Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_5193_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
30.08.2026
Размер:
65 Мб
Скачать
166
Fig. 14.5 Trocar placement of the thoracic phase. The red interrupted line is the recommended upper border for placement of a trocar. The black vertical line above the T5 shows the recommended mini-thoracotomy site. PAL posterior axillary line
E. Tagkalos and P. P. Grimminger
8mmHg and checking the operative site, T2 is placed in the 8th intercostal space (if a robotic stapler is used, it is advisable to use the 12mm trocar), followed by T4in the 4th intercostal space, facing the esophageal hiatus and slightly higher than T3 (this axis is very important for the placement of this trocar). Finally, T1 is placed laterally to T2in the 10th intercostal space above the posterior axillary line. Try to leave enough space between the robotic trocars to avoid collisions.
Instrument Placement
T1: Fenestrated tip-up grasper. T2: Fenestrated bipolar forceps using the 8mm reduction cap and the robotic stapler
(Sureform; 12mm). T3: Camera. T4: Vessel Sealer or SynchroSeal, monopolar hook or scissors.
Mobilization of the esophagus begins with an incision of the parietal pleura at the inferior pulmonary ligament along the anterior esophageal border. The operative plane is extended cranially in relation to the subcarinal lymph nodes, which should be harvested with the specimen up to the azygos arch. Fine dissection of the pleura should extend above the azygos arch. At this point, the right vagus nerve is the lat­eral border. For this step, the surgeon can be assisted by the assistant (try to position the assistant’s instrument in the 6th row of your screen to avoid unnecessary move­ment) or the T1 (tip-up grasper) (Fig.14.6).
The azygos arch should be carefully prepared and the small bronchial artery (posterolateral to the azygos vein) should be dissected. The monopolar hook or scis­sors are instruments that allow ne dissection up to this point. The azygos can be resected at this point with Hem-o-lok (Telefex Medical, Weck Drive, NC) clips (using T2) or with hand-held clips using T5 (Fig.14.7).
Try not to dissect the azygos vein too close to the chest wall as a stump of 2–3cm may provide better traction in the following steps. Alternatively, a hand­held vascular stapler can be used. Once this step has been completed, the right paratracheal lymph nodes can be dissected separately. The next step is to dissect the pleura down to the esophageal hiatus. The plane should be extended parallel to the azygos vein. The thoracic duct should be visualized and dissected at the lower mediastinum (Fig.14.8).
ab
15 Robotic Esophagectomy
167
a
b
Fig. 14.6 Incision of the parietal pleura. (a) The interrupted line demonstrates the dissection plane of the parietal pleural. (b) The dissection of the pleura below the azygos arch and the esopha­gus. (c) The completion of the pleural dissection below the azygos arch. (d) The caudal plane with visualization of the thoracic duct
c
d
Fig. 14.7 The dissection of the azygos vein. (a) After clipping of the distal part. (b) The stump can be used to facilitate a better visualization of the underlying tissue (the traction through T1 fenestrated tip-up grasper should be at the 12th hour of your screen)
The use of ICG can be helpful, but the medium should be injected into the ingui­nal lymph nodes before the abdominal part or into the jejunal lymph nodes during the abdominal part (as shown in Fig.14.9).
When mobilizing the esophagus, try to identify small arteries coming from the aorta, the left and right pulmonary veins, the left and right bronchus and the trachea. When attempting to retrieve lymph nodes in the vicinity of important structures
168
ab
Fig. 14.8 The dissection of the thoracic duct. (a) The preparation and clipping of the distal part. (b) The dissected thoracic duct after clipping the proximal part
E. Tagkalos and P. P. Grimminger
abc
Fig. 14.9 ICG visualization of the thoracic duct. (a) The medium is injected in the lymph nodes of the jejunum during the abdominal phase. (b) The thoracic duct view in normal mode. (c) The thoracic duct (green) after enabling the FireyTM mode of the da Vinci platform
such as those mentioned above, try to reduce the maximum current applied to the tissue to avoid thermal damage to the airways. If possible, the vagus nerve should be transected in relation to the cardiac branches. During this step, the T1 tip-up grasper should be used to provide countertraction (12th hour of your screen). If necessary, the assistant should apply traction to the 6th hour of your screen. The next step is to prepare the subcarinal lymph nodes so that they can be retrieved en bloc with the specimen. The assistant should gently compress the bronchial system with an atraumatic instrument to facilitate better visualization of the fatty tissue borders of the region (Fig.14.10).
The posterior mediastinal and supradiaphragmatic lymph nodes are also retrieved en bloc with the specimen (damage to the airway should be avoided at this stage, even if this means that the lymph nodes from this station have to be removed sepa­rately from the specimen). After mobilizing the distal part of the intrathoracic esophagus from the diaphragm (and the crura, if not completely done during the abdominal phase), the full mobilization of the esophagus is achieved. Subsequently,
15 Robotic Esophagectomy
Fig. 14.10 The dissection of the subcarinal lymph nodes
169
the dissection of the specimen at the level of the azygos vein can be performed. The esophageal wall can be opened using monopolar scissors or hooks. After complet­ing a purse string suture of the proximal end, externalize both suture ends via T5. Secure the distal esophageal opening through T5 with a grasper. Attempt to ascend the conduit into the thoracic cavity using gentle traction, maintaining contact with the vessel end at all times. At this point, we will describe the end-to-side circular anastomotic technique used in our clinic. As there is still no consensus on the ideal anastomotic type for intrathoracic reconstruction, alternative anastomotic types such as a linear stapled or hand-sewn anastomosis can be used. The robotic instru­ments are retrieved and the trocars are undocked. T5 is removed and a mini­thoracotomy is performed 2–3cm anterior and 2cm posterior to the epicenter of T5. A wound protector is placed and the 25 or 28 mm anvil (CEEATM, Covidien, Manseld, MA, USA) is passed through the mini-thoracotomy to the proximal end of the esophagus, and the purse string is tightened. The specimen is then external­ized through the mini-thoracotomy and the right angulation of the conduit is checked (the stapler line along the lesser curvature should be opposite to the aorta). The specimen is then partially externalized, a small incision is made at the end of the lesser curvature at the stapler line, and the stapler shaft is inserted through the inci­sion and brought into the thoracic cavity. The shaft pin of the stapler is exteriorized cranially near the greater curvature of the gastric conduit. The shaft and anvil are approximated under continuous visualization. Using a hand-held grasper through T2, the fatty tissue of the greater omentum is removed from the anastomotic fronts to avoid stapling this tissue into the anastomosis. The anastomosis is created and the stapler removed. The specimen is divided using a linear stapler (Fig.14.11). Single interrupted monolament sutures may be used to secure the anastomosis (alterna­tively a continuous barbed resorbable suture may be used). A pleural tent and the use of a 180–270° omental ap can be further created around the anastomosis. The trocars are removed and a chest tube is inserted through T1. Once the lung is fully expanded, the mini-thoracotomy and wound are closed.
170
E. Tagkalos and P. P. Grimminger
a
b
c
Fig. 14.11 The intrathoracic circular-stapled end-to-side esophagogastrostomy. (a) The purse string of the proximal end (esophagus) before the placement of the anvil. (b) The connection of the anvil (esophagus) with the spike (gastric conduit). (c) The approximation of both ends. (d) The dissection of the specimen via linear stapler. (e) A continuous barbed suture is placed at the anas­tomosis. (f) A pleural tent and a 270° omental ap are placed around the anastomosis
d
e
f

Robotic-Assisted McKeown Esophagectomy

The fully robotic minimally invasive “one surgeon–one assistant” 4-arm transab­dominal, transthoracic, and transcervical esophagectomy with D2 lymph node dis­section with gastric pull-up reconstruction is presented. The three phases—thoracic, abdominal, and cervical—are described. We recommend this procedure for tumors located in the upper or upper/middle esophagus.
Thoracic Phase
The thoracic phase is the rst phase of the McKeown procedure. This phase shares many steps with the thoracic phase of the Ivor-Lewis procedure described above. If meticulous right and left recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) lymph node dissection is required, all trocars can be moved cranially in one intercostal space (9th, 7th, 5th,
15 Robotic Esophagectomy
171
and 3rd for the four robotic arms). After complete mobilization of the esophagus below the azygos vein and completion of the lymphadenectomy in the middle and lower mediastinum, the operation continues in the upper mediastinum.
Instrument Placement
T1: Fenestrated bipolar forceps. T2: Camera. T3: Monopolar hook or scissors. T4: Tip-up fenestrated grasper.
The lymph nodes of the RLN are dissected. The parietal pleura should be incised parallel to the right vagus nerve extending towards the right subclavian artery. This is the recurrent point for the right RLN.These lymph nodes should be dissected separately from the specimen.
Dissection of the left RLN is more difcult and requires good visualization of the left RLN. The trachea should be gently rotated clockwise. The tip-up grasper through T1 is used to retract the esophagus dorsally and the assistant will rotate the trachea. The soft tissues of the left paratracheal space are carefully dissected, leav­ing the left RLN untouched. The ventral lymph nodes are dissected rst, followed by the dorsal lymph nodes. The esophagus can then be safely mobilized to the tho­racic outlet. A thoracic tube is placed and the wounds are closed.
Abdominal andCervical Phases
The abdominal phase described in the Ivor-Lewis section shares many similarities to the McKeown abdominal phase. The patient is placed in the supine position with the head slightly tilted to the right and the neck extended. To facilitate passage of the specimen through the posterior mediastinum to the neck, it is advisable to divide the specimen from the gastric conduit. The two ends can then be reattached with inter­rupted sutures (tip of the gastric conduit).
After creating the anastomosis in the cervical region (see below), the stomach should be retracted in the abdomen for a few centimeters and the pylorus should be close to the hiatus. This is the end of the abdominal phase.
It is clear that the cervical phase will begin before the end of the abdominal phase, and this step can be also performed by a second surgical team. An incision parallel and median to the medial border of the left sternocleidomastoid muscle (approximately 4cm) should start from the jugulum and extend cranially. After dis­secting the platysma, the dissection follows the layers to the thoracic inlet. At this point, the cervical esophagus should be identied. A loop may be used to encircle the esophagus for better traction. Once the cervical esophagus has been mobilized, the specimen and conduit can be advanced to the neck. The cervical esophagus is dissected and the specimen is retrieved. We perform a circular-stapled anastomosis, but other techniques can be used for reconstruction (linear or hand-sewn anastomo­sis). The anastomosis can be further secured with interrupted absorbable
172
E. Tagkalos and P. P. Grimminger
monolament sutures. A small soft drainage is placed posterior to the anastomosis and the wounds are closed with interrupted sutures (platysma and skin). The cervi­cal phase is complete.
Good teamwork is essential for a successful robotic operation. A clear role for each team member remains the cornerstone of a successful procedure. The use of the robotic assistance may lead to further surgical precision and facilitate more extended lymphadenectomies in the upper mediastinum. It is expected that the con­tinuous technological development of the robotic systems as well as promising robotic processes such as RACE (robotic-assisted transhiatal and transcervical esophagectomy) could totally alter today standards.

References

1. Ferlay J, Colombet M, Soerjomataram I, Parkin DM, Pineros M, Znaor A, etal. Cancer statis­tics for the year 2020: an overview. Int J Cancer. 2021;1
2. Lepage C, Drouillard A, Jouve JL, Faivre J.Epidemiology and risk factors for oesophageal adenocarcinoma. Dig Liver Dis. 2013;45(8):625–9.
3. Cho S.Fistulas between the esophagus and adjacent vital organs in esophageal cancer. Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;53(4):211–6.
4. Zhong XQ, Li GX.Successful management of life-threatening aortoesophageal stula: a case report and review of the literature. World J Clin Cases. 2022;10(12):3814–21.
5. He LR, Qiao W, Liao ZX, Komaki R, Ho L, Hofstetter WL, etal. Impact of comorbidities and use of common medications on cancer and non-cancer specic survival in esophageal carci­noma. BMC Cancer. 2015;15:1095.
6. Arends J, Bachmann P, Baracos V, Barthelemy N, Bertz H, Bozzetti F, etal. ESPEN guidelines on nutrition in cancer patients. Clin Nutr. 2017;36(1):11–48.
7. Valsangkar N, Salty HVN, Timsina L, Ceppa DP, Ceppa EP, Birdas TJ.Operative time in esophagectomy: does it affect outcomes? Surgery. 2018;164(4):866–71.
8. Takahashi C, Shridhar R, Huston J, Meredith K. Esophagectomy from then to now. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2018;9(5):903–9.
9. Lai G, Guo N, Jiang Y, Lai J, Li Y, Lai R. Duration of one-lung ventilation as a risk fac­tor for postoperative pulmonary complications after McKeown esophagectomy. Tumori. 2020;106(1):47–54.
10. Fabbi M, Hagens ERC, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Gisbertz SS.Anastomotic leakage after esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: denitions, diagnostics, and treatment. Dis Esophagus. 2021;34(1):1.
11. In H, Palis BE, Merkow RP, Posner MC, Ferguson MK, Winchester DP, etal. Doubling of 30-day mortality by 90 days after esophagectomy: a critical measure of outcomes for quality improvement. Ann Surg. 2016;263(2):286–91.
12. Low DE, Kuppusamy MK, Alderson D, Cecconello I, Chang AC, Darling G, et al. Benchmarking complications associated with esophagectomy. Ann Surg. 2019;269(2):291–8.
13. Haverkamp L, Seesing MF, Ruurda JP, Boone J, Hillegersberg RV.Worldwide trends in sur­gical techniques in the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer. Dis Esophagus. 2017;30(1):1–7.
14. de Groot EM, Goense L, Kingma BF, Haverkamp L, Ruurda JP, van Hillegersberg R.Trends in surgical techniques for the treatment of esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer: the 2022 update. Dis Esophagus. 2023;36(7):doac099.
15. Mariette C, Markar SR, Dabakuyo-Yonli TS, Meunier B, Pezet D, Collet D, etal. Hybrid mini­mally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(2):152–62.
15 Robotic Esophagectomy
16. Biere SS, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Maas KW, Bonavina L, Rosman C, Garcia JR, etal. Minimally invasive versus open oesophagectomy for patients with oesophageal cancer: a mul­ticentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9829):1887–92.
17. van der Sluis PC, van der Horst S, May AM, Schippers C, Brosens LAA, Joore HCA, etal. Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracolaparoscopic esophagectomy versus open trans­thoracic esophagectomy for resectable esophageal cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2019;269(4):621–30.
18. Yang Y, Li B, Yi J, Hua R, Chen H, Tan L, Li H, He Y, Guo X, Sun Y, Yu B, Li Z.Robot-assisted versus conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy for resect­able esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: early results of a multicenter randomized controlled trial: the RAMIE Trial. Ann Surg. 2022;275(4):646–53.
19. Tagkalos E, van der Sluis PC, Berlth F, Poplawski A, Hadzijusufovic E, Lang H, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Gisbertz SS, Müller-Stich BP, Ruurda JP, Schiesser M, Schneider PM, van Hillegersberg R, Grimminger PP. Robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy versus minimally invasive esophagectomy for resectable esophageal adeno­carcinoma, a randomized controlled trial (ROBOT-2 trial). BMC Cancer. 2021;21(1):1060.
20. Tagkalos E, Grimminger P, Gao X, Chiu CH, Uzun E, Lang H, Wen YW, Chao YK.Incidence and predictors of textbook outcome after minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer: a two­center study. Cancers. 2024;16:1109.
21. Hernandez JM, Dimou F, Weber J, etal. Dening the learning curve for robotic-assisted esoph­agogastrectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2013;17:1346–51.
22. Sarkaria IS, Rizk NP, Grosser R, etal. Attaining prociency in robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy while maximizing safety during procedure development. Innovations. 2016;11(4):268–73.
23. van der Sluis PC, Ruurda JP, van der Horst S, Goense L, van Hillegersberg R.Learning curve for robot-assisted minimally invasive thoracoscopic esophagectomy: results from 312 cases. Ann Thorac Surg. 2018;106(1):264–71.
24. Grimminger PP, Hadzijusufovic E, Babic B, van der Sluis PC, Lang H.Innovative fully robotic 4-arm Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for esophageal cancer (RAMIE4). Dis Esophagus. 2020;33(3):doz015.
25. Grimminger PP, Hadzijusufovic E, Ruurda JP, Lang H, van Hillegersberg R.The da Vinci Xi robotic four-arm approach for robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018a;66(5):407–9. https://doi.org/10.1055/s- 0038- 1636933.
26. Grimminger PP, Hadzijusufovic E, Lang H. Robotic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy (RAMIE) with a standardized intrathoracic circular end-to-side stapled anastomosis and a team of two (surgeon and assistant only). Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018b;66(5):404–6. https://
doi.org/10.1055/s- 0037- 1606198.
173
Robot-Assisted Partial andTotal Gastrectomy
RajG.Vaghjiani

Introduction

On January 29, 1881, Theodor Billroth performed the rst successful gastric resec­tion at his Viennese clinic which included the eponymous gastroenteric reconstruc­tion [1]. Although previous surgeons had attempted such a complex procedure, this was the rst case of a technical success (the patient reportedly passed away months later from metastatic disease). Since this time, surgery of the stomach has advanced tremendously taking into account not only the complex physiology of nutrient digestion but also the mechanics of gastroenteric ow. Fast forward to over 100years later in 1991, the rst laparoscopic-assisted gastrectomy was described by Seigo Kitano’s group [2]. Rapid advancements in both laparoscopic, and, more recently, robotic techniques, have allowed for the continued adoption of minimally invasive approaches to gastric resection.
This chapter will provide a brief synopsis of the indications for gastric resections as well as a technical guide to a breadth of robot-assisted gastric resections and the associated alimentary reconstructions. Although the majority of robot-assisted resec­tions for GI malignancies in the United States are done with the Intuitive Surgical da Vinci platform, the descriptions provided will attempt to highlight technical aspects that could be easily translated to various platforms as well as upcoming iterations.
15

Indications

Gastric cancer remains a major source of worldwide cancer burden, accounting for the fth most commonly diagnosed cancer as well as the fth leading cause of cancer mortality [3]. As detailed investigations into the pathogenesis of gastric
R. G. Vaghjiani (*) University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX, USA e-mail: rgvaghji@UTMB.EDU
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2025 S. Samreen et al. (eds.), The SAGES Manual of Robotic Surgery,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-86927-3_15
175
176
R. G. Vaghjiani
adenocarcinoma have continued, the approach to management has simultane­ously become more intricate, often entailing a multitude of therapies depending on the stage of the malignancy at discovery [4]. Additionally, the ideal extent of surgery as well as the associated lymphadenectomy continues to evolve, espe­cially as different geographic cohorts are prone to variable incidence, detection, and surgical capabilities. Finally, although gastric adenocarcinoma is often a commonly discussed indication for robotic resections, the breadth of entities that may be appropriate for a robotic approach include gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST), neuroendocrine tumors, leiomyomas, sarcomas, polyps/adenomas, and benign peptic disease. Specic extent of resection is beyond the scope of this chapter; however, the application of the techniques would be for the most part identical.
Positioning andPort Placement
For the vast majority of gastric resections, the patient can be positioned supine with a 10–25 degree reverse Trendelenburg orientation. This can aid in upper gastroin­testinal dissection, and thus the use of either a footboard or a split-leg table with footrests should be applied. The robotic platform is located to the left of the patient but with increasingly versatile systems, both a left-sided and right-sided approach can be used. If there is the possibility that the gastric resection may extend into the thorax and require an esophagogastrectomy, then a left-sided placement may allow for an easy transition for the thoracic/lateral portion of the operation (Fig.15.1).
Fig. 15.1 (a) A reverse Trendelenburg position can aid in dissection of the upper abdominal space and hiatus. (b) Either a split leg with foot rests or a straight leg with footboard should be used to allow for the steep angle required. The robot can be positioned either to the left or right of the patient with the arms in extension
a
b