Kook Nam Han1, Jun Hee Lee1, Jeong In Hong1, Hyun Koo Kim2. 1. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 148, Gurodong-ro, Guro-gu, Seoul, 08308, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Guro Hospital, Korea University College of Medicine, 148, Gurodong-ro, Guro-gu, Seoul, 08308, Republic of Korea. kimhyunkoo@korea.ac.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted lobectomy has been used to treat non-small cell lung cancer and usually uses 3 or 4 ports and 3 or 4 robotic arms. We recently developed a two-port approach for robotic lobectomy using three robotic arms and performed a propensity score-matched analysis to compare the feasibility of the two-port and three-port techniques. METHODS: Data on robotic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were matched using propensity score based on age, sex, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, forced expiratory volume per 1 s, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, clinical stage, lobe involved, tumor size, and cell types. Overall, 53 and 89 patients who underwent the two-port and three-port approaches, respectively, were matched (1:1 ratio; caliper distance, 0.2). We analyzed the perioperative outcomes and postoperative pain to evaluate the feasibility and safety. RESULTS: The matched group included 37 patients each who underwent two-port and three-port robotic lobectomy. The operation time was shorter in the two-port group (P = .01). The number of lymph nodes resected (P = .70), conversion to multiport or thoracotomy (P > .99), morbidity and mortality (P = .31), drain indwelling time (P = .32), and hospital stay (P = .11) were not significantly different between the groups. The postoperative pain was less at 0-3 postoperative days (P < .01) in the two-port group. The total medical cost was not markedly increased after transitioning to the two-port technique. CONCLUSIONS: Two-port approach in robotic lobectomy is a safe and feasible alternative approach for treating non-small cell lung cancer.
BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted lobectomy has been used to treat non-small cell lung cancer and usually uses 3 or 4 ports and 3 or 4 robotic arms. We recently developed a two-port approach for robotic lobectomy using three robotic arms and performed a propensity score-matched analysis to compare the feasibility of the two-port and three-port techniques. METHODS: Data on robotic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were matched using propensity score based on age, sex, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, forced expiratory volume per 1 s, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, clinical stage, lobe involved, tumor size, and cell types. Overall, 53 and 89 patients who underwent the two-port and three-port approaches, respectively, were matched (1:1 ratio; caliper distance, 0.2). We analyzed the perioperative outcomes and postoperative pain to evaluate the feasibility and safety. RESULTS: The matched group included 37 patients each who underwent two-port and three-port robotic lobectomy. The operation time was shorter in the two-port group (P = .01). The number of lymph nodes resected (P = .70), conversion to multiport or thoracotomy (P > .99), morbidity and mortality (P = .31), drain indwelling time (P = .32), and hospital stay (P = .11) were not significantly different between the groups. The postoperative pain was less at 0-3 postoperative days (P < .01) in the two-port group. The total medical cost was not markedly increased after transitioning to the two-port technique. CONCLUSIONS: Two-port approach in robotic lobectomy is a safe and feasible alternative approach for treating non-small cell lung cancer.
Authors: Franca M A Melfi; Gian Franco Menconi; A Massimo Mariani; Carlo Alberto Angeletti Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Giulia Veronesi; Domenico Galetta; Patrick Maisonneuve; Franca Melfi; Ralph Alexander Schmid; Alessandro Borri; Fernando Vannucci; Lorenzo Spaggiari Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-12-28 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Gaetano Rocco; Eveline Internullo; Stephen D Cassivi; Dirk Van Raemdonck; Mark K Ferguson Journal: Thorac Surg Clin Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 1.750
Authors: Rishindra M Reddy; Madhu Lalitha Gorrepati; Daniel S Oh; Shilpa Mehendale; Michael F Reed Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2018-04-25 Impact factor: 4.330