Robotic versus laparoscopic heller myotomy for esophageal achalasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

Background: The surgical treatment for esophageal achalasia has evolved over the years, with laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) and partial fundoplication becoming widely used worldwide. More recently, an increased interest in the robotic Heller myotomy (RHM) has arisen.

Purpose: Compare short-term and functional outcomes of RHM vs. LHM.

Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis. PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were queried. Primary outcome was esophageal perforation (EP). Risk ratio (RR), standardized mean difference (SMD), and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were effect size and relative inference measures. PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42024512644.

Results: Fourteen observational studies (12962 patients) were included. Of those, 2503 (19.3%) underwent RHM. The patient age ranged from 34 to 66 years and 51.7% were males. EP occurred in 259 patients (1.99%). The cumulative incidence of EP was 1.67% for RHM and 2.07% for LHM. Compared to LHM, RHM was associated with a reduced risk of EP (RR: 0.31; 95% CI 0.16-0.59). No differences were found in term of dysphagia requiring reoperation or additional endoscopic procedures (RR: 0.47; 95% CI 0.20-1.09) and postoperative Eckardt score (SMD: -0.42; 95% CI -0.94, 0.11). Blood loss, conversion to open, operative time, and hospital length of stay were comparable.

Conclusions: RHM may be associated with a reduced risk of EP compared to LHM. However, because of selection bias, diverse surgeon expertise, variations in surgical technique, and prior endoscopic procedures these findings should not be viewed as conclusive while the superiority of one approach over the other remains to be established.