lymph node yield.ResultsIn total, 75 patients underwent minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy between January 2021 and November 2023. Several modifications to the surgical technique were registered, evaluated, and implemented in the context of IDEAL stage 2A. A total of 12 patients (16%) had postoperative pulmonary complications, including pneumonia (4 patients) and pleural effusion with drainage or aspiration (8 patients). Recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy was observed in 33 of 75 patients (44%), with recovery in 30 of 33 patients (91%). A total of 5 of 75 patients (7%) had anastomotic leakage. The median number of resected lymph nodes was 29 (interquartile range 22-37) and the R0 resection rate was 96% (72 patients).ConclusionIntroducing minimally invasive transcervical oesophagectomy for oesophageal cancer in a Dutch institution is associated with a low rate of postoperative pulmonary complications and a high rate of temporary recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy.
| S-EPMC11235329 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7330401 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTranscervical esophagectomy is a less invasive procedure performed within mediastinum. However, the mediastinum offers limited surgical space and the surgery via this route differs from conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy. Therefore, the physiological study of this surgical approach on an animal model would be necessary before the procedure gained more popularity.MethodsWe conducted transcervical minimally invasive esophagectomy on animal model (swine) under CO2 pneumomediastinum. The hemodynamic parameters were monitored using float catheter cannulated via right jugular vein. At different anatomical level (the upper, middle, and lower thoracic part of the animal esophagus), increased artificial pneumomediastinal pressures (0, 4, 8, 12, and 16 mmHg) were consecutively allocated to record the intra-operative changes of blood pressure, cardiac output (CO), central venous pressure (CVP), pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) and extravascular lung water (EVLW). Meanwhile, the surgical field under different pneumomediastinum pressure was recorded and balanced with animals' hemodynamic changes to determine the optimal pressure for transcervical minimally invasive esophagectomy.ResultsThe animal procedures were accomplished without conversions. During the upper thoracic stage, increased CO2 pressures did not lead to significant changes in hemodynamic parameters including the blood pressure, CO, CVP, PAP or the level of EVLW. During the middle thoracic stage, pneumomediastinum under 4-12 mmHg did not lead to significant changes in hemodynamic parameters. However, pneumomediastinum at 16 mmHg resulted in lower CO (P=0.038) when compared to 0-12 mmHg. During lower thoracic stage, as the pneumomediastinum pressures increased from 0 to 16 mmHg, significant decrease in CO (P=0.022), and increase in CVP (P=0.036) was recorded. In compared to 4 mmHg pneumomediastinum, the surgical field under 8-16 mmHg artificial CO2 pneumomediastinum was suitable for mediastinal manipulation.ConclusionsDuring transcervical minimally invasive esophagectomy on animal model, the mobilization of swine thoracic esophagus with optimal pneumomediastinum pressure 8-12 mmHg is safe and effective based on hemodynamic analysis.
| S-EPMC7711368 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe purpose of this randomized trial is to evaluate the early removal of postoperative drains after robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy (RAMIE). Evidence is lacking about feasibility, associated pain, recovery, and morbidity.Methods/designThis is a randomized controlled multicentric trial involving 72 patients undergoing RAMIE. Patients will be allocated into two groups. The "intervention" group consists of 36 patients. In this group, abdominal and chest drains are removed 3 h after the end of surgery in the absence of contraindications. The control group consists of 36 patients with conventional chest drain management. These drains are removed during the further postoperative course according to a standard algorithm. The primary objective is to investigate whether postoperative pain measured by NRS on the second postoperative day can be significantly reduced in the intervention group. Secondary endpoints are the intensity of pain during the first week, analgesic use, number of postoperative chest X-ray and CT scans, interventions, postoperative mobilization (steps per day as measured with an activity tracker), postoperative morbidity and mortality.DiscussionUntil now, there have been no trials investigating different intraoperative chest drain strategies in patients undergoing RAMIE for oesophageal cancer with regard to perioperative complications until discharge. Minimally invasive approaches combined with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols lower morbidity but still include the insertion of chest drains. Reduction and early removal have been proposed after pulmonary surgery but not after RAMIE. The study concept is based on our own experience and the promising current results of the RAMIE procedure. Therefore, the presented randomized controlled trial will provide statistical evidence of the effectiveness and feasibility of the "drainless" RAMIE.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05553795. Registered on 23 September 2022.
| S-EPMC10152702 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIO) is reported to produce fewer respiratory complications than open oesophagectomy. This study assessed differences in postoperative complications between MIO and hybrid MIO (HMIO) employing thoracoscopy and laparotomy, along with the influence of co-morbidities on postoperative outcomes. Patients with oesophageal cancer undergoing three-stage MIO or three-stage HMIO between 1999 and 2018 were identified from a prospectively developed database, which included patient demographics, co-morbidities, preoperative therapies, and cancer stage. The primary outcome was postoperative complications in the two groups. Secondary outcomes included duration of operation, blood transfusion requirement, duration of hospital stay, and overall survival. There were 828 patients, of whom 722 had HMIO and 106 MIO, without significant baseline differences. Median duration of operation was longer for MIO (325 versus 289 min; P < 0.001), but with less blood loss (median 250 versus 300 ml; P < 0.001) and a shorter hospital stay (median 12 versus 13 days; P = 0.006). Respiratory complications were not associated with operative approach (31.1 versus 35.2 per cent for MIO and HMIO respectively; P = 0.426). Anastomotic leak rates (10.4 versus 10.2 per cent) and 90-day mortality (1.0 versus 1.7 per cent) did not differ. Cardiac co-morbidity was associated with more medical and surgical complications. Overall survival was associated with AJCC stage and co-morbidities, but not operative approach. MIO had a small benefit in terms of blood loss and hospital stay, but not in operating time. Oncological outcomes were similar in the two groups. Postoperative complications were associated with pre-existing cardiorespiratory co-morbidities rather than operative approach.
| S-EPMC7893474 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAnatomically, the esophagus is located within the mediastinum, and thus it potentially a transcervical approach for esophagectomy, which avoids thoracic manipulation, could be an alternative to transthoracic esophagectomy for the surgical resection of esophageal cancer. A modified transcervical minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), laparo-gastroscopic esophagectomy (LGE), was recently introduced using an integrated gastroscope to mobilize the esophagus. As such, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is necessary to validate its value compared to transthoracic MIE, which carries a high risk of morbidity due to thoracic manipulation.MethodsThis prospective study plans to enroll patients with resectable esophageal cancer with a pathological diagnosis of squamous cell carcinoma or adenocarcinoma patients over a 2-year period. Patients will be randomly assigned to one of 2 groups in a 1:1 ratio: patients in Group A will radical LGE and patients in Group B will receive radical laparo-thoracoscopic esophagectomy (LTE). Perioperative and long-term outcomes of all patients will be collected and analyzed. The primary end point will be perioperative morbidity, and the secondary end points will include 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) and quality of life (QOL) score. Other data that will be collected and compared between the groups include the number of harvested lymph nodes, surgical Apgar score, and duration of operation.DiscussionTransthoracic MIE is the most widely accepted approach for treating esophageal cancer. In this RCT, transthoracic MIE and transcervical LGE will be compared with respect to oncological and surgical outcomes (oncological none-inferiority and surgical superiority).Trial registrationThis study is registered in Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200055312) with the name of 'Transcervical versus Transthoracic Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Randomized and Controlled Trial' on January 6, 2022. Details can be found on http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=133224.
| S-EPMC9073779 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeMinimally invasive oesophagectomy is a technically demanding procedure, and the learning curve for this procedure should be explored. A survival analysis should also be performed.MethodsA total of 214 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive oesophagectomy were retrospectively reviewed. To evaluate the development of thoracoscopic-laparoscopic oesophagectomy and compare mature minimally invasive oesophagectomy and open oesophagectomy, we comprehensively studied the clinical and surgical parameters. The cumulative sum (CUSUM) plot was used to evaluate the learning curve for systemic lymphadenectomy. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was performed to explore the clinical factors affecting survival.ResultsThe bleeding volume, operation time, and postoperative mortality within 3 months significantly decreased after 20 patients. The rise point for node dissection was visually determined to occur at patient 57 in the CUSUM plots. Patients who underwent mature thoracoscopic-laparoscopic oesophagectomy had better surgical data and short-term benefits than patients who underwent an open procedure. Cox proportional hazards regression analysis showed that the maximum diameter of the tumour cross-sectional area and the number of positive nodes significantly influenced survival.ConclusionsThe results suggest that thoracoscopic-laparoscopic oesophagectomy has short-term benefits. There was no evidence that it was associated with a significantly better prognosis for patients with oesophageal cancer. ClinicalTrials Gov ID: NCT04217239; January 2, 2020 retrospectively registered.
| S-EPMC8579515 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMinimally invasive oesophagectomy has been shown to reduce the risk of pulmonary complications compared with open oesophagectomy, but the effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and oesophageal cancer survivorship remain unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the longitudinal effects of minimally invasive compared with open oesophagectomy for cancer on HRQoL.MethodsAll patients who had surgery for oesophageal cancer in Sweden from January 2013 to April 2018 were identified. The exposure was total or hybrid minimally invasive oesophagectomy, compared with open surgery. The study outcome was HRQoL, evaluated by means of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer questionnaires QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OG25 at 1 and 2 years after surgery. Mean differences and 95 per cent confidence intervals were adjusted for confounders.ResultsOf the 246 patients recruited, 153 underwent minimally invasive oesophagectomy, of which 75 were hybrid minimally invasive and 78 were total minimally invasive procedures. After adjustment for age, sex, Charlson Co-morbidity Index score, pathological tumour stage and neoadjuvant therapy, there were no clinically and statistically significant differences in overall or disease-specific HRQoL after oesophagectomy between hybrid minimally invasive and total minimally invasive surgical technique versus open surgery.ConclusionIn this population-based nationwide Swedish study, longitudinal HRQoL after minimally invasive oesophagectomy was similar to that of the open surgical approach.
| S-EPMC10364862 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOesophageal cancer (EC) is the sixth leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Oesophageal resection is the only curative treatment option for EC which is frequently performed via an abdominal and right thoracic approach (Ivor-Lewis operation). This 2-cavity operation is associated with a high risk of major complications. To reduce postoperative morbidity, several minimally invasive techniques have been developed that can be broadly classified into either hybrid oesophagectomy (HYBRID-E) via laparoscopic/robotic abdominal and open thoracic surgery or total minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIN-E). Both, HYBIRD-E and MIN-E, compare favourable to open oesophagectomy. However, there is still an evidence gap comparing HYBRID-E with MIN-E with regard to postoperative morbidity.MethodsThe MICkey trial is a multicentre randomized controlled superiority trial with two parallel study groups. A total of 152 patients with oesophageal cancer scheduled for elective oesophagectomy will be randomly assigned 1:1 to the control group (HYBRID-E) or to the intervention group (MIN-E). The primary endpoint will be overall postoperative morbidity assessed via the comprehensive complication index (CCI) within 30 days after surgery. Specific perioperative parameters, as well as patient-reported and oncological outcomes, will be analysed as secondary outcomes.DiscussionThe MICkey trial will address the yet unanswered question whether the total minimally invasive oesophagectomy (MIN-E) is superior to the HYBRID-E procedure regarding overall postoperative morbidity.Trial registrationDRKS00027927 U1111-1277-0214. Registered on 4th July 2022.
| S-EPMC9999550 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Oesophageal cancer is the eighth most common cause of cancer worldwide. In recent years, the frequency to use minimally invasive surgical methods for esophagectomy has been increased, but its real advantages over conventional surgery is still remains. The aim of this study is to compare patients who underwent open three-stage transthoracic oesophagectomy with those who underwent minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic oesophagectomy (MIO) to ascertain the feasibility, safety, and clinical advantages of the MIO. Methods We did a multicentre prospective, open and parallel, randomised controlled trial in six study centres between April 1st, 2014, and April 30th, 2018. Patients aged 18–75 years with resectable middle and upper esophageal cancer were randomly assigned via a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive either open three-stage transthoracic oesophagectomy (Group A) or MIO (Group B). The perioperative outcomes were to compare operative time, intraoperative blood loss, total expenses in hospital, hospital stay, the number and location of lymph nodes harvested and respiratory complications within 30 days. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02355249. Results We randomly assigned 339 patients to the Group A and 156 to the Group B. No differences emerged in terms of age (year) [(61.52±8.52) vs. (60.25±6.28), P=0.67], the median lengths of hospital stay (day) [(16.28±8.02) vs. (17.15±11.74), P=0.08]. Group A has less intraoperative blood loss (mL) [(241.1±165.8) vs. (274.0±169.8), P<0.05] and total expenses in hospital (?) [(92,076±27,889) vs. (107,669±32,655), P<0.05], shorter operative time (min) [(267±92.2) vs. (364.3±99.43), P<0.05]. While Group B has palpable advantage in the number [(18.30±11.44) vs. (23.08±12.45), P<0.05] and location [(4.30±2.16) vs. (5.44±2.37), P<0.05] of lymph nodes harvested. The proportion of respiratory complications within 30 days was no statistical difference in the Group B [21/156 (13.5%)] compared to the Group A [45/339 (13.3%)] (Chi-square sig =0.934, P>0.05). Meanwhile, the study makes clear that tumour size has no correlation to operative time (Spearman r =?0.014, P>0.05) and intraoperative blood loss (Spearman r =0.078, P>0.05). Conclusions Compared to open three-stage transthoracic oesophagectomy, MIO has prominent representation in lymph nodes harvested which is fatal to estimate prognosis and plan sequential treatment plan, although, MIO has some disadvantage such as longer operative time, more intraoperative blood loss and total expenses in hospital which is conflicting to previous observational studies conclusion. There is no statistical difference in respiratory complications within 30 days between the two surgical approaches. Next step, survival rate after 2 years will be analyzed and published after the follow-up work is finished.
| S-EPMC6706623 | biostudies-literature