National trends in operative approach to esophagectomy: utilization rates, outcomes, and overall survival.

IF 2.4 2区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Lucas Weiser, Claire Perez, Justin J J Watson, Qiudong Chen, Shruthi Nammalwar, Allen Razavi, Charles Fuller, Sevannah G Soukiasian, Andrew R Brownlee, Harmik J Soukiasian
{"title":"National trends in operative approach to esophagectomy: utilization rates, outcomes, and overall survival.","authors":"Lucas Weiser, Claire Perez, Justin J J Watson, Qiudong Chen, Shruthi Nammalwar, Allen Razavi, Charles Fuller, Sevannah G Soukiasian, Andrew R Brownlee, Harmik J Soukiasian","doi":"10.1007/s00464-025-11563-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although open esophagectomies (OE) have traditionally been favored, minimally invasive approaches are increasingly utilized and associated with improved outcomes. We investigated the adoption rates of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) compared with OE. Utilization rates by surgical approach, post-operative outcomes, and overall survival were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The National Cancer Database was queried for patients who underwent OE, MIE, and RAMIE for esophageal cancer from 2010 to 2019. Adoption rates of RAMIE, MIE and OE were determined for all patients. Patients with primary cervical esophageal cancer, stage 4 disease, unknown staging, or missing follow-up data were excluded. Multivariable Cox regression models compared overall survival based on surgical approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 17,765 patients underwent an esophagectomy for stage I, II, and III disease (OE: n = 10,039; MIE: n = 5388; RAMIE: n = 2338). Between 2010 and 2019, OE decreased by 52%, while MIE and RAMIE increased by 49% and 704%, respectively. The overall conversion rate of MIE and RAMIE to OE decreased significantly over the study time period. On multivariable analysis, the odds of 30-day and 90-day mortality was lower for MIE (p < 0.001; p < 0.001) and trended towards lower for RAMIE when compared to OE, though was not a statistically significant difference. Further, the overall 5-year survival was higher in the MIE and RAMIE cohort compared to the OE cohort. Like short-term survival, patients who underwent MIE had a significantly lower mortality (p < 0.001) while those who underwent RAMIE trended towards lower mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This contemporary review of a national cohort demonstrates the rapid adoption of minimally invasive esophagectomy techniques, without compromise in short-term or long-term outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":22174,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","volume":" ","pages":"2267-2274"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy And Other Interventional Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-025-11563-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Although open esophagectomies (OE) have traditionally been favored, minimally invasive approaches are increasingly utilized and associated with improved outcomes. We investigated the adoption rates of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) compared with OE. Utilization rates by surgical approach, post-operative outcomes, and overall survival were analyzed.

Methods: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients who underwent OE, MIE, and RAMIE for esophageal cancer from 2010 to 2019. Adoption rates of RAMIE, MIE and OE were determined for all patients. Patients with primary cervical esophageal cancer, stage 4 disease, unknown staging, or missing follow-up data were excluded. Multivariable Cox regression models compared overall survival based on surgical approach.

Results: A total of 17,765 patients underwent an esophagectomy for stage I, II, and III disease (OE: n = 10,039; MIE: n = 5388; RAMIE: n = 2338). Between 2010 and 2019, OE decreased by 52%, while MIE and RAMIE increased by 49% and 704%, respectively. The overall conversion rate of MIE and RAMIE to OE decreased significantly over the study time period. On multivariable analysis, the odds of 30-day and 90-day mortality was lower for MIE (p < 0.001; p < 0.001) and trended towards lower for RAMIE when compared to OE, though was not a statistically significant difference. Further, the overall 5-year survival was higher in the MIE and RAMIE cohort compared to the OE cohort. Like short-term survival, patients who underwent MIE had a significantly lower mortality (p < 0.001) while those who underwent RAMIE trended towards lower mortality.

Conclusion: This contemporary review of a national cohort demonstrates the rapid adoption of minimally invasive esophagectomy techniques, without compromise in short-term or long-term outcomes.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
12.90%
发文量
890
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: Uniquely positioned at the interface between various medical and surgical disciplines, Surgical Endoscopy serves as a focal point for the international surgical community to exchange information on practice, theory, and research. Topics covered in the journal include: -Surgical aspects of: Interventional endoscopy, Ultrasound, Other techniques in the fields of gastroenterology, obstetrics, gynecology, and urology, -Gastroenterologic surgery -Thoracic surgery -Traumatic surgery -Orthopedic surgery -Pediatric surgery
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信