Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 177–187 | Cite as

Quality Improvement in Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy: Outcome Improvement Through Data Review

  • Patrick D. Lorimer
  • Benjamin M. Motz
  • Danielle M. Boselli
  • Mark K. Reames
  • Joshua S. Hill
  • Jonathan C. SaloEmail author
Gastrointestinal Oncology



Esophagectomy is a complex operation in which outcomes are profoundly influenced by operative experience and volume. We report the effects of experience and innovation on outcomes in minimally invasive esophagectomy.


Esophageal resections for cancer from 2007 to 2016 at Levine Cancer Institute at Carolinas Medical Center (Charlotte, NC) were reviewed. During this time, three changes in technique were made to improve outcomes: vascular evaluation of the gastric conduit to improve anastomotic healing (beginning at case #63), one-stage approach to permit access to abdomen and chest through one draped surgical field (case #82), and adoption of a lung-protective anesthetic protocol (case #101). Mortality, operative time, complications, and length of stay were analyzed relative to these interventions using GLM regression.


200 patients underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy. There were no mortalities at 30 days, and no change in mortality rate at 60 and 90 days. Anastomotic leak decreased significantly after the introduction of intraoperative vascular evaluation of the gastric conduit (3.6 vs 19.4%). Operative time decreased with adoption of a one-stage approach (416 vs 536 min). Pulmonary complications decreased coincident with a change in anesthetic technique (pneumonia 6 vs 28%). Lymph node harvest increased over time. Length of stay was driven primarily by complications and decreased with operative experience.


Postoperative complications, operative time, and length of stay decreased with case experience and alterations in surgical and anesthetic technique. We believe that adoption of the techniques and technology described herein can reduce complications, reduce hospital stay, and improve patient outcomes.



This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.


Portions of this body of work were presented in abstract form at the Digestive Disease Week in San Diego, CA in May 2016.


  1. 1.
    Litle VR, Buenaventura PO, Luketich JD. Minimally invasive resection for esophageal cancer. Surg Clin North Am. 2002;82(4):711–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Osugi H, Takemura M, Higashino M, et al. Learning curve of video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy and extensive lymphadenectomy for squamous cell cancer of the thoracic esophagus and results. Surg Endosc. 2003;17(3):515–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Osugi H, Takemura M, Lee S, et al. Thoracoscopic esophagectomy for intrathoracic esophageal cancer. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;11(4):221–7.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Watson DI, Davies N, Jamieson GG. Totally endoscopic Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Surg Endosc. 1999;13(3):293–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, Goodney PP, Wennberg DE, Lucas FL. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(22):2117–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dimick JB, Pronovost PJ, Cowan JA, Lipsett PA. Surgical volume and quality of care for esophageal resection: do high-volume hospitals have fewer complications? Ann Thorac Surg. 2003;75(2):337–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB, Staiger DO. Operative mortality and procedure volume as predictors of subsequent hospital performance. Ann Surg. 2006;243(3):411–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yun YH, Kim YA, Min YH, et al. The influence of hospital volume and surgical treatment delay on long-term survival after cancer surgery. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(10):2731–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Campbell C, Reames MK, Robinson M, Symanowski J, Salo JC. Conduit vascular evaluation is associated with reduction in anastomotic leak after esophagectomy. J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;19(5):806–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Motz BM, Lorimer PD, Boselli D, et al. One-stage minimally-invasive Ivor-Lewis esophagectomy without patient repositioning. Surg Endosc. 2017;Annual SAGES conference proceedings.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lorimer PD, Pollard RJ, Salo JC, Buhrman WC. Use of a standard evidence-based ventilation protocol reduces the incidence of pulmonary complications in minimally invasive esophagectomy. Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiology. 2017; Annual Symposium Proceedings.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hanna EM, Norton HJ, Reames MK, Salo JC. Minimally invasive esophagectomy in the community hospital setting. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2011;20(3):521–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bizekis C, Kent MS, Luketich JD, et al. Initial experience with minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;82(2):402–6. (discussion 406–7). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pennathur A, Awais O, Luketich JD. Technique of minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2010;89(6):S2159–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nguyen NT, Hinojosa MW, Smith BR, Chang KJ, Gray J, Hoyt D. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: lessons learned from 104 operations. Ann Surg. 2008;248(6):1081–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Crenshaw GD, Shankar SS, Brown RE, Abbas AE, Bolton JS. Extracorporeal gastric stapling reduces the incidence of gastric conduit failure after minimally invasive esophagectomy. Am Surg. 2010;76(8):823–8.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rice TW, Blackstone EH, Rusch VW. 7th edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual: esophagus and esophagogastric junction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(7):1721–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yap CH, Colson ME, Watters DA. Cumulative sum techniques for surgeons: a brief review. ANZ J Surg. 2007;77(7):583–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Van Rij AM, McDonald JR, Pettigrew RA, Putterill MJ, Reddy CK, Wright JJ. Cusum as an aid to early assessment of the surgical trainee. Br J Surg. 1995;82(11):1500–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dhamija A, Rosen JE, Dhamija A, et al. Learning curve to lymph node resection in minimally invasive esophagectomy for cancer. Innovations (Phila). 2014;9(4):286–91.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fabian T, Martin JT, McKelvey AA, Federico JA. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: a teaching hospital’s first year experience. Dis Esophagus. 2008;21(3):220–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Galloway SW. Learning curve for oesophageal cancer surgery. Br J Surg. 1999;86(2):282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Guo W, Zou YB, Ma Z, et al. One surgeon’s learning curve for video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer with the patient in lateral position: how many cases are needed to reach competence? Surg Endosc. 2013;27(4):1346–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg. 2012;256(1):95–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Markar SR, Mackenzie H, Lagergren P, Hanna GB, Lagergren J. Surgical proficiency gain and survival after esophagectomy for cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(13):1528–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mu JW, Gao SG, Xue Q, et al. Updated experiences with minimally invasive McKeown esophagectomy for esophageal cancer. World J Gastroenterol. 2015;21(45):12873–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mungo B, Lidor AO, Stem M, Molena D. Early experience and lessons learned in a new minimally invasive esophagectomy program. Surg Endosc. 2015;30(4):1692–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ninomiya I, Osugi H, Tomizawa N, et al. Learning of thoracoscopic radical esophagectomy: how can the learning curve be made short and flat? Dis Esophagus. 2010;23(8):618–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Song SY, Na KJ, Oh SG, Ahn BH. Learning curves of minimally invasive esophageal cancer surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2009;35(4):689–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tapias LF, Morse CR. Minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy: description of a learning curve. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218(6):1130–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jobe BA, Kim CY, Minjarez RC, O’Rourke R, Chang EY, Hunter JG. Simplifying minimally invasive transhiatal esophagectomy with the inversion approach: lessons learned from the first 20 cases. Arch Surg. 2006;141(9):857–65. (discussion 865–56).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Rohatgi A, Sutcliffe R, Forshaw MJ, Strauss D, Mason RC. Training in oesophageal surgery: the gold standard: a prospective study. Int J Surg. 2008;6(3):230–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Schoppmann SF, Prager G, Langer F, Riegler M, Fleischman E, Zacherl J. Fifty-five minimally invasive esophagectomies: a single centre experience. Anticancer Res. 2009;29(7):2719–25.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bailey MB, Davenport DL, Vargas HD, Evers BM, McKenzie SP. Longer operative time: deterioration of clinical outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy versus open colectomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57(5):616–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Daley BJ, Cecil W, Clarke PC, Cofer JB, Guillamondegui OD. How slow is too slow? Correlation of operative time to complications: an analysis from the Tennessee Surgical Quality Collaborative. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;220(4):550–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ross SW, Oommen B, Wormer BA, et al. National outcomes of laparoscopic Heller myotomy: operative complications and risk factors for adverse events. Surg Endosc. 2015;29(11):3097–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kunisaki C, Kosaka T, Ono HA, et al. Significance of thoracoscopy-assisted surgery with a minithoracotomy and hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for esophageal cancer: the experience of a single surgeon. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011;15(11):1939–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhou J, Chen H, Lu JJ, et al. Application of a modified McKeown procedure (thoracoscopic esophageal mobilization three-incision esophagectomy) in esophageal cancer surgery: initial experience with 30 cases. Dis Esophagus. 2009;22(8):687–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ben-David K, Rossidis G, Zlotecki RA, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy is safe and effective following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(12):3324–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Giglia MD, DeRussy A, Morris MS, et al. Racial disparities in length-of-stay persist even with no postoperative complications. J Surg Res. 2017;214:14–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick D. Lorimer
    • 1
  • Benjamin M. Motz
    • 1
  • Danielle M. Boselli
    • 2
  • Mark K. Reames
    • 3
  • Joshua S. Hill
    • 1
  • Jonathan C. Salo
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of SurgeryLevine Cancer Institute, Carolinas Medical CenterCharlotteUSA
  2. 2.Department of BiostatisticsLevine Cancer Institute, Carolinas Medical CenterCharlotteUSA
  3. 3.Sanger Heart and Vascular InstituteCarolinas Medical CenterCharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations