Endoscopic surgery suturing techniques: a randomized study on learning

BACKGROUND: Surgeons have widely adopted endoscopic suturing techniques using conventional laparoscopic instruments and the more advanced robotic systems. The FlexDex is a novel articulating laparoscopic needle driver providing enhanced dexterity in laparoscopic surgery. This study evaluates and compares the learning curve of endoscopic suturing with conventional laparoscopy, the FlexDex and robotic suturing in novices. METHODS: Participants performed a minimal invasive suturing task in three different ways in a randomized order: with a conventional laparoscopic needle driver, using the FlexDex needle driver and third, using the Da Vinci Si surgical system. Primary outcome was suturing task time. Secondary outcome parameters were assessment of suturing quality and workload perception. RESULTS: A total of 10 novice participants were included and completed a total of 300 sessions. Median (IQR) suturing time of the first 5 sessions was 231 s (188-291) in the laparoscopic group versus 378 s (282-471) in the FlexDex group versus 189 s (160-247) in the DaVinci Si group. The last 5 sessions showed significant reduction of median suturing time of 143 s (120-190), 232 s (180-265) and 172 s (134-199) respectively. Analysis identified that the learning curve for the laparoscopic needle driver and Da Vinci Si was reached in 5 sessions, compared to 8 sessions for the Flexdex. The laparoscopic needle driver and Da Vinci Si showed a significant shorter median suturing time compared to the FlexDex (p = 0.00). The FlexDex quality assessment scores were significantly lower compared to the laparoscopic (p = 0.00) and robotic (p = 0.00) scores and perceived workload remains high for the FlexDex users. CONCLUSIONS: Ex vivo endoscopic suturing with the FlexDex demonstrated a prolonged learning curve compared to laparoscopic and robotic suturing. The learning curve of the FlexDex is fundamentally different from conventional laparoscopic and robotic instruments. This study provides further insights in the implementation and training of endoscopic suturing techniques

Outcomes of surgical treatment of non-metastatic gastric cancer in patients aged 70 and older:A systematic review and meta-analysis

The optimal surgical treatment strategy for gastric cancer in older patients needs to be carefully evaluated due to increased vulnerability of older patients. We performed a database search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that included patients ≥70 years with potentially resectable stage I-III gastric cancer. Postoperative and survival outcomes were compared between groups undergoing 1) gastrectomy vs conservative treatment (best supportive care or non-operative treatment), 2) minimally invasive (MIG) vs open gastrectomy (OG), or 3) extended vs limited lymphadenectomy. When possible, results were pooled using risk ratios (RR). Thirty-one studies were included. Six retrospective studies compared overall survival (OS) between gastrectomy (N = 2332) and conservative treatment (N = 246). Longer OS was reported in the gastrectomy group in all studies, but study quality was low and meta-analysis was not feasible. Eighteen cohort studies compared MIG (N = 3626) and OG (N = 5193). MIG was associated with fewer complications (pooled RR 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.54–0.84). OS was not different between the groups. Two RCTs and five cohort studies compared outcomes between extended (N = 709) and limited lymphadenectomy (N = 1323). Complication rates were comparable between the groups. Two cohort studies found longer OS or cancer-specific survival after extended lymphadenectomy. No quality of life (QoL) or functional outcomes were reported. In older patients with gastric cancer, there is low-quality evidence for better OS after gastrectomy vs conservative treatment. Compared to OG, MIG was associated with less postoperative morbidity. The evidence to support extended lymphadenectomy is limited. QoL and functional outcomes should be addressed in future studies

Trends in surgical techniques for the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer: the 2022 update

The aim of this study was to evaluate the current practice in surgical techniques for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer surgery worldwide and to compare the results to the previous surveys in 2007 and 2014. An online survey was sent out among surgical members of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus, the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Disease of the Esophagus, the International Gastric Cancer Association, the Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery of Great Britain and Ireland and Dutch gastroesophageal surgeons via the network of the investigators. In total, 260 surgeons completed the survey representing 52 countries and 6 continents; Europe 56%, Oceania 14%, Asia 14%, South-America 9%, North-America 7%. Of the responding surgeons, 39% worked in a hospital that performed >51 esophagectomies per year. Total minimally invasive esophagectomy was the preferred technique (53%) followed by hybrid esophagectomy (26%) of which 7% consisted of a minimally invasive thoracic phase and 19% of a minimally invasive abdominal phase. Total open esophagectomy was preferred by 21% of the respondents. Total minimally invasive esophagectomy was significantly more often performed in high-volume centers compared with non-high-volume centers (P = 0.002). Robotic assistance was used in 13% during the thoracic phase and 6% during the abdominal phase. Minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy has become the preferred approach for esophagectomy. Although 21% of the surgeons prefer an open approach, 26% of the surgeons perform a hybrid procedure which may reflect further transition towards the use of total minimally invasive esophagectomy

Worldwide Practice in Gastric Cancer Surgery: A 6-Year Update

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate the current status of gastric cancer surgery worldwide and update the changes compared to a previous survey in 2014. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was sent to surgical members of the International Gastric Cancer Association, pilot centers of the World Organization for Specialized Studies on Diseases of the Esophagus, and the Australian and New Zealand Gastric and Oesophageal Surgeons Association in addition to participants of the 2019 International Gastric Cancer and European Society for Diseases of the Esophagus congresses. Topics addressed included hospital volume, staging, perioperative treatment, surgical approach, anastomotic techniques, lymphadenectomy, and palliative management. RESULTS: Between June 2019 and January 2020, 165 respondents from 44 countries completed the survey. In total, 80% worked in a hospital performing >20 gastrectomies annually. Staging laparoscopy and 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography with computed tomography were preferred by 68 and 26% for advanced cancer, and 90% offered perioperative chemo(radio)therapy to patients. For early cancer, a minimally invasive surgical approach was preferred by 65% for distal and by 50% for total gastrectomy. For advanced cancer, this was preferred by 39% for distal and by 33% for total gastrectomy. And 84% favored a stapled anastomosis, and 14% created a jejunal pouch as reconstruction during total gastrectomy. A D2 lymphadenectomy was preferred for distal as well as for total gastrectomy, in both early (62 and 71%) and advanced (84 and 89%) cancer. CONCLUSION: This international survey demonstrates that perioperative chemotherapy and a D2 lymphadenectomy have now become the preferred treatment for gastric cancer. A minimally invasive surgical approach has gained popularity

Implementation of the robotic abdominal phase during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE): results from a high-volume center

BACKGROUND: Evidence on the added value of robotic-assistance in the abdominal phase during esophagectomy is scarce. In 2003, our center implemented the robotic thoracic phase for esophagectomy. In November 2018 the robot was also implemented in the abdominal phase. The aim of this study was to evaluate the implementation of the abdominal phase during robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent full RAMIE with intrathoracic anastomosis for esophageal cancer were included. Patients were extracted from a prospectively maintained institutional database. A cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was performed for abdominal operation time and abdominal lymph node yield. Intraoperative, postoperative and oncological outcomes including collected lymph nodes per abdominal lymph node station were reported. RESULTS: Between 2018 and 2021, 70 consecutive patients were included. The majority of the patients had an adenocarcinoma (n = 55, 77%) and underwent neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy (n = 65, 95%). The median operative time for the abdominal phase was 180 min (range 110-233). The CUSUM analysis for abdominal operation time showed a plateau at case 22. There were no intraoperative complications or conversions during the abdominal phase. The most common postoperative complications were pneumonia (n = 18, 26%) and anastomotic leakage (n = 14, 20%). Radical resection margins were achieved in 69 (99%) patients. The median total lymph node yield was 42 (range 23-83) and the median abdominal lymph node yield was 16 (range 2-43). The CUSUM analysis for abdominal lymph node yield showed a plateau at case 21. Most abdominal lymph nodes were collected from the left gastric artery (median 4, range 0-20). CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that a robotic abdominal phase was safely implemented for RAMIE without compromising intraoperative, postoperative and oncological outcomes. The learning curve is estimated to be 22 cases in a high-volume center with experienced upper GI robotic surgeons

Surveillance of high-risk early postsurgical patients for real-time detection of complications using wireless monitoring (SHEPHERD study):results of a randomized multicenter stepped wedge cluster trial

Background: Vital signs measurements on the ward are performed intermittently. This could lead to failure to rapidly detect patients with deteriorating vital signs and worsens long-term outcome. The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that continuous wireless monitoring of vital signs on the postsurgical ward improves patient outcome. Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, stepped-wedge cluster randomized study, patients in the control group received standard monitoring. The intervention group received continuous wireless monitoring of heart rate, respiratory rate and temperature on top of standard care. Automated alerts indicating vital signs deviation from baseline were sent to ward nurses, triggering the calculation of a full early warning score followed. The primary outcome was the occurrence of new disability three months after surgery. Results: The study was terminated early (at 57% inclusion) due to COVID-19 restrictions. Therefore, only descriptive statistics are presented. A total of 747 patients were enrolled in this study and eligible for statistical analyses, 517 patients in the control group and 230 patients in the intervention group, the latter only from one hospital. New disability at three months after surgery occurred in 43.7% in the control group and in 39.1% in the intervention group (absolute difference 4.6%). Conclusion: This is the largest randomized controlled trial investigating continuous wireless monitoring in postoperative patients. While patients in the intervention group seemed to experience less (new) disability than patients in the control group, results remain inconclusive with regard to postoperative patient outcome due to premature study termination. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02957825.</p

Prognostic value of patient-reported quality of life for survival in oesophagogastric cancer:Analysis from the population-based POCOP study

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence of trials demonstrates that patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) at diagnosis is prognostic for overall survival (OS) in oesophagogastric cancer. However, real-world data are lacking. Moreover, differences in disease stages and tumour-specific symptoms are usually not taken into consideration. The aim of this population-based study was to assess the prognostic value of HRQoL, including tumour-specific scales, on OS in patients with potentially curable and advanced oesophagogastric cancer. METHODS: Data were derived from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the patient reported outcome registry (POCOP). Patients included in POCOP between 2016 and 2018 were stratified for potentially curable (cT1-4aNallM0) or advanced (cT4b or cM1) disease. HRQoL was measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the tumour-specific OG25 module. Cox proportional hazards models assessed the impact of HRQoL, sociodemographic and clinical factors (including treatment) on OS. RESULTS: In total, 924 patients were included. Median OS was 38.9 months in potentially curable patients (n = 795) and 10.6 months in patients with advanced disease (n = 129). Global Health Status was independently associated with OS in potentially curable patients (HR 0.89, 99%CI 0.82-0.97), together with several other HRQoL items: appetite loss, dysphagia, eating restrictions, odynophagia, and body image. In advanced disease, the Summary Score was the strongest independent prognostic factor (HR 0.75, 99%CI 0.59-0.94), followed by fatigue, pain, insomnia and role functioning. CONCLUSION: In a real-world setting, HRQoL was prognostic for OS in patients with potentially curable and advanced oesophagogastric cancer. Several HRQoL domains, including the Summary Score and several OG25 items, could be used to develop or update prognostic models