Outcomes of robotic versus non-robotic minimally-invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: An American College of Surgeons NSQIP database analysis

Utilization of robotic-assistance for esophagectomy is increasing. The differences in outcomes between robotic-assisted minimally-invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and non-robotic minimally-invasive esophagectomy (MIE) for esophageal cancer are unknown. The purpose of this study was to compare 30-day postoperative outcomes between RAMIE and MIE. A retrospective analysis was conducted using the ACS-NSQIP 2016–2017 databases. Primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality and morbidity. 725 minimally-invasive cases were identified, which included 100 RAMIE and 625 MIE. RAMIE was not found to be a risk factor for postoperative mortality (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.38–6.00, p = 0.5675) or overall morbidity (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.40–1.06, p = 0.0818). No significant differences were found between groups for systemic, organ-specific, or surgical complications. No significant difference was found in the incidence of 30-day postoperative outcomes between RAMIE and MIE. In comparison to MIE, RAMIE may be considered a feasible but non-superior option for treatment of esophageal cancer. •Robotic and non-robotic minimally-invasive esophagectomy had similar 30-day outcomes.•Pulmonary complications and anastomotic leak were the most common complications.•Robotic approach for esophagectomy is a feasible but non-superior approach.