Dataset Information

Robotic-assisted Esophagectomy vs Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy (REVATE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Radical lymph node dissection (LND) along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) is surgically demanding and can be associated with substantial postoperative morbidity. The question of whether robot-assisted esophagectomy (RE) might be superior to video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (VATE) for performing LND along the RLN in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains open.

Methods/design

We will conduct a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial (Robotic-assisted Esophagectomy vs Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy (REVATE)) enrolling patients with ESCC scheduled to undergo LND along the RLN. Patients will be randomly assigned to either RE or VATE. The primary outcome measure will be the rate of unsuccessful LND along the left RLN, which will be defined as: failure to remove lymph nodes along the left RLN (i.e., no identifiable nodes on pathology reports); or occurrence of permanent (duration > 6 months) left RLN palsy following LND. Secondary outcomes will include the number of successfully removed RLN nodes, postoperative recovery, length of hospital stay, 30-day and 90-day mortality, quality of life, and oncological outcomes.

Discussion

The REVATE study provides an opportunity to explore whether RE could facilitate LND along the left RLN-a complex surgical procedure that, as of now and with the use of VATE, remains difficult to perform and associated with a significant burden of morbidity.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03713749 . Registered on 22 October 2018.

SUBMITTER: Chao YK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6558787 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Robotic-assisted Esophagectomy vs Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy (REVATE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Chao Yin-Kai YK Li Zhi-Gang ZG Wen Yu-Wen YW Kim Dae-Joon DJ Park Seong-Yong SY Chang Yu-Ling YL van der Sluis Pieter C PC Ruurda Jelle P JP van Hillegersberg Richard R

Trials 20190610 1

<h4>Background</h4>Radical lymph node dissection (LND) along the left recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) is surgically demanding and can be associated with substantial postoperative morbidity. The question of whether robot-assisted esophagectomy (RE) might be superior to video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (VATE) for performing LND along the RLN in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains open.<h4>Methods/design</h4>We will conduct a multicenter, open-label, randomized ...[more]

PMID: 31182150

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRetrospective data demonstrates that robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery provides many benefits, such as decreased postoperative pain, lower mortality, shorter length of stay, shorter chest tube duration, and reductions in the incidence of common postoperative pulmonary complications, when compared to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Despite the potential benefits of robotic surgery, there are two major barriers against its widespread adoption in thoracic surgery: lack of high-quality prospective data, and the perceived higher cost of it. Therefore, in the face of these barriers, a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing robotic- to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is needed. The RAVAL trial is a two-phase, international, multi-centered, blinded, parallel, randomized controlled trial that is comparing robotic- to video-assisted lobectomy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer that has been enrolling patients since 2016.MethodsThe RAVAL trial will be conducted in two phases: Phase A will enroll 186 early-stage non-small cell lung cancer patients who are candidates for minimally invasive pulmonary lobectomy; while Phase B will continue to recruit until 592 patients are enrolled. After consent, participants will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either robotic- or video-assisted lobectomy, and blinded to the type of surgery they are allocated to. Health-related quality of life questionnaires will be administered at baseline, postoperative day 1, weeks 3, 7, 12, months 6, 12, 18, 24, and years 3, 4, 5. The primary objective of the RAVAL trial is to determine the difference in patient-reported health-related quality of life outcomes between the robotic- and video-assisted lobectomy groups at 12 weeks. Secondary objectives include determining the differences in cost-effectiveness, and in the 5-year survival data between the two arms. The results of the primary objective will be reported once Phase A has completed accrual and the 12-month follow-ups are completed. The results of the secondary objectives will be reported once Phase B has completed accrual and the 5-year follow-ups are completed.DiscussionIf successfully completed, the RAVAL Trial will have studied patient-reported outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and survival of robotic- versus video-assisted lobectomy in a prospective, randomized, blinded fashion in an international setting.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02617186. Registered 22-September-2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02617186.

Project description:BackgroundThe long-term survival and perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted lobectomy (RAL) and video-assisted lobectomy (VAL) in resectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) were found to be comparable in retrospective studies, but they have not been investigated in a randomized trial setting. We conducted the RVlob trial to investigate if RAL was non-inferior to VAL in patients with resectable NSCLC.MethodsIn this single-center, open-label, and parallel-arm randomized controlled trial conducted in Ruijin Hospital (Shanghai, China) between May 2017 and May 2020, we randomly assigned patients with resectable NSCLC in a 1:1 ratio to receive either RAL or VAL. One of the primary endpoints was 3-year overall survival. Secondary endpoints included 3-year disease-free survival. The Kaplan-Meier approach was used to calculate overall survival and disease-free survival at 3 years. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03134534.FindingsA total of 320 patients were randomized to receive RAL (n = 157) or VAL (n = 163). The baseline characteristics of patients were well balanced between the two groups. After a median follow-up of 58.0 months, the 3-year overall survival was 94.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.0-98.3) in the RAL group and 91.5% (95% CI, 87.2-96.0) in the VAL group (hazard ratio [HR] for death, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.33-1.28; P = 0.21); noninferiority of RAL was confirmed according to the predefined margin of -5% (absolute difference, 2.96%; a one-sided 90% CI, -1.39% to ∞; P = 0.0029 for noninferiority). The 3-year disease-free survival was 88.7% (95% CI, 83.6-94.1) in the RAL group and 85.4% (95% CI, 80.0-91.2) in the VAL group (HR for disease recurrence or death, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.50-1.52; P = 0.62).InterpretationThis study is the first randomized trial to show that RAL resulted in non-inferior overall survival compared with VAL in patients with resectable NSCLC. Based on our results, RAL is an equally oncologically effective treatment and can be considered as an alternative to VAL for resectable NSCLC.FundingNational Natural Science Foundation of China (82072557), National Key Research and Development Program of China (2021YFC2500900), Shanghai Municipal Education Commission-Gaofeng Clinical Medicine Grant (20172005, the 2nd round of disbursement), program of Shanghai Academic Research Leader from Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality (20XD1402300), Novel Interdisciplinary Research Project from Shanghai Municipal Health Commission (2022JC023), and Interdisciplinary Program of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (YG2023ZD04).

Project description:ObjectiveAnatomical segmentectomy has been proven to be a viable surgical treatment for small-size peripheral lung nodules. Three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction computed tomography (CT) has been proposed as an effective approach to overcome the challenges of encountering pulmonary anatomical variations when performing segmentectomy. Therefore, to further investigate the usefulness of preoperative 3D reconstruction CT in segmentectomy, we will conduct this prospective, multicenter randomized controlled DRIVATS study to compare the use of 3D reconstruction CT with standard chest CT in video-assisted segmentectomy (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04004494).MethodsThis study began in July 2019 and a total of 190 patients will be accrued from three clinical centers within 4 years. The main inclusion criteria are patients with a single peripheral nodule 0.8-2 cm with at least one of the following requirements: (i) histology of adenocarcinoma in situ; (ii) nodule has ≥50% ground-glass appearance on CT; (iii) radiologic surveillance confirms a long doubling time (≥400 days). Surgical procedures include segmental resection of the lesion and mediastinal lymph node sampling (subsegmental resection or combined subsegmental resection will not be included in this study). The primary endpoint is operative time. The secondary endpoints include incidence of change of surgical plan, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate, operative accident event, incidence of postoperative complications, postoperative hospital stay, length of hospitalization, duration of chest tube placement, postoperative 30-day mortality, dissection of lymph nodes, overall survival, disease-free survival, preoperative lung function, and postoperative lung function.DiscussionThis multicenter DRIVATS study aims to verify the usefulness of preoperative 3D reconstruction CT compared with standard chest CT in segmentectomy. If successfully completed, this multicenter prospective study will provide a higher level of evidence for the use of 3D reconstruction CT in segmentectomy.

Dataset Information

Robotic-assisted Esophagectomy vs Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy (REVATE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Background

Methods/design

Discussion

Trial registration

Publications

Robotic-assisted Esophagectomy vs Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Esophagectomy (REVATE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets