Franco Badaloni, Adam Zeyara, Gino M Kuiper, Stijn Vanstraelen, Ludovico Campi, Jan Willem van den Berg, Richard van Hillegersberg, Jelle P Ruurda
{"title":"Intraoperative Adverse Events in Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy (RAMIE): Incidence, Management, and Impact on Surgical Outcomes.","authors":"Franco Badaloni, Adam Zeyara, Gino M Kuiper, Stijn Vanstraelen, Ludovico Campi, Jan Willem van den Berg, Richard van Hillegersberg, Jelle P Ruurda","doi":"10.1097/SLA.0000000000007167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Assess the incidence and management of intraoperative adverse events (IAEs) during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and evaluate their impact on postoperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>IAEs are an inherent component of surgical practice and owing to its complexity, esophagectomy is no exception. Data on their incidence and management remain limited. Robotic assistance may facilitate management of these events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective observational cohort study analyzed prospectively collected data from consecutive RAMIE performed at UMC Utrecht using the da Vinci Xi system. iAEs were categorized using the ClassIntra classification. Perioperative outcomes were compared according to major IAEs occurrence (ClassIntra ≥III).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Between 2018 and 2025, 478 RAMIE were performed. IAEs occurred in 41 patients (8.6%; 46 events), of which 92.7% were managed robotically without conversion. Bleeding was the most common event (69.6%), followed by chyle leaks (8.7%), lung injuries (8.7%), and airway injuries (4.3%). Major IAEs occurred in 20 patients (4.2%) and were associated with increased mean blood loss (1211 vs. 296 mL, P <0.001), higher conversion rates (15.0% vs. 1.3%, P =0.005) and longer mean operative time (478.6 vs. 413.3 min, P =0.022). Major postoperative complications (35.0% vs. 37.3%, P =1.000), median hospital length of stay (11 vs. 11 d, P =0.311) and in-hospital mortality (5.0% vs. 2.7%, P =0.446) were comparable between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this retrospective cohort, over 90% of IAEs during RAMIE were managed robotically without conversion, with no significant increase in postoperative morbidity. These results should be interpreted in the context of an expert center and a limited number of events.</p>","PeriodicalId":8017,"journal":{"name":"Annals of surgery","volume":" ","pages":"957-963"},"PeriodicalIF":7.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13652120/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000007167","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Assess the incidence and management of intraoperative adverse events (IAEs) during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and evaluate their impact on postoperative outcomes.
Background: IAEs are an inherent component of surgical practice and owing to its complexity, esophagectomy is no exception. Data on their incidence and management remain limited. Robotic assistance may facilitate management of these events.
Methods: This retrospective observational cohort study analyzed prospectively collected data from consecutive RAMIE performed at UMC Utrecht using the da Vinci Xi system. iAEs were categorized using the ClassIntra classification. Perioperative outcomes were compared according to major IAEs occurrence (ClassIntra ≥III).
Results: Between 2018 and 2025, 478 RAMIE were performed. IAEs occurred in 41 patients (8.6%; 46 events), of which 92.7% were managed robotically without conversion. Bleeding was the most common event (69.6%), followed by chyle leaks (8.7%), lung injuries (8.7%), and airway injuries (4.3%). Major IAEs occurred in 20 patients (4.2%) and were associated with increased mean blood loss (1211 vs. 296 mL, P <0.001), higher conversion rates (15.0% vs. 1.3%, P =0.005) and longer mean operative time (478.6 vs. 413.3 min, P =0.022). Major postoperative complications (35.0% vs. 37.3%, P =1.000), median hospital length of stay (11 vs. 11 d, P =0.311) and in-hospital mortality (5.0% vs. 2.7%, P =0.446) were comparable between groups.
Conclusion: In this retrospective cohort, over 90% of IAEs during RAMIE were managed robotically without conversion, with no significant increase in postoperative morbidity. These results should be interpreted in the context of an expert center and a limited number of events.
目的:评估机器人辅助微创食管切除术(RAMIE)术中不良事件(iae)的发生率和处理,并评估其对术后预后的影响。背景:iae是外科手术的固有组成部分,由于其复杂性,食管切除术也不例外。关于其发病率和管理的数据仍然有限。机器人辅助可以促进这些事件的管理。方法:这项回顾性观察队列研究前瞻性地分析了UMC乌得勒支使用达芬奇Xi系统进行的连续RAMIE的数据。iae使用ClassIntra分类进行分类。根据主要iae发生情况(ClassIntra≥III)比较围手术期结果。结果:2018年至2025年,共进行了478例RAMIE手术。41例患者发生iae(8.6%; 46次事件),其中92.7%的患者通过机器人治疗,没有转化。出血是最常见的事件(69.6%),其次是乳糜漏(8.7%)、肺损伤(8.7%)和气道损伤(4.3%)。20例患者(4.2%)发生严重iae,并伴有平均失血量增加(1211 mL vs 296 mL)。结论:在该回顾性队列中,超过90%的RAMIE期间iae由机器人处理,无转换,术后发病率无显著增加。这些结果应该在专家中心和有限数量的事件的背景下进行解释。
期刊介绍:
The Annals of Surgery is a renowned surgery journal, recognized globally for its extensive scholarly references. It serves as a valuable resource for the international medical community by disseminating knowledge regarding important developments in surgical science and practice. Surgeons regularly turn to the Annals of Surgery to stay updated on innovative practices and techniques. The journal also offers special editorial features such as "Advances in Surgical Technique," offering timely coverage of ongoing clinical issues. Additionally, the journal publishes monthly review articles that address the latest concerns in surgical practice.