Literature DB >> 29625502

Effectiveness of Robotic Lobectomy-Outcome and Learning Curve in a High Volume Center.

Danjouma Housmanou Cheufou1, Khaled Mardanzai1, Till Ploenes1, Dirk Theegarten1, Georgios Stamatis1, Sandra Kampe2, Clemens Aigner1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery has been developed as a sophisticated tool to expand possibilities in minimal invasive surgery. The learning curve for this method is short in various surgical fields; however, limited data exist on the learning curve in robotic thoracic surgery.
METHODS: This study analyzes a single center experience of robotic lobectomies using a prospectively kept database. Perioperative data and outcome of patients during the learning curve were compared with patients operated with increased institutional experience. The learning curve was defined as the initial 20 lobectomies.
RESULTS: Sixty-four robotic lobectomies were performed between January 2014 and February 2017. Indications, preoperative lung functions, comorbidities, patient age, and tumor stage were comparable between patients operated during the learning curve and thereafter. The mean operative time could be significantly reduced after the learning curve (286 ± 86 vs. 211 ± 62 minutes; p = 0.0003). The conversion rate dropped from 4 of 20 (20%) during the learning curve to 2 of 44 (4.5%, p = 0.07) thereafter. Chest tube duration (4.3 ± 2.9 vs. 3.8 ± 2.1 days) and hospital stay (8.3 ± 3.4 vs. 7.9 ± 4.5 days) were not different in the two phases. The number of resected lymph nodes increased from 11.2 ± 6.8 to 13.9 ± 6.5 (p = 0.0797). Lymph node upstaging was achieved in 8 (12.9%) cases. Ninety-day mortality was 0%, and 2-year overall survival was 83%.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic thoracic surgery can be safely performed and trained with low complication rates and contributes to the extension of minimal invasive thoracic surgery. The initial learning curve in our experience is overcome after 20 cases. However, to become proficient in more advanced procedures and to further reduce operative time, additional training is required. Prospective studies are required to clearly determine the role of robotic surgery in comparison to the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) procedures. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29625502     DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1639477

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0171-6425            Impact factor:   1.827


  4 in total

1.  From "open" to robotic assisted thoracic surgery: why RATS and not VATS?

Authors:  Sara Ricciardi; Federico Davini; Carmelina Cristina Zirafa; Franca Melfi
Journal:  J Vis Surg       Date:  2018-05-22

2.  Current status and evolution of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery in Germany-results from a nationwide survey.

Authors:  Thorben Möller; Jan-Hendrik Egberts; Martin Eichhorn; Hans-Stefan Hofmann; Ingo Krüger; Jens-C Rückert; Tim Sandhaus; Matthias Steinert
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Objective analysis of postoperative air leaks can aid in decision-making, but does the use of digital drains really impact patient outcomes?

Authors:  Vijay Joshi; Ioannis Dimarakis
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Learning curve of robotic portal lobectomy for pulmonary neoplasms: A prospective observational study.

Authors:  Mu-Zi Yang; Ren-Chun Lai; Abbas E Abbas; Bernard J Park; Ji-Bin Li; Jie Yang; Jin-Chun Wu; Gang Wang; Hao-Xian Yang
Journal:  Thorac Cancer       Date:  2021-03-11       Impact factor: 3.500

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.