Robot‐assisted Thoracoscopic Lymphadenectomy Along the Left Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve for Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma in the Prone Position: Technical Report and Short‐term Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Meticulous mediastinal lymphadenectomy frequently induces recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy (RLNP). Surgical robots with impressive dexterity and precise dissection skills have been developed to help surgeons perform operations. The objective of this study was to determine the impact on short‐term outcomes of robot‐assisted thoracoscopic radical esophagectomy performed on patients in the prone position for the treatment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, including its impact on RLNP. Methods A single‐institution nonrandomized prospective study was performed. The patients (n = 36) with resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma were divided into two groups: patients who agreed to robot‐assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy with total mediastinal lymphadenectomy performed in the prone position (n = 16, robot‐assisted group) without insurance reimbursement, and those who agreed to undergo the same operation without robot assistance but with health insurance coverage (n = 20, control group). These patients were observed for 30 days following surgery to assess short‐term surgical outcomes, including the incidence of vocal cord palsy, hoarseness, and aspiration. Results Robot assistance significantly reduced the incidence of vocal cord palsy (p = 0.018) and hoarseness (p = 0.015) and the time on the ventilator (p = 0.025). There was no in‐hospital mortality in either group. There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to patient background, except for the use of preoperative therapy (robot‐assisted group p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, operating time, number of dissected lymph nodes, completeness of resection, or the incidence of the other complications, except for anastomotic leakage (p = 0.038). Conclusion Robot‐assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy with total mediastinal lymphadenectomy is feasible and safe. This method shows promise in preventing RLNP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".