Tong Qiu1, Yandong Zhao1, Yunpeng Xuan1, Yi Qin1, Zejun Niu2, Yi Shen1, Wenjie Jiao3. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China. 2. Department of Anesthesia, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China. 3. Department of Thoracic Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China. Electronic address: jiaowj@qduhospital.cn.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the surgical and oncologic outcomes of robotic sleeve lobectomy in comparison with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and open surgery. METHODS: Surgical outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer who underwent sleeve lobectomy via robotic, VATS, and thoracotomy were assessed using the χ2 test, Fisher exact test, and the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. Log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model were used in survival analyses. Propensity score-weighted matching was used to achieve the balance of baseline among the 3 groups. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2017, 188 patients were included and divided into robotic (n = 49), VATS (n = 73), and open (n = 66) groups. After weighted matching that retained all patients, no statistical difference in 90-day mortality or morbidity among the 3 groups was shown. Patients in the robotic group had less bleeding loss (P < .001), operative time (P < .001), and tube drainage time (P < .001) than the other 2 groups. No positive bronchial margin or conversion presented in the robotic group. In multivariable analyses, surgical technique was independently associated with neither overall survival nor disease-free survival (P > .050). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic sleeve lobectomy is a safe, feasible, and effective procedure. Compared with VATS and open techniques, robotic sleeve lobectomy has a similar oncologic prognosis for patients with centrally located non-small cell lung cancer. Further studies with a larger sample size and long-term follow-up are needed.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the surgical and oncologic outcomes of robotic sleeve lobectomy in comparison with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and open surgery. METHODS: Surgical outcomes in patients with non-small cell lung cancer who underwent sleeve lobectomy via robotic, VATS, and thoracotomy were assessed using the χ2 test, Fisher exact test, and the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test. Log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards model were used in survival analyses. Propensity score-weighted matching was used to achieve the balance of baseline among the 3 groups. RESULTS: Between 2012 and 2017, 188 patients were included and divided into robotic (n = 49), VATS (n = 73), and open (n = 66) groups. After weighted matching that retained all patients, no statistical difference in 90-day mortality or morbidity among the 3 groups was shown. Patients in the robotic group had less bleeding loss (P < .001), operative time (P < .001), and tube drainage time (P < .001) than the other 2 groups. No positive bronchial margin or conversion presented in the robotic group. In multivariable analyses, surgical technique was independently associated with neither overall survival nor disease-free survival (P > .050). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic sleeve lobectomy is a safe, feasible, and effective procedure. Compared with VATS and open techniques, robotic sleeve lobectomy has a similar oncologic prognosis for patients with centrally located non-small cell lung cancer. Further studies with a larger sample size and long-term follow-up are needed.
Authors: Tao Shaolin; Feng Yonggeng; Kang Poming; Mei Longyong; Shen Cheng; Fang Chunshu; Wu Licheng; Tan Qunyou; Deng Bo Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2021 Jan-Dec
Authors: Ji Hyeon Park; Samina Park; Chang Hyun Kang; Bub Se Na; So Young Bae; Kwon Joong Na; Hyun Joo Lee; In Kyu Park; Young Tae Kim Journal: J Chest Surg Date: 2022-02-05