A Technical Modification to the Circular Stapling Anastomosis Technique During Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Procedure

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (12) ◽  
pp. 1585-1591
Author(s):  
Michele Valmasoni ◽  
Giovanni Capovilla ◽  
Elisa Sefora Pierobon ◽  
Lucia Moletta ◽  
Luca Provenzano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Ivor Lewis ◽  
Technical Modification ◽  
Stapling Anastomosis

scholarly journals European consensus on essential steps of Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis and McKeown Esophagectomy through Delphi methodology

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yassin Eddahchouri ◽  
◽  
Frans van Workum ◽  
Frits J. H. van den Wildenberg ◽  
Mark I. van Berge Henegouwen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Expert Panel ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Round Table ◽  
Round Table Discussion ◽  
Ivor Lewis ◽  
Delphi Methodology ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
European Consensus ◽  
Mckeown Esophagectomy

Abstract Background Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) is a complex and technically demanding procedure with a long learning curve, which is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. To master MIE, training in essential steps is crucial. Yet, no consensus on essential steps of MIE is available. The aim of this study was to achieve expert consensus on essential steps in Ivor Lewis and McKeown MIE through Delphi methodology. Methods Based on expert opinion and peer-reviewed literature, essential steps were defined for Ivor Lewis (IL) and McKeown (McK) MIE. In a round table discussion, experts finalized the lists of steps and an online Delphi questionnaire was sent to an international expert panel (7 European countries) of minimally invasive upper GI surgeons. Based on replies and comments, steps were adjusted and rephrased and sent in iterative fashion until consensus was achieved. Results Two Delphi rounds were conducted and response rates were 74% (23 out of 31 experts) for the first and 81% (27 out of 33 experts) for the second round. Consensus was achieved on 106 essential steps for both the IL and McK approach. Cronbach’s alpha in the first round was 0.78 (IL) and 0.78 (McK) and in the second round 0.92 (IL) and 0.88 (McK). Conclusions Consensus among European experts was achieved on essential surgical steps for both Ivor Lewis and McKeown minimally invasive esophagectomy.

792 OUTCOMES AFTER TOTALLY MINIMALLY INVASIVE VERSUS HYBRID OR OPEN IVOR LEWIS ESOPHAGECTOMY: RESULTS FROM THE INTERNATIONAL ESODATA STUDY GROUP.

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Berend Van Der Wilk ◽  
Eliza R C Hagens ◽  
Ben M Eyck ◽  
Suzanne S Gisbertz ◽  
Richard Hillegersberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Anastomotic Leakage ◽  
Hospital Length Of Stay ◽  
Mortality Data ◽  
Study Group ◽  
Ivor Lewis ◽  
Open Esophagectomy ◽  
Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy ◽  
The Impact

Abstract   To compare complications following totally minimally invasive (TMIE), laparoscopically assisted (hybrid) and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy in patients with esophageal cancer. Three randomized trials have reported benefits for minimally invasive esophagectomy. Two studies compared TMIE versus open esophagectomy and another compared hybrid versus open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Only small retrospective studies compared TMIE with hybrid Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Methods Data were used from the International Esodata Study Group assessing patients undergoing TMIE, hybrid or open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Primary outcome was pneumonia, secondary outcomes included incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage, (major) complications, length of stay, escalation of care and 90-day mortality. Data were analyzed using multivariate multilevel models. Results In total, 4733 patients were included in this study (TMIE:1472, hybrid:1364 and open:1897). Patients undergoing TMIE had lower incidence of pneumonia compared to hybrid (10.9% vs 16.3%, Odds Ratio (OR):0.56, 95%CI: 0.40–0.80) and open esophagectomy (10.9% vs 17.4%, OR:0.60, 95%CI: 0.42–0.84) and had shorter length of stay (median 10 days (IQR 8–16)) compared to hybrid (14 (11–19), p = 0.041) and open esophagectomy (11 (9–16), p = 0.027). Patients undergoing TMIE had higher rate of anastomotic leakage compared to hybrid (15.1% vs 10.7%, OR:1.47, 95%CI: 1.01–2.13) and open esophagectomy (7.3%, OR:1.73, 95%CI: 1.26–2.38). No differences were reported between hybrid and open esophagectomy. Conclusion Compared to hybrid and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, TMIE resulted in a lower pneumonia rate, a shorter hospital length of stay but a higher anastomotic leakage rate. The impact of these individual complications on survival and long-term quality of life should be further investigated.

Modified Intrathoracic Esophagogastrostomy with Minimally Invasive Robot-Assisted Ivor-Lewis Esophagectomy for Cancer

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 218-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Ping Wang ◽  
Long-Qi Chen ◽  
Han-Lu Zhang ◽  
Yu-Shang Yang ◽  
Song-Lin He ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Circular Stapler ◽  
Purse String Suture ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Purse String ◽  
Ivor Lewis ◽  
Intrathoracic Anastomosis ◽  
Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Esophagectomy For Cancer

Background: Intrathoracic esophagogastrostomy plays an important role in minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy for cancer. Intrathoracic anastomosis with robot-assisted Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy (RAILE) includes hand-sewn and circular stapler methods, which remain technically challenging. In this study, we modified the techniques for intrathoracic anastomosis at RAILE, in order to simplify the complex procedures. Methods: “Side-insertion” technique was used for anvil placement and purse string suture for intrathoracic anastomosis at RAILE. Medical records for consecutive patients who had undergone robot-assisted minimally invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy for cancer between January 2015 and June 2018 were analyzed. Results: A total of consecutive 31 patients were enrolled. There was no conversion to open thoracotomy in this cohort. Mean operation duration in the robotic group was 387.4 ± 68.2 min. Median estimated blood loss was 110 mL (range 50–400 mL). Two patients (6.5%) had postoperative anastomotic leak. No postoperative reoperation was needed and there were no mortality. Six patients (19.4%) had anastomotic stricture and 2 patients of them needed endoscopic dilation. Conclusion: RAILE is safe and feasible. Our modified procedure highlighting the “side-insertion” method may simplify the process of intrathoracic anvil placement and purse string suture for anastomosis at RAILE.

W1516 A Safe and Reproducible Anastomotic Technique for Minimally Invasive Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy – the Circular Stapled Anastomosis with the Transoral Anvil.

2009 ◽  
Vol 136 (5) ◽  
pp. A-929
Author(s):  
Rene Ramirez ◽  
Jessica K. Smith ◽  
Sofia Peeva ◽  
Garrett R. Roll ◽  
Pierre Theodore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Stapled Anastomosis ◽  
Ivor Lewis ◽  
Anastomotic Technique ◽  
Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy

scholarly journals Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy: Ivor-Lewis approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 21-21
Author(s):  
Kelsey Musgrove ◽  
Charlotte R. Spear ◽  
Jahnavi Kakuturu ◽  
Britney R. Harris ◽  
Fazil Abbas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy ◽  
Ivor Lewis ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
Invasive Esophagectomy
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document