Faculty Bibliography

Robotic-assisted pulmonary lobectomy can be considered for patients fit for conventional lobectomy. Contraindications include prohibitive lung function or medical comorbidities, multistation N2, gross N2 disease, or evidence of N3 disease. Team training, familiarity with equipment, troubleshooting, and preparation are critical for successful robotic lobectomy. Similar to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lobectomy, robotic lobectomy is associated with decreased blood loss, blood transfusion, air leak, chest tube duration, duration of stay, and mortality compared with thoracotomy. Robotic lobectomy offers many of the same benefits in perioperative morbidity and mortality, and the advantages of optics, dexterity, and surgeon ergonomics compared with VATS lobectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the associations of lymph node metastases (pN+), number of positive nodes, and pN subclassification with cancer, treatment, patient, geographic, and institutional variables, and to recommend extent of lymphadenectomy needed to accurately detect pN+ for esophageal cancer. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Limited data and traditional analytic techniques have precluded identifying intricate associations of pN+ with other cancer, treatment, and patient characteristics. METHODS: Data on 5806 esophagectomy patients from the Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration were analyzed by Random Forest machine learning techniques. RESULTS: pN+, number of positive nodes, and pN subclassification were associated with increasing depth of cancer invasion (pT), increasing cancer length, decreasing cancer differentiation (G), and more regional lymph nodes resected. Lymphadenectomy necessary to accurately detect pN+ is 60 for shorter, well-differentiated cancers (<2.5 cm) and 20 for longer, poorly differentiated ones. CONCLUSIONS: In esophageal cancer, pN+, increasing number of positive nodes, and increasing pN classification are associated with deeper invading, longer, and poorly differentiated cancers. Consequently, if the goal of lymphadenectomy is to accurately define pN+ status of such cancers, few nodes need to be removed. Conversely, superficial, shorter, and well-differentiated cancers require a more extensive lymphadenectomy to accurately define pN+ status.

Robotic segmentectomy can be a useful technique for patients with suboptimal pulmonary reserve, or for small peripheral stage I tumors. Port placement and conduct of operation is described for the various segmentectomies. Results for robotic segmentectomy are comparable to that for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) segmentectomy.

Minimally invasive thoracic surgery, when compared with open thoracotomy, has been shown to have improved perioperative outcomes as well as comparable long-term survival. Robotic surgery represents a powerful advancement of minimally invasive surgery, with vastly improved visualization and instrument maneuverability, and is increasingly popular for thoracic surgery. However, there remains debate over the best robotic approaches for lung resection, with several different techniques evidenced and described in the literature. We delineate our method for total port approach with four robotic arms and discuss how its advantages outweigh its disadvantages. We conclude that it is preferred to other robotic approaches, such as the robotic assisted approach, due to its enhanced visualization, improved instrument range of motion, and reduced potential for injury.

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for lung cancer has been associated with decreased perioperative morbidity while maintaining similar long-term survival when compared to open thoracotomy. Robotic thoracic surgery constitutes an evolutionary step in this field, beckoning dramatic advancements both in visualization as well as surgical instrument range of motion and ergonomics. As such, robotic thoracic surgery is growing in adoption worldwide. One of its oft-cited disadvantages, however, is increased operative time, especially for less-experienced surgeons. We describe an assortment of tips and tricks that we conclude can safely reduce robotic operative duration.

To address uncertainty of whether clinical stage groupings (cTNM) for esophageal cancer share prognostic implications with pathologic groupings after esophagectomy alone (pTNM), we report data-simple descriptions of patient characteristics, cancer categories, and non-risk-adjusted survival-for clinically staged patients from the Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration (WECC). Thirty-three institutions from six continents submitted data using variables with standard definitions: demographics, comorbidities, clinical cancer categories, and all-cause mortality from first management decision. Of 22,123 clinically staged patients, 8,156 had squamous cell carcinoma, 13,814 adenocarcinoma, 116 adenosquamous carcinoma, and 37 undifferentiated carcinoma. Patients were older (62 years) men (80%) with normal body mass index (18.5-25 mg/kg2 , 47%), little weight loss (2.4 +/- 7.8 kg), 0-1 ECOG performance status (67%), and history of smoking (67%). Cancers were cT1 (12%), cT2 (22%), cT3 (56%), cN0 (44%), cM0 (95%), and cG2-G3 (89%); most involved the distal esophagus (73%). Non-risk-adjusted survival for squamous cell carcinoma was not distinctive for early cT or cN; for adenocarcinoma, it was distinctive for early versus advanced cT and for cN0 versus cN+. Patients with early cancers had worse survival and those with advanced cancers better survival than expected from equivalent pathologic categories based on prior WECC pathologic data. Thus, clinical and pathologic categories do not share prognostic implications. This makes clinically based treatment decisions difficult and pre-treatment prognostication inaccurate. These data will be the basis for the 8th edition cancer staging manuals following risk adjustment for patient characteristics, cancer categories, and treatment characteristics and should direct 9th edition data collection.

To address uncertainty of whether pathologic stage groupings after neoadjuvant therapy (ypTNM) for esophageal cancer share prognostic implications with pathologic groupings after esophagectomy alone (pTNM), we report data-simple descriptions of patient characteristics, cancer categories, and non-risk-adjusted survival-for pathologically staged cancers after neoadjuvant therapy from the Worldwide Esophageal Cancer Collaboration (WECC). Thirty-three institutions from six continents submitted data using variables with standard definitions: demographics, comorbidities, clinical cancer categories, and all-cause mortality from first management decision. Of 7,773 pathologically staged neoadjuvant patients, 2,045 had squamous cell carcinoma, 5,686 adenocarcinoma, 31 adenosquamous carcinoma, and 11 undifferentiated carcinoma. Patients were older (61 years) men (83%) with normal (40%) or overweight (35%) body mass index, 0-1 Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (96%), and a history of smoking (69%). Cancers were ypT0 (20%), ypT1 (13%), ypT2 (18%), ypT3 (44%), ypN0 (55%), ypM0 (94%), and G2-G3 (72%); most involved the distal esophagus (80%). Non-risk-adjusted survival for yp categories was unequally depressed, more for earlier categories than later, compared with equivalent categories from prior WECC data for esophagectomy-alone patients. Thus, survival of patients with ypT0-2N0M0 cancers was intermediate and similar regardless of ypT; survival for ypN+ cancers was poor. Because prognoses for ypTNM and pTNM categories are dissimilar, prognostication should be based on separate ypTNM categories and groupings. These data will be the basis for the 8th edition cancer staging manuals following risk adjustment for patient, cancer, and treatment characteristics and should direct 9th edition data collection.