Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39996872›Full record

ReviewCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2025

Evaluating Postoperative Morbidity and Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Esophagectomy in Esophageal Cancer Treatment-A Comprehensive Review on Behalf of TROGSS (The Robotic Global Surgical Society) and EFISDS (European Federation International Society for Digestive Surgery) Joint Working Group.

Yogesh Vashist, Aman Goyal, Preethi Shetty, Sergii Girnyi, Tomasz Cwalinski, Jaroslaw Skokowski, Silvia Malerba, Francesco Paolo Prete, Piotr Mocarski, Magdalena Kamila Kania and 21 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

31 authors.

Yogesh VashistDepartment of Surgery, Organ Transplant Center for Excellence, Center for Liver Diseases and Oncology, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh 12271, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0003-2030-6712
Aman GoyalDepartment of General Surgery, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Research Institute, Pondicherry, Cuddalore Rd, ECR, Pillayarkuppam, Puducherry 607402, India.ORCID 0000-0001-7336-1366
Preethi ShettyKasturba Medical College, Manipal, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal 576104, India.
Sergii GirnyiDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-0988-5875
Tomasz CwalinskiDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.
Jaroslaw SkokowskiDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-3079-3502
Silvia MalerbaDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6462-2090
Francesco Paolo PreteDepartment of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", 70110 Bari, Italy.
Piotr MocarskiDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.
Magdalena Kamila KaniaDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.
Maciej ŚwierblewskiDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.
Marek StrzemskiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0009-0007-6718-9142
Luis Osvaldo Suárez-CarreónDepartment of Bariatric Surgery, UMAE Hospital de Especialidades del Centro Medico Nacional de Occidente, Guadalajara 44100, Mexico.
Johnn Henry Herrera KokDepartment of Surgery, Complejo Asistencial Universitario de Palencia, 34401 Palencia, Spain.
Natale CalominoDepartment of Medicine, Surgery, and Neurosciences, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5426-5985
Vikas JainDepartment of Surgical Oncology & Robotic services, HCG Manavata Cancer Center, Nashik 422002, India.ORCID 0000-0001-5110-6831
Karol PolomDepartment of Medicine, Academy of Applied Medical and Social Sciences-AMiSNS: Akademia Medycznych I Spolecznych Nauk Stosowanych, 52-300 Elbląg, Poland.
Witold KyclerDepartment of Gastrointestinal Surgical Oncology, Greater Poland Cancer Centre, 61-866 Poznan, Poland.
Valentin CaluDepartment of Surgery, University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila, 010001 Bucharest, Romania.ORCID 0000-0001-7710-9109
Pasquale TalentoDepartment of Surgery, Pelvic Floor Center, AUSL-IRCCS Reggio Emilia, 42122 Reggio Emilia, Italy.
Antonio BrillantinoDepartment of Surgery, Antonio Cardarelli Hospital, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Francesco Antonio CiarleglioDepartment of General Surgery and Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary (HPB) Unit-APSS, 38121 Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1489-1954
Luigi BruscianoDivision of General, Oncological, Mini-Invasive and Obesity Surgery, University of Study of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", 80131 Naples, Italy.
Nicola CillaraDepartment of Surgery, "SS. Trinità" Hospital, 09121 Cagliari, Italy.
Ruslan DukaDepartment of Surgery, Dnipro State Medical University, 49044 Dnipro, Ukraine.ORCID 0000-0003-3962-8746
Beniamino PascottoDepartment of General and Minimally Invasive Surgery (Laparoscopy & Robotic), Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg, 1210 Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
Juan Santiago AzagraDepartment of General and Minimally Invasive Surgery (Laparoscopy & Robotic), Centre Hospitalier de Luxembourg, 1210 Luxembourg, Luxembourg.
Mario TestiniDepartment of Precision and Regenerative Medicine and Ionian Area, University of Bari "Aldo Moro", 70110 Bari, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9297-4894
Adel Abou-MradDepartment of Surgery, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Orléans, 45000 Orléans, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3408-4540
Luigi MaranoDepartment of General Surgery and Surgical Oncology, "Saint Wojciech" Hospital, "Nicolaus Copernicus" Health Center, 80-000 Gdańsk, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-9777-9588
Rodolfo J OviedoDepartment of Surgery, Nacogdoches Medical Center, Nacogdoches, TX 75962, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3784-6555

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEsophageal cancer, the seventh most common malignancy globally, requires esophagectomy for curative treatment. However, esophagectomy is associated with high postoperative morbidity and mortality, highlighting the need for minimally invasive approaches. Robotic-assisted surgery has emerged as a promising alternative to traditional open and minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE), offering potential benefits in improving clinical and oncological outcomes. This review aims to assess the postoperative morbidity and outcomes of robotic surgery.

methodsA comprehensive review of the current literature was conducted, focusing on studies evaluating the role of robotic-assisted surgery in esophagectomy. Data were synthesized on the clinical outcomes, including postoperative complications, survival rates, and recovery time, as well as technological advancements in robotic surgery platforms. Studies comparing robotic-assisted esophagectomy with traditional approaches were analyzed to determine the potential advantages of robotic systems in improving surgical precision and patient outcomes.

resultsRobotic-assisted esophagectomy (RAMIE) has shown significant improvements in clinical outcomes compared to open surgery and MIE, including reduced postoperative pain, less blood loss, and faster recovery. RAMIE offers enhanced thoracic access, with fewer complications than thoracotomy. The RACE technique has improved patient recovery and reduced morbidity. Fluorescence-guided technologies, including near-infrared fluorescence (NIRF), have proven valuable for sentinel node biopsy, lymphatic mapping, and angiography, helping identify critical structures and minimizing complications like anastomotic leakage and chylothorax. Despite these benefits, challenges such as the high cost of robotic systems and limited long-term data hinder broader adoption. Hybrid approaches, combining robotic and open techniques, remain common in clinical practice.

conclusionsRobotic-assisted esophagectomy offers promising advantages, including enhanced precision, reduced complications, and faster recovery, but challenges related to cost, accessibility, and evidence gaps must be addressed. The hybrid approach remains a valuable option in select clinical scenarios. Continued research, including large-scale randomized controlled trials, is necessary to further establish the role of robotic surgery as the standard treatment for resectable esophageal cancer.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyPostoperative ComplicationsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansTreatment Outcomeesophageal cancerfluorescence-guided technologiesminimally invasive surgerypostoperative outcomesrobotic-assisted esophagectomy

Identifiers

PMID39996872
PMCPMC11854120

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.