National trends and perioperative outcomes of robotic oesophagectomy following induction chemoradiation therapy: A National Cancer Database propensity-matched analysis

Mohamed K. Kamel, Adam N. Sholi, Mohamed Rahouma, Sebron W. Harrison, Benjamin Lee, Brendon M. Stiles, Nasser K. Altorki, Jeffrey L. Port

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations


Objectives: Oesophagectomy following induction chemoradiation therapy (CRT) is technically challenging. To date, little data exist to describe the feasibility of a robotic approach in this setting. In this study, we assessed national trends and outcomes of robotic oesophagectomy following induction CRT compared to the traditional open approach. Methods: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients who underwent oesophagectomy following induction CRT (2010-2014). Trends of robotic utilization were assessed by a Mantel-Haenszel test of trend. Propensity matching controlled for differences in age, gender, comorbidity, stage, histology and tumour location between the robotic and open groups. Overall survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis and compared by a log-rank test Results: Oesophagectomy following induction CRT was performed in 6958 patients. Of them, 555 patients (8%) underwent robotic surgery (5% converted to an open approach). Between 2010 and 2014, utilization of a robotic approach increased from 3% to 11% (Mantel-Haenszel, P < 0.001) and the number of hospitals performing at least 1 robotic oesophagectomy increased from 23 to 57. Compared to the traditional open approach, robotic oesophagectomy was used more frequently at academic hospitals (76% vs 60%, P < 0.001), and in patients living in metropolitan areas (85% vs 77%, P < 0.001) and those living in the Midwest (41% vs 33%, P < 0.001). In the matched groups, a robotic approach was associated with shorter median hospital stay (9 vs 10 days, P = 0.004) and dissection of more lymph nodes (median, 16 vs 12, P < 0.001). However, there were no differences in rates of positive margin resection (5% for both groups, P = 0.95), 30-day readmissions (5% vs 7%, P = 0.18), 30-day mortality (2.5% vs 4%, P = 0.79), 90-day mortality (9% vs 8.5%, P = 0.89) or 5-year overall survival (42% vs 39%, P = 0.19) between patients undergoing robotic and open surgery, respectively. Conclusions: Robotic oesophagectomy after induction CRT is feasible and associated with shorter hospitalization compared to an open approach, and does not compromise the adequacy of oncological resection, perioperative outcomes or long-term survival.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)403-408
Number of pages6
JournalEuropean Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery
Issue number2
StatePublished - Feb 1 2021
Externally publishedYes


  • Induction therapy
  • Minimally invasive
  • Oesophageal cancer
  • Oesophagectomy
  • Robotic

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine


Dive into the research topics of 'National trends and perioperative outcomes of robotic oesophagectomy following induction chemoradiation therapy: A National Cancer Database propensity-matched analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this