With the evolution of minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE), questions remain regarding the benefits and indications of these methods. Given that set indications do not exist, this article aims first to review the reported outcomes of MIE, RAMIE, and open esophagectomy. Then, considerations based on the reported outcomes are discussed to guide surgeons in selecting the best approach. MIE and RAMIE offer the potential to improve outcomes for esophagectomy patients; however, surgeon experience as well as individual patient factors play important roles when deciding upon the surgical approach.

Background: Optimal time to surgery for lung cancer is not well established. We aimed to assess whether time to surgery correlates with outcomes.Methods: We assessed patients 18–84 years old who were diagnosed with stage I/II lung cancer at our integrated healthcare system from 2009 to 2019. Time to surgery was defined to start with disease confirmation (imaging or biopsy) prior to the surgery scheduling date. Outcomes of unplanned return to care within 30 days of lung cancer surgery, all‐cause mortality, and disease recurrence were compared based on time to surgery before and after 2, 4, and 12 weeks.Results: Of 2861 included patients, 70% were over 65 years old and 61% were female. Time to surgery occurred in 1–2 weeks for 6%, 3–4 weeks for 31%, 5–12 weeks for 58%, and 13–26 weeks for 5% of patients. Patients with time to surgery > 4 (vs. ≤ 4) weeks had greater risk of both death (hazard ratio (HR) 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00–1.39) and recurrence (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.10–1.62). Associations were not statistically significant when dichotomizing time to surgery at 2 or 12 weeks for death (2 week HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.93–1.64; 12 week HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.97–1.88) and recurrence (2 week HR 1.54, 95% CI 0.85–2.80; 12 week HR 2.28, 95% CI 0.80–6.46).Conclusions: Early stage lung cancer patients with time to surgery within 4 weeks experienced lower rates of recurrence. Optimal time to surgical resection may be shorter than previously reported.

Background: Intercostal nerve blockade (INB) for thoracic surgery analgesia has gained popularity in practice, but evidence demonstrating its efficacy remains sparse and inconsistent. We investigated the effect of INB with standard bupivacaine (SB) with epinephrine versus liposomal bupivacaine (LB) versus a mixed solution of the two on postoperative pain control and outcomes in video assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy patients. Methods: Since 2014, our practice has shifted from using INBs with SB with epinephrine, to LB, to a mix of the two as the central component of multimodal analgesia after video assisted thoracoscopic surgery. The blocks are performed in a standardized fashion under thoracoscopic visualization consecutively from two rib spaces above to two below the outermost incisions. We retrospectively compared all minimally invasive lobectomies performed at our institution between January 2014 and July 2018 by type of local anesthetic used for INB. We examined median length of stay (LOS), opioid utilization, and subjective pain scores [0–10]. Results: Out of 302 minimally invasive lobectomy patients, 34 received SB with epinephrine, 222 received LB alone, and 46 received the mixed solution. LOS was almost a full day shorter in the LB group than in the SB group (34.8 vs. 56.5 hours, P=0.01). There was nearly 25% lower median total morphine equivalent utilization in the mixed solution cohort compared to the LB cohort (−7.1 mg, P=0.02). Additionally, IV morphine equivalent utilization was over 50% lower in the mixed solution group than in the SB with epinephrine group (−10.0 mg, P=0.03). Conclusions: Our study is by far the largest (N=302) to compare types of local anesthetic used for INB within a uniform case population. The reductions in LOS and opiate utilization observed in our study among patients receiving LB-based formulations were both statistically and clinically significant.

Background: Limited evidence exists assessing whether anastomotic evaluation using indocyanine green fluorescence (IGF) during minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) predicts or improves outcomes. We hypothesized that IGF helps surgeons predict anastomotic complications and reduces anastomotic leaks after MIE. Methods: In September 2019, our institution began routinely using IGF for intraoperative evaluation of anastomoses during MIE. Data were collected from patients undergoing MIE in the two years before and after this technology began being routinely used. Baseline characteristics and outcomes, including anastomotic leak, in patients who underwent indocyanine green fluorescence evaluation (ICG) and those who did not (nICG) were compared. Outcomes were also compared between ICG patients with normal versus abnormal fluorescence. Results: Overall, 181 patients were included. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics did not differ between the ICG and nICG groups. ICG patients experienced higher rates of anastomotic leak (10.2% vs. 1.6%, P = .015) and 90-day mortality (8.5% vs. 1.6%, P = .04) compared to nICG patients. Due to lack of equipment availability, 19 nICG patients underwent MIE after the use of IGF became routine, and none developed leaks. ICG patients with abnormal fluorescence had higher rates of anastomotic leak (71.4% vs 1.9%, P < .001) and 30-day mortality (28.6% vs 0%, P = .012) compared to those with normal fluorescence. Discussion: Abnormal intraoperative IGF was associated with increased rate of anastomotic leak, suggesting predictive potential of IGF. However, its use was associated with an increased leak rate and higher mortality. Further studies are warranted to assess possible physiologic effects of indocyanine green on the esophageal anastomosis.

Background: Adjuvant immunotherapy has been shown in clinical trials to prolong the survival of patients with esophageal cancer. We report our initial experience with immunotherapy within an integrated health system. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed reviewing patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy at our institution between 2017 and 2021. The immunotherapy cohort was assessed for completion of treatment, adverse effects, and disease progression, with emphasis on patients who received surgery in 2021 and their eligibility to receive nivolumab. Results: There were 39 patients who received immunotherapy and 137 patients who did not. In logistic regression, immunotherapy was not found to have a statistically significant impact on 1-year overall survival after adjusting for age and receipt of adjuvant chemoradiation. Only seven patients out of 39 who received immunotherapy successfully completed treatment (18%), with the majority failing therapy due to disease progression or side effects. Of the 17 patients eligible for nivolumab, 13 patients received it (76.4%), and three patients completed a full course of treatment. Conclusions: Despite promising findings of adjuvant immunotherapy improving the survival of patients with esophageal cancer, real-life practice varies greatly from clinical trials. We found that the majority of patients were unable to complete immunotherapy regimens with no improvement in overall 1-year survival.

Traumatic pneumothorax management has evolved to include the use of smaller caliber tube thoracostomy and even observation alone. Data is limited comparing tube thoracostomy to observation for small traumatic pneumothoraces. We aimed to investigate whether observing patients with a small traumatic pneumothorax on initial chest radiograph (CXR) is associated with improved outcomes compared to tube thoracostomy. We retrospectively reviewed trauma patients at our level 1 trauma center from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2020. We included those with a pneumothorax size 0.99). Average pneumothorax sizes on computed tomography were 25 ± 2.1 and 37 ± 3.9 mm in the observation and tube thoracostomy groups, respectively (p = 0.01). Length of stay in the observation group was significantly shorter than the tube thoracostomy group (3.6 ± 0.33 vs 5.8 ± 0.81 days, p < 0.01). While pneumothorax size on computed tomography was associated with tube thoracostomy, only tube thoracostomy correlated with length of stay on multivariable analysis; pneumothorax size on CXR and computed tomography did not. There were no deaths or readmissions in either cohort. One patient in the observation group required tube thoracostomy after 18 h for worsening subcutaneous emphysema, and one patient in the tube thoracostomy group developed an empyema. Select patients with small traumatic pneumothoraces on initial chest radiograph who were treated with observation experienced an average length of stay over two days shorter than those treated with tube thoracostomy. Outcomes were otherwise similar between the two groups suggesting that an observation-first strategy may be a superior treatment approach for these patients.