Dataset Information

Robotic and video-assisted lobectomy/segmentectomy for non-small cell lung cancer have similar perioperative outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT:

Background

At present, the clinical conclusion that robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS), which is better for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is not clear. Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes between RATS and VATS for NSCLC.

Methods

The Population, Interventions, Comparators, Outcomes, and Study design (PICOS) framework was employed to develop the search strategy, and the findings was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. We searched EMbase, The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wan Fang Data to collect clinical studies about RATS vs. VATS for patients with NSCLC from inception to October 2019. The following outcomes were measured: rate of conversion to thoracotomy, postoperative complications, postoperative hospital mortality, lymph node dissection, hospitalization time, operating time, and postoperative drainage days. Estimation of potential publication bias was conducted by Begg’s test and Egger’s test. The Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) and Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using Stata 15.0 software.

Results

A total of 18 studies involving 60,349 patients were included. Among them, 8,726 cases were in the RATS group, and 51,623 were in the VATS group. The results of meta-analysis showed that the operation time of RATS group was longer than that of VATS group (SMD=0.532, 95% CI: 0.391–0.674, P=0.000). And the further meta-analysis suggested that the incidence of postoperative complications was lower in patients who underwent RATS after 2015 (OR=0.848, 95% CI: 0.748–0.962, P=0.010). Meanwhile, there was no significant difference between both groups in postoperative hospitalization time (SMD=0.003, 95% CI: −0.104–0.110, P=0.957). In addition, more lymph nodes were retrieved in RATS group than VATS (SMD=0.308, 95% CI: 0.131–0.486, P=0.001). However, the conversion rate, retrieved lymph node station, days to tube removal and in-hospital mortality rate have no significant differences between both groups.

Discussion

The current meta-analysis indicates that the perioperative outcomes of RATS and VATS for NSCLC are equivalence. Due to the limited quantity and quality of included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high-quality studies.

SUBMITTER: Mao J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8798077 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRobotic anatomic segmentectomy (RATS) for early-stage lung cancer is being increasingly performed in spite of limited published evidence. To evaluate its safety and oncologic efficacy, we compared the outcomes of both RATS and video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) segmentectomy in patients with small-sized (<2 cm) peripheral stage IA lung cancer.MethodsFrom November 2011 to January 2018, a total of 130 patients with resected stage IA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who underwent RATS (n=50) and VATS (n=80) pulmonary segmentectomy were included. Clinicopathologic data, recurrence rate, and survival were recorded.ResultsThe demographics, pulmonary function, comorbidity, and tumor size were similar between RATS segmentectomy and VATS segmentectomy. The surgery time, intensive care unit stay, hospital stay, and blood loss were reduced in the RATS group compared to the VATS group. The number of totally dissected lymph nodes and postoperative complications were similar between the 2 groups. There was no operative mortality. The intensity of narcotic use during hospital stay and the time to return to routine daily activities were also reduced in the RATS group. There was no recurrence observed in the RATS group during the median 38-month follow-up period; meanwhile, during a median 85-month follow-up period in the VATS group, local recurrence and distant recurrence was observed in 2 patients (2.5%) and 3 patients (3.75%) respectively. There was no significant difference in the 5-year recurrence-free survival between the RATS and VATS groups (100% vs. 93.75%; P>0.05).ConclusionsRATS can be performed safely and effectively in patients with early-stage NSCLC. The reduced narcotic use and earlier return to routine daily activities of RATS patients might reflect its less traumatic nature as compared to VATS. For stage IA disease with small tumors (<2 cm), segmentectomy performed by RATS has better oncologic efficacy when compared to VATS, although in this study, this difference did not reach statistical difference.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The morbidity of lung cancer has long been the highest in cancer. Stage I, stage II and partly of stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are mainly treated by surgery. Lobectomy and segmentectomy both are common lung resection methods. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has been widely used in clinical, and the application of single-portvideo-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (SP VATS) has gradually been recognized and accepted by professors. With increasing degree of eldly in society, eldly patients already have become inceasingly difficulties in the diagnosis and treatment of NSCLC. The aim of this study is to explore and analyze clinical value of SP VATS lobectomy and segmentectomy in elderly patients with NSCLC. METHODS:In this retrospective observational study, the outcomes of 417 consecutive patients who had undergone SP VATS anatomic segmentectomy or lobectomy for NSCLC from May 2014 to December 2016 on department of thoracic surgery in Fujian Medical University Affiliated Union Hospital were examined, including 139 elderly-case (lobectomy vs segmentectomy: 124 vs 15) and 278 nonelderly-case (lobectomy vs segmentectomy: 248 vs 30). The condition of perioperative period and postoperative short-time recovery could be compared with lobectomy and segmentectomy between elderly and nonelderly cases and lobectomy and segmentectomy in elderly cases. RESULTS:The morbidty of preoperative complications was significant difference (P<0.05) in comparing with elderly and non-elderly patients with NSCLC either in SP VATS anatomic segmentectomy orlobectomy, except others is no significant difference (P>0.05). Numbers of dissected lymph nodes and mediastinal nodal stations of SP VATS lobectomy in elderly patients with NSCLC were more than segmentectomy (P<0.05), which were (7.61±0.21) vs (20.39±0.97) and (5.60±0.35) vs (15.40±2.64). But there was not significant difference between two elderly groups of SP VATS lobectomy and anatomic segmentectomy in age, morbidty of preoperative complications, average operation time and intraoperative blood loss (P>0.05). Postoperative drainage volume [(1,150.15±140.02) mL vs (853.53±177.04) mL] and duration [(7.00±1.31) d vs (5.00±0.74) d], duration of postoperative hospital stay [(3.18±1.32) d vs (5.04±1.30) d], costs [(70.06±5.23) thousands yuan vs (61.20±5.22) thousands yuan ] or postoperative complications (5.97% vs 20.00%)(P>0.05). Notwithstanding, group of SP VATS anatomic segmentectomy found more postoperative atrialfibrillation and the vein thrombosis of lower limbs (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS:Elderly patients having more basic diseases and taking increasely risk of postoperative complications. SP VATS anatomic segmentectomy andlobectomy do not increase the risk of elderly patients with surgery. SP VATS segmentectomy is as safe and effective as SP VATS lobectomy in elderly patients, who fit to undergo SP VATS segmentectomy seem to get as same short-time effect as SP VATS lobectomy.

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:BackgroundTo address the US Food and Drug Administration's recent safety concern on robotic surgery procedures, we compared short- and long-term mortality for stage I non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated by robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgical lobectomy (RATS-L) vs video-assisted thoracoscopic surgical lobectomy (VATS-L).MethodsFrom the National Cancer Database, we identified 18 908 stage I NSCLC patients who underwent RATS-L or VATS-L as the primary operation from 2010 to 2014. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for short- and long-term mortality using unmatched and propensity score-matched analyses. All statistical tests were 2-sided.ResultsPatients treated by RATS-L had higher 90-day mortality than those with VATS-L (6.6% vs 3.8%, P = .03) if conversion to open thoracotomy occurred. After excluding first-year observation, multiple regression analyses showed RATS-L was associated with increased long-term mortality, compared with VATS-L, in cases with tumor size 20 mm or less: hazard ratio (HR) = 1.33 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.15 to 1.55), HR = 1.36 (95% CI = 1.17 to 1.58), and HR = 1.33 (95% CI = 1.11 to 1.61) for unmatched, N:1 matched, and 1:1 matched analyses, respectively, in the intention-to-treat analysis. Among patients without conversion to an open thoracotomy, the respective hazard ratios were 1.19 (95% CI = 1.10 to 1.29), 1.19 (95% CI = 1.10 to 1.29), and 1.17 (95% CI = 1.06 to 1.29). Similar associations were observed when follow-up time started 18 or 24 months postsurgery. No statistically significant mortality difference was found for patients with tumor size of greater than 20 mm. These associations were not related to case volume of VATS-L or RATS-L performed at treatment institutes.ConclusionsPatients with small (≤20 mm) stage I NSCLC treated with RATS-L had statistically significantly higher long-term mortality risk than VATS-L after 1 year postsurgery.

Project description:BackgroundIt remains no clear conclusion about which is better between robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the short-term and long-term efficacy between RATS and VATS for NSCLC.MethodsPubmed, Cochrane Library, Embase, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Medline, and Web of Science databases were comprehensively searched for studies published before December 2020. The quality of the articles was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and the data analyzed using the Review Manager 5.3 software. Fixed or random effect models were applied according to heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were conducted.ResultsA total of 18 studies including 11,247 patients were included in the meta-analyses, of which 5114 patients were in the RATS group and 6133 in the VATS group. Compared with VATS, RATS was associated with less blood loss (WMD = - 50.40, 95% CI -90.32 ~ - 10.48, P = 0.010), lower conversion rate (OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.43 ~ 0.60, P < 0.001), more harvested lymph nodes (WMD = 1.72, 95% CI 0.63 ~ 2.81, P = 0.002) and stations (WMD = 0.51, 95% CI 0.15 ~ 0.86, P = 0.005), shorter duration of postoperative chest tube drainage (WMD = - 0.61, 95% CI -0.78 ~ - 0.44, P < 0.001) and hospital stay (WMD = - 1.12, 95% CI -1.58 ~ - 0.66, P < 0.001), lower overall complication rate (OR = 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 ~ 0.99, P = 0.020), lower recurrence rate (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.36 ~ 0.72, P < 0.001), and higher cost (WMD = 3909.87 USD, 95% CI 3706.90 ~ 4112.84, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference between RATS and VATS in operative time, mortality, overall survival (OS), and disease-free survival (DFS). Sensitivity analysis showed that no significant differences were found between the two techniques in conversion rate, number of harvested lymph nodes and stations, and overall complication.ConclusionsThe results revealed that RATS is a feasible and safe technique compared with VATS in terms of short-term and long-term outcomes. Moreover, more randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques with rigorous study designs are still essential to evaluate the value of robotic surgery for NSCLC.