Judith Buentzel1, Judith Heinz2, Marc Hinterthaner3, Friedrich A Schöndube3, Carmen Straube1, Christian Roever2, Alexander Emmert3. 1. Department of Haematology and Oncology, University Medical Center, Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany. 2. Department of Medical Statistics, University Medical Center, Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany. 3. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, University Medical Center, Georg-August University, Göttingen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to analyze all relevant comparative studies comparing robot-assisted minimally invasive thymectomy (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery thymectomy (VATS) in terms of surgical and short-term outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search for articles describing robot-assisted and video-assisted thymectomy and addressing surgical outcomes, operation time, length of hospitalization, intra-operative blood loss, conversion to sternotomy and post-operative complications was performed using the medical databases. RESULTS: Of the 478 studies from preliminary screening, five articles were included. By pooling these studies, we found no significant differences between the RATS and VATS (odds ratio 1.24 (95% CI 0.51, 3.03; p = 0.63)).There were no significant differences in comparison of conversion rates, operation time (26.29 min (95% CI -2.57, 55.35; p = 0.07)) and length of hospitalization (-1.58 days (95% CI -4.78, 1.62; p = 0.33)). There was a slightly higher blood loss in the RATS group. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis did not detect any statistically significant differences in surgery outcomes between the two groups.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to analyze all relevant comparative studies comparing robot-assisted minimally invasive thymectomy (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery thymectomy (VATS) in terms of surgical and short-term outcomes. METHODS: A systematic search for articles describing robot-assisted and video-assisted thymectomy and addressing surgical outcomes, operation time, length of hospitalization, intra-operative blood loss, conversion to sternotomy and post-operative complications was performed using the medical databases. RESULTS: Of the 478 studies from preliminary screening, five articles were included. By pooling these studies, we found no significant differences between the RATS and VATS (odds ratio 1.24 (95% CI 0.51, 3.03; p = 0.63)).There were no significant differences in comparison of conversion rates, operation time (26.29 min (95% CI -2.57, 55.35; p = 0.07)) and length of hospitalization (-1.58 days (95% CI -4.78, 1.62; p = 0.33)). There was a slightly higher blood loss in the RATS group. CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis did not detect any statistically significant differences in surgery outcomes between the two groups.
Authors: Gabrielle Drevet; Stéphane Collaud; François Tronc; Nicolas Girard; Jean-Michel Maury Journal: Cancer Manag Res Date: 2019-07-22 Impact factor: 3.989