| Literature DB >> 36071757 |
Zenan Gu1, Jia Huang1, Yu Tian1, Long Jiang1, Qingquan Luo1.
Abstract
Background: The pursuit of less surgical incisions brings better postoperative experience of patients and earns extensive popularity recently. As the update to the da Vinci robotic surgical system has reduced the size of the robotic arm, a new surgical method with fewer ports has become feasible. We performed 20 cases of robotic surgery with only 2 ports and compared the efficacy and safety between bi-port robotic-assisted lobectomy and multi-port robotic-assisted lobectomy.Entities:
Keywords: Lung cancer; bi-ports; lobectomy; lung cancer; robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS)
Year: 2022 PMID: 36071757 PMCID: PMC9442526 DOI: 10.21037/jtd-22-1003
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Thorac Dis ISSN: 2072-1439 Impact factor: 3.005
Figure 1Bi-port robotic-assisted lobectomy.
Figure 2Multi-port robotic-assisted lobectomy.
Baseline characteristics of patients who underwent bi-port RATS and multi-port RATS
| Baseline characteristics | Bi-port RATS (n=20) | Multi-port RATS (n=40) | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 58.5±11.1 | 60.4±8.6 | 0.480 | |
| Gender | χ2=0.848 | 0.357 | ||
| Male | 7 (35.0) | 19 (47.5) | ||
| Female | 13 (65.0) | 21 (52.5) | ||
| Hypertension | 0.238 | |||
| Positive | 2 (10.0) | 9 (22.5) | ||
| Negative | 18 (90.0) | 31 (77.5) | ||
| Diabetes | ||||
| Positive | 1 (5.0) | 4 (10.0) | 0.656 | |
| Negative | 19 (95.0) | 36 (90.0) | ||
| Tumor location | 0.056 | |||
| RUL | 5 (25.0) | 22 (55.0) | ||
| RML | 2 (10.0) | 5 (12.5) | ||
| RLL | 6 (30.0) | 3 (7.5) | ||
| LUL | 3 (15.0) | 1 (2.5) | ||
| LLL | 3 (15.0) | 8 (20.0) | ||
| RUL and RML | 1 (5.0) | 1 (2.5) | ||
| Max tumor diameter (cm) | 2.0±1.0 | 1.9±0.9 | 0.711 | |
| pTNM stage | 0.808 | |||
| IA | 14 (70.0) | 31 (77.5) | ||
| IB | 3 (15.0) | 3 (7.5) | ||
| IIA | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | ||
| IIB | 0 (0) | 1 (2.5) | ||
| IIIA | 0 (0) | 1 (2.5) | ||
| Other | 3 (15.0) | 4 (10.0) | ||
| Histology | 0.282 | |||
| Atypic Hyperplasia | 1 (5.0) | 0 (0) | ||
| AIS | 0 (0) | 1 (2.5) | ||
| MIA | 3 (15.0) | 4 (10.0) | ||
| IAC | 14 (70.0) | 28 (70.0) | ||
| Other | 2 (10.0) | 2 (5.0) | ||
| Squamous cell carcinoma | 0 (0) | 3 (7.5) | ||
| Granuloma | 0 (0) | 2 (5.0) |
Age and maximum tumor diameter are presented as mean ± standard deviation; Gender, hypertension, diabetes, tumor location, pTNM stage, histology are presented as number (percentage). RATS, robotic-assisted thoracic surgery; RUL, right upper lobe; RML, right middle lobe; RLL, right lower lobe; LUL, left upper lobe; LLL, left lower lobe; AIS, adenocarcinoma in situs; MIA, micro invasive adenocarcinoma; IAC, invasive adenocarcinoma.
Perioperative outcome of patients who underwent bi-port RATS and multi-port RATS
| Perioperative data | Bi-port RATS | Multi-port RATS | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chest tube drainage (mL) | 459.5±262.8 | 673.4±508.0 | 0.084 | |
| NRS pain score | 2.9±1.0 | 2.6±1.0 | 0.525 | |
| Chest drain removal (d) | 4.3±1.0 | 5.05±1.3 | 0.071 | |
| Complication | ||||
| Fever | 6 (30.0) | 5 (12.5) | χ2=1.055 | 0.304 |
| Subcutaneous emphysema | 2 (10.0) | 4 (10.0) | 1.000 | |
| Recurrent laryngeal nerve injury | 0 | 0 | ||
| Atelectasis | 0 | 4 (10.0) | ||
| Chylothorax | 0 | 0 | ||
| Operation duration (min) | 95.6±21.4 | 101.4±25.0 | 0.328 | |
| Blood loss (mL) | 60.0±20.5 | 65.0±30.4 | 0.442 |
Chest tube drainage, NRS pain score, chest drain removal are presented as mean ± standard deviation; complications are presented as numbers (percentages). RATS, robotic-assisted thoracic surgery; NRS, numerical rating scale.
Lymphadenectomy outcomes of patients underwent bi-port RATS and multi-port RATS
| Variables | Bi-port RATS | Multi-port RATS |
| P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lymph node dissected (station) | 6.0±1.4 | 6.1±1.6 | 0.049 | 0.981 |
| Max lymph node diameter (cm) | 1.2±0.4 | 1.2±0.5 | 0.155 | 0.977 |
Dissected lymph node stations and max lymph node diameter are presented as mean ± standard. RATS, robotic-assisted thoracic surgery.