Impact of Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Short-Term Analysis.

Background: We compared short-term clinical outcomes between robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and video-assisted thoracic esophagectomy (VATS-E) using propensity score-matched analysis.

Methods: We enrolled 114 patients with esophageal cancer who underwent esophagectomy at our institution from January 2013 to January 2022. Propensity score matching was performed to minimize selection bias between the RAMIE and VATS-E groups.

Results: After propensity score matching, 72 patients (RAMIE group, n = 36; VATS-E group, n = 36) were selected for analysis. No significant differences in clinical variables were observed between the two groups. The RAMIE group had a significantly longer thoracic operation time (313 ± 40 vs. 295 ± 35 min, P = 0.048), a higher number of right recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph nodes (4.2 ± 2.7 vs. 2.9 ± 1.9, P = 0.039), and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (23.2 ± 12.8 vs. 30.4 ± 18.6 days, P = 0.018) than the VATS-E group. The RAMIE group tended to have a lower rate of anastomotic leakage (13.9% vs. 30.6%) than the VATS-E group, although the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.089). No significant differences were found in recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis (11.1% vs. 13.9%, P = 0.722) or pneumonia (13.9% vs. 13.9%, P = 1.000) between the RAMIE group and the VATS-E group.

Conclusion: Although RAMIE for esophageal cancer requires a longer thoracic surgery time, it might be a feasible and safe alternative to VATS-E for treating esophageal cancer. Further analysis is needed to clarify the advantages of RAMIE over VATS-E, especially in terms of long-term surgical outcomes.