Risk of chyle leak after robotic versus video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy
- 3 March 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in Surgical Endoscopy
- Vol. 36 (2), 1332-1338
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08410-4
Abstract
Background We investigate the incidence and risk factors for post-operative outcomes including chyle leak following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Methods Patients undergoing MIE from May 2016 until August 2020 were prospectively followed. Outcomes of robotic and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) esophagectomy were analyzed. Results 347 esophagectomies were performed: 70 cases were done robotically by 2 surgeons and 277 by VATS by 14 surgeons. Patients had similar demographics, surgical technique, length of stay (LOS), and re-operation rates. Overall complication rates between robotic and VATS MIE were statistically similar (61% vs. 50%; p = 0.082). The majority of complications for either VATS (41.5%) or robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) (51.4%) were grade II. Nineteen patients developed a chyle leak. Patients with a chyle leak were similar in age, gender, and hospital LOS (all p > 0.05), but were more likely to undergo a three-hole or robotic esophagectomy (both p < 0.05) as well as have higher rehabilitation requirements on discharge (26% vs. 10%; p = 0.05). Among the two surgeons who each performed > 20 robotic esophagectomies (n = 70), nine chyle leaks occurred. Rates varied by surgeon (7 vs. 2; p = 0.003). Lower leak rates occurred in the surgeon with more robotic esophagectomy experience (n = 47 vs. 23). Patients were similar in age, and gender (p > 0.05), but those with a chyle leak were more likely to undergo three-hole esophagectomies, prophylactic thoracic duction ligations, undergo the abdominal portion via laparotomy, and not have a prophylactic omental flap (all p < 0.05). Conclusion Robotic and VATS esophagectomy have similar rates of re-operation, length of stay, discharge needs and complications. Differences in outcomes between VATS and Robotic esophagectomy appears to be related to surgeon experience with the robot but may also be associated with techniques such as anastomotic height, omental flap utilization and performance of laparoscopy.Keywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Does prophylactic ligation of the thoracic duct reduce chylothorax rates in patients undergoing oesophagectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysisEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 2016
- The 3-Hole Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: A Safe Procedure Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and RadiationSeminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2015
- Chyle leakage patterns and management after oncologic esophagectomy: A retrospective cohort studyThoracic Cancer, 2014
- Defining the Learning Curve for Robotic-assisted EsophagogastrectomyJournal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 2013
- Percutaneous treatment of thoracic duct injuriesSurgical Endoscopy, 2011
- Aetiology and management of chylothorax in adultsEuropean Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 2007
- Chylothorax After EsophagogastrectomyThoracic Surgery Clinics, 2006
- Incidence and Management of Chyle Leakage After EsophagectomyThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2005
- Classification of Surgical ComplicationsAnnals of Surgery, 2004
- Thoracic duct injury during esophagectomy: 20 years experience at a tertiary care center in a developing countryDiseases of the Esophagus, 2004