Background: The evolution of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) also extends to the field of esophageal surgery and has brought forth the development of several approaches of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Hybrid and total minimally invasive operative techniques have proven beneficial compared to open surgery and are currently evaluated against robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE). We aim to review the current literature regarding the position of MIE versus RAMIE. Methods: A systematic review of the relevant literature on minimally invasive esophageal surgery for cancer is presented. A PubMed search was carried out for the period of 1992-2018 with the following search terms: ‘esophageal cancerʼ, ‘minimally invasive surgeryʼ, ‘resectionʼ, ‘transhiatalʼ, ‘transthoracicʼ, ‘MIEʼ, ‘hybridʼ, ‘robotic resectionʼ, ‘RAMIEʼ, ‘RATEʼ. Results: Hybrid and total minimally invasive operative techniques have proven beneficial, especially with regard to pulmonary complications, compared to open surgery. Oncologic outcomes appear equivalent between open and minimally invasive techniques. Currently, the position of RAMIE is being evaluated against other minimally invasive techniques. Conclusion: All minimally invasive techniques confer the expected reduction in perioperative morbidity compared to open surgery. However, MIS is still evolving with regard to specific technical challenges, especially anastomotic techniques.

Keywords:
Esophageal cancer, Minimally invasive esophagectomy, Robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy, RAMIE, Hybrid resection
This content is only available via PDF.
2018 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg
2019
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.