Page 20 - Read Online
P. 20

Matto et al. Mini-invasive Surg. 2025;9:19  https://dx.doi.org/10.20517/2574-1225.2025.51  Page 11 of 11

               to achieving optimal outcomes. Therefore, the generalizability of our findings to less specialized centers may
               be limited. Future directions for our research include an analysis of over 200 RAMIE cases performed to
               date, as well as an evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of RAMIE compared to MIE.


               DECLARATIONS
               Authors’ contributions
               Made substantial contributions to the conception of the manuscript and the execution of the techniques
               described: Matto MA, Luketich JD, Alicuben ET, Sarkaria IS, Baker N, Kim S
               Creation of figures in the manuscript: Luketich S

               Availability of data and materials
               Data for this manuscript were taken from Ref. .
                                                      [5]
               Financial support and sponsorship
               The study was supported by the Training Grant (T32) from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute,
               NIH, HHS, United States (Grant No. T32 HL160526).

               Conflicts of interest
               All authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.


               Ethical approval and consent to participate
               The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board/Research Ethics Board of the University of
               Pittsburgh (Approval Number: STUDY2005005S, Approval Date: September 30, 2020). Written informed
               consent was waived.

               Consent for publication
               Not applicable.


               Copyright
               © The Author(s) 2025.


               REFERENCES
               1.      Espinoza-Mercado F, Imai TA, Borgella JD, et al. Does the approach matter? Comparing survival in robotic, minimally invasive, and
                  open esophagectomies. Ann Thorac Surg. 2019;107:378-85.  DOI  PubMed
               2.      Luketich JD, Schauer PR, Christie NA, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2000;70:906-12.  DOI  PubMed
               3.      Luketich JD, Alvelo-Rivera M, Buenaventura PO, et al. Minimally invasive esophagectomy: outcomes in 222 patients. Ann Surg.
                  2003;238:486-95.  DOI  PubMed  PMC
               4.      Luketich JD, Pennathur A, Awais O, et al. Outcomes after minimally invasive esophagectomy: review of over 1000 patients. Ann Surg.
                  2012;256:95-103.  DOI  PubMed  PMC
               5.      Ekeke CN, Kuiper GM, Luketich JD, et al. Comparison of robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy versus minimally
                  invasive esophagectomy: a propensity-matched study from a single high-volume institution. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023;166:374-
                  82.e1.  DOI  PubMed  PMC
               6.      Sarkaria IS, Rizk NP, Goldman DA, et al. Early quality of life outcomes after robotic-assisted minimally invasive and open
                  esophagectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2019;108:920-8.  DOI  PubMed  PMC
               7.      Okusanya OT, Sarkaria IS, Hess NR, et al. Robotic assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE): the University of Pittsburgh
                  Medical Center initial experience. Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;6:179-85.  DOI  PubMed  PMC
               8.      Lanfranco AR, Castellanos AE, Desai JP, Meyers WC. Robotic surgery: a current perspective. Ann Surg. 2004;239:14-21.  DOI
                  PubMed  PMC
   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25