Comment on: “Early Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Study” | SpringerLink

Comment on: “Early Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Study” | SpringerLink

Annals of Surgical Oncology

May 2019, Volume 26, Issue 5, pp 1178–1181| Cite as

Comment on: “Early Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Versus Thoracoscopic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Study”

• Authors
• Authors and affiliations

• B. Feike Kingma
• Jelle P. Ruurda

1. 1.

Gastrointestinal Oncology

First Online: 13 March 2019

• 605Downloads

Zhang and colleagues are to be complimented for recently conducting an interesting study that compared the perioperative outcomes of two-stage robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) versus two-stage conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE).1 In that study, it was concluded that RAMIE and MIE are similar regarding intraoperative blood loss, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and lymph node yield; however, the operating time was significantly longer in the RAMIE group. These findings are a valuable addition to the existing evidence for RAMIE and we would like to place this into a broader perspective.