Mark W Hennon1,2, Luke H DeGraaff2, Adrienne Groman3, Todd L Demmy1,2, Sai Yendamuri1,2. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA. 3. Department of Biostatistics, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Proponents of open thoracotomy (OPEN) and robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) claim its oncological superiority over video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) in terms of the accuracy of lymph node staging. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing lobectomy without neoadjuvant therapy from 2010 to 2014. Nodal upstaging rates were compared using a surgical approach. Overall survival adjusted for confounding variables was examined using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 64 676 patients fulfilled the selection criteria. The number of patients who underwent lobectomy by RATS, VATS and OPEN approaches was 5470 (8.5%), 17 545 (27.1%) and 41 661 (64.4%), respectively. The mean number of lymph nodes examined for each of these approaches was 10.9, 11.3 and 10 (P < 0.01) and upstaging rates were 11.2%, 11.7% and 12.6% (P < 0.01), respectively. For patients with clinical stage I disease (N = 46 826; RATS = 4338, VATS = 13 416 and OPEN = 29 072), the mean lymph nodes examined were 10.6, 10.8 and 9.4 (P < 0.01), and upstaging rates were 10.8%, 11.1% and 12.1% (P < 0.01), respectively. A multivariable analysis suggested an association with improved survival with RATS and VATS compared with OPEN surgery [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.89 and 0.89, respectively; P < 0.01] for patients with all stages. In stage I disease, VATS but not RATS was associated with increased overall survival compared with the OPEN approach (HR = 0.81; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: RATS lobectomy is not superior to VATS lobectomy with respect to lymph node yield or upstaging of NSCLC. Increased nodal upstaging by the OPEN approach does not confer a survival advantage in any stage of NSCLC and may be associated with decreased overall survival.
OBJECTIVES: Proponents of open thoracotomy (OPEN) and robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) claim its oncological superiority over video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) in terms of the accuracy of lymph node staging. METHODS: The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing lobectomy without neoadjuvant therapy from 2010 to 2014. Nodal upstaging rates were compared using a surgical approach. Overall survival adjusted for confounding variables was examined using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 64 676 patients fulfilled the selection criteria. The number of patients who underwent lobectomy by RATS, VATS and OPEN approaches was 5470 (8.5%), 17 545 (27.1%) and 41 661 (64.4%), respectively. The mean number of lymph nodes examined for each of these approaches was 10.9, 11.3 and 10 (P < 0.01) and upstaging rates were 11.2%, 11.7% and 12.6% (P < 0.01), respectively. For patients with clinical stage I disease (N = 46 826; RATS = 4338, VATS = 13 416 and OPEN = 29 072), the mean lymph nodes examined were 10.6, 10.8 and 9.4 (P < 0.01), and upstaging rates were 10.8%, 11.1% and 12.1% (P < 0.01), respectively. A multivariable analysis suggested an association with improved survival with RATS and VATS compared with OPEN surgery [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.89 and 0.89, respectively; P < 0.01] for patients with all stages. In stage I disease, VATS but not RATS was associated with increased overall survival compared with the OPEN approach (HR = 0.81; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:RATS lobectomy is not superior to VATS lobectomy with respect to lymph node yield or upstaging of NSCLC. Increased nodal upstaging by the OPEN approach does not confer a survival advantage in any stage of NSCLC and may be associated with decreased overall survival.
Authors: Walter J Scott; Mark S Allen; Gail Darling; Bryan Meyers; Paul A Decker; Joe B Putnam; Robert W McKenna; Rodney J Landrenau; David R Jones; Richard I Inculet; Richard A Malthaner Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2010-02-20 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Paul C Lee; Mohamed Kamel; Abu Nasar; Galal Ghaly; Jeffrey L Port; Subroto Paul; Brendon M Stiles; Weston G Andrews; Nasser K Altorki Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2015-12-02 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Herbert Decaluwé; Johnny Moons; Steffen Fieuws; Walter De Wever; Christophe Deroose; Alessia Stanzi; Lieven Depypere; Kristiaan Nackaerts; Johan Coolen; Maarten Lambrecht; Eric Verbeken; Dirk De Ruysscher; Johan Vansteenkiste; Dirk Van Raemdonck; Paul De Leyn; Christophe Dooms Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2018-07-01 Impact factor: 4.191