ObjectiveTo compare the safety and comfort of patients with or without postoperative gastric tube placement after esophageal cancer surgery, and analyze the cost and nursing time of gastric tube placement. Methods The patients with esophageal cancer undergoing minimally invasive surgery in West China Hospital of Sichuan University in 2021 were enrolled. The patients were divided into a gastric tube indwelling group and a non gastric tube indwelling group according to whether the gastric tube was indwelled after the operation. The safety and comfort indicators of the two groups were compared. Results A total of 130 patients were enrolled. There were 66 patients in the gastric tube indwelling group, including 53 males and 13 females, aged 61.80±9.05 years and 64 patients in the non gastric tube indwelling group, including 55 males and 9 females, aged 64.47±8.00 years. Six patients in the non gastric tube indwelling group needed to place gastric tube 1 to 3 days after the operation due to their condition. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups (P>0.05). The subjective comfort of patients in the gastric tube indwelling group was significantly lower than that in the non gastric tube indwelling group (P<0.001), and the incidence of foreign body sensation in the throat of patients in the gastric tube indwelling group was higher than that in the non gastric tube indwelling group (P<0.001). The average nursing time in the gastric tube indwelling group was about 59.58 minutes, and the average cost of gastric tube materials and nursing was 378.24 yuan per patient. Conclusion No gastric tube used after operation for appropriate esophageal cancer patients will not increase the incidence of postoperative complications (pulmonary infection, anastomotic leakage, chylothorax), but can increase the comfort of patients, save cost and reduce nursing workload, which is safe, feasible and economical.
ObjectiveTo compare the short-term outcomes of Da Vinci robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and video-assisted thoracoscopic-laparoscopic minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE) for esophageal cancer. MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on the data of patients with esophageal cancer admitted to Gansu Provincial People's Hospital from January 2021 to February 2025. Based on the surgical method, patients were divided into a RAMIE group and a VAMIE group. Both groups underwent standard McKeown three-incision surgery and systematic three-field lymph node dissection. Intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph nodes dissected, postoperative recovery indicators, and complication rates were compared. ResultsA total of 126 patients with esophageal cancer were included, of which 109 were male and 17 were female, with an average age of (64.6±8.8) years. The RAMIE group consisted of 36 patients and the VAMIE group 90 patients. There was no statistical difference in baseline indicators such as age, sex, and body mass index between the two groups (P>0.05). The difference in operation time between the two groups was not statistically significant [305.0 (280.0, 348.0) min vs. 300.0 (268.8, 340.0) min, P=0.457]. Compared with the VAMIE group, the RAMIE group had less intraoperative blood loss [100.0 (100.0, 120.0) mL vs. 100.0 (100.0, 200.0) mL, P=0.035], more intraoperative fluid infusion [(2244.7±610.3) mL vs. (1954.4±457.9) mL, P=0.013], a higher number of lymph nodes dissected [(27.9±10.6) nodes vs. (21.3±5.1) nodes, P<0.001], and the difference in the number of lymph node dissection groups was not statistically significant [8.0 (6.0, 8.0) groups vs. 7.0 (5.0, 8.0) groups, P=0.268]. In terms of postoperative recovery indicators, compared with the VAMIE group, the RAMIE group had shorter postoperative hospital stay [12.5 (9.0, 18.0) d vs. 17.0 (14.0, 22.0) d, P＜0.001] and shorter time with tubes [9.0 (8.0, 10.0) d vs. 10.0 (9.0, 12.0) d, P=0.007]. In terms of postoperative complications, the incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve injury in the RAMIE group was significantly lower than that in the VAMIE group (2.8% vs. 16.7%, P=0.039), there was no statistical difference in pulmonary infection, anastomosis leakage, and incision infection between the two groups (P>0.05). The total hospitalization cost of the RAMIE group was significantly higher than that of the VAMIE group (P<0.001). ConclusionRAMIE has significant advantages over VAMIE in terms of intraoperative bleeding control, the number of lymph node dissections, postoperative recovery speed, and reducing the risk of incision infection and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, with good safety and feasibility.