Recurrence and Survival After Minimally Invasive and Open Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the impact of operative approach (open [OE], hybrid [HMIE] and total minimally invasive esophagectomy [TMIE]) on operative and oncologic outcomes for patients treated with curative intent for esophageal and junctional cancer. Summary Background Data: The optimum oncologic surgical approach to esophageal and junctional cancer is unclear. Methods: This secondary analysis of the European multicenter ENSURE study includes patients undergoing curative-intent esophagectomy for cancer between 2009–2015 across 20 high-volume centers. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and the incidence and location of disease recurrence. Secondary endpoints included among others R0 resection rate, lymph node yield and overall survival (OS). Results: In total, 3,199 patients were included. Of these, 55% underwent OE, 17% HMIE and 29% TMIE. DFS was independently increased post TMIE (HR 0.86 [95% CI 0.76-0.98], P=0.022) compared with OE. Multivariable regression demonstrated no difference in absolute locoregional recurrence risk according to operative approach (HMIE vs. OE OR 0.79, P=0.257, TMIE vs. OE OR 0.84, P=0.243). The probability of systemic recurrence was independently increased post HMIE (OR 2.07, P=0.031), but not TMIE (OR 0.86, P=0.508). R0 resection rates (P=0.005) and nodal yield (P<0.001) were independently increased after TMIE, but not HMIE (P=0.424; P=0.512) compared with OE. OS was independently improved following both HMIE (HR 0.79, P=0.009) and TMIE (HR 0.82, P=0.003) as compared with OE. Conclusion: In this European multicenter study, TMIE was associated with improved surgical quality and DFS, while both TMIE and HMIE were associated with improved OS as compared with OE for esophageal cancer.