Cost-effectiveness evaluation of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus open thoracotomy and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for operable non-small cell lung cancer

Robotic Versus Thoracoscopic Sub-lobar Resection for Octogenarians with Clinical Stage IA Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Propensity Score-Matched Real-World Study

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive sub-lobectomy is sufficient in treating small early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, comparison of the feasibility and oncologic efficacy between robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in performing sub-lobectomy for early-stage NSCLC patients age 80 years or older is scarce.

METHODS

Octogenarians with clinical stage IA NSCLC (tumor size, ≤ 2 cm) undergoing minimally invasive wedge resection or segmentectomy at Shanghai Chest Hospital from 2011 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Propensity score-matching (PSM) with a RATS versus VATS ratio of 1:4 was performed. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The study identified 594 patients (48 RATS and 546 VATS patients), and PSM resulted in 45 cases in the RATS group and 180 cases in the VATS group. The RATS patients experienced less intraoperative bleeding (60 mL [interquartile range (IQR), 50-100 mL] vs. 80 mL [IQR, 50-100 mL]; P = 0.027) and a shorter postoperative hospital stay (4 days [IQR, 3-5 days] vs. 5 days [IQR, 4-6 days]; P = 0.041) than the VATS patients. The two surgical approaches were comparable concerning other perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications (20.00% vs. 26.11%; P = 0.396). Additionally, during a median follow-up period of 66 months, RATS and VATS achieved comparable 5-year overall survival (90.48% vs. 87.93%; P = 0.891), recurrence-free survival (83.37% vs. 83.18%; P = 0.782), and cumulative incidence of death. Further subgroup comparison also demonstrated comparable long-term outcomes between the two approaches. Finally, multivariate Cox analysis indicated that the surgical approach was not independently correlated with long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The RATS approach shortened the postoperative hospital stay, reduced intraoperative bleeding by a statistically notable but clinically insignificant amount, and achieved long-term outcomes comparable with VATS in performing sub-lobectomy for octogenarians with early-stage small NSCLC.

A systematic review of full economic evaluations of robotic-assisted surgery in thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures

This study aims to conduct a systematic review of full economic analyses of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in adults' thoracic and abdominopelvic indications. Authors used Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed to conduct a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Fully published economic articles in English were included. Methodology and reporting quality were assessed using standardized tools. Majority of studies (28/33) were on oncology procedures. Radical prostatectomy was the most reported procedure (16/33). Twenty-eight studies used quality-adjusted life years, and five used complication rates as outcomes. Nine used primary and 24 studies used secondary data. All studies used modeling. In 81% of studies (27/33), RAS was cost-effective or potentially cost-effective compared to comparator procedures, including radical prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy. Societal perspective, longer-term time-horizon, and larger volumes favored RAS. Cost-drivers were length of stay and equipment cost. From societal and payer perspectives, robotic-assisted surgery is a cost-effective strategy for thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures.Clinical trial registration This study is a systematic review with no intervention, not a clinical trial.

Robotic Lobectomy Is Cost-effective and Provides Comparable Health Utility Scores to Video-assisted Lobectomy: Early Results of the RAVAL Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine if robotic-assisted lobectomy (RPL-4) is cost-effective and offers improved patient-reported health utility for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer when compared with video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy (VATS-lobectomy).

BACKGROUND

Barriers against the adoption of RPL-4 in publicly funded health care include the paucity of high-quality prospective trials and the perceived high cost of robotic surgery.

METHODS

Patients were enrolled in a blinded, multicentered, randomized controlled trial in Canada, the United States, and France, and were randomized 1:1 to either RPL-4 or VATS-lobectomy. EuroQol 5 Dimension 5 Level (EQ-5D-5L) was administered at baseline and postoperative day 1; weeks 3, 7, 12; and months 6 and 12. Direct and indirect costs were tracked using standard methods. Seemingly Unrelated Regression was applied to estimate the cost effect, adjusting for baseline health utility. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was generated by 10,000 bootstrap samples with multivariate imputation by chained equations.

RESULTS

Of 406 patients screened, 186 were randomized, and 164 analyzed after the final eligibility review (RPL-4: n=81; VATS-lobectomy: n=83). Twelve-month follow-up was completed by 94.51% (155/164) of participants. The median age was 68 (60-74). There were no significant differences in body mass index, comorbidity, pulmonary function, smoking status, baseline health utility, or tumor characteristics between arms. The mean 12-week health utility score was 0.85 (0.10) for RPL-4 and 0.80 (0.19) for VATS-lobectomy ( P =0.02). Significantly more lymph nodes were sampled [10 (8-13) vs 8 (5-10); P =0.003] in the RPL-4 arm. The incremental cost/quality-adjusted life year of RPL-4 was $14,925.62 (95% CI: $6843.69, $23,007.56) at 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Early results of the RAVAL trial suggest that RPL-4 is cost-effective and associated with comparable short-term patient-reported health utility scores when compared with VATS-lobectomy.

Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic versus open distal gastrectomy for locally advanced gastric cancer: a prospective trial-based economic evaluation

IMPORTANCE

It is largely unclear whether robotic distal gastrectomy (RDG) is cost-effective for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC).

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (LDG), and open distal gastrectomy (ODG) for patients with LAGC.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics. A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of RDG, LDG, and ODG.

EXPOSURES

RDG, LDG, and ODG.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

RESULTS

This pooled analysis of two randomized controlled trials included 449 patients: 117, 254, and 78 patients in the RDG, LDG, and ODG groups, respectively. After IPTW, RDG demonstrated its priority in terms of less blood loss, postoperative length, and complication rate (all P < 0.05). RDG also showed higher QOL with more cost, representing an ICER of $85,739.73 per QALY and $42,189.53 per QALY compared to LDG and ODG, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, RDG achieved the best cost-effectiveness for patients with LAGC only when the willingness-to-pay threshold was > $85,739.73 per QALY, which significantly exceeded 3 times Chinese per capita GDP. Furthermore, one of the most important factors was the indirect costs of robotic surgery in terms of the cost-effectiveness of RDG compared to that of LDG or ODG.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although improved short-term outcomes and QOL were seen in patients underwent RDG, the economic burden should be considered in the clinical decision-making regarding robotic surgery use for patients with LAGC. Our findings may vary in different health care settings and affordability. Trial registration CLASS-01 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, CT01609309) and FUGES-011 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03313700).

Cost-effectiveness of neoadjuvant pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy with adjuvant pembrolizumab for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer in the United States

Introduction

Perioperative (neoadjuvant and adjuvant) pembrolizumab has shown favorable efficacy in patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of this treatment from the perspective of the United States healthcare payers.

Methods

We established a Markov model to compare the cost-effectiveness of perioperative pembrolizumab with that of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in 21-day cycles, utilizing data from the phase 3 KEYNOTE-671 trial. Additional data were extracted from other publications or online sources. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness of the findings. A willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained was established. The main outcomes of this study were the measurement of QALYs, overall costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and net monetary benefit (NMB).

Results

During a 10-year time horizon, the total costs of perioperative pembrolizumab and the control treatment were $224,779.1 and $110,026.3, respectively. The QALYs were 4.19 and 2.97 for the two treatments, respectively, which led to an ICER of $94,222.29 per QALY gained. The NMB at the WTP threshold at $150,000 per QALY gained was $67,931.3. One-way sensitivity analysis identified the cost of pembrolizumab as the primary factor influencing cost-effectiveness. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a 97.7% probability of perioperative pembrolizumab being cost-effective at the WTP threshold.

Conclusions

From the perspective of the United States healthcare payers, perioperative pembrolizumab is a cost-effective treatment for patients with early-stage NSCLC.

Minimally Invasive Surgery in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Where Do We Stand?

In the last two decades, robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) has gained popularity as a minimally invasive surgical (MIS) alternative to multi- and uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). With this approach, the surgeon obviates the known drawbacks of conventional MIS, such as the reduced in-depth perception, hand-eye coordination, and freedom of motion of the instruments. Previous studies have shown that a robotic approach for operable lung cancer has treatment outcomes comparable to other MIS techniques such as multi-and uniportal VATS, but with less blood loss, a lower conversion rate to open surgery, better lymph node dissection rates, and improved ergonomics for the surgeon. The thoracic surgeon of the future is expected to perform more complex procedures. More patients will enter a multimodal treatment scheme making surgery more difficult due to severe inflammation. Furthermore, due to lung cancer screening programs, the number of patients presenting with operable smaller lung nodules in the periphery of the lung will increase. This, combined with the fact that segmentectomy is becoming an increasingly popular treatment for small peripheral lung lesions, indicates that the future thoracic surgeons need to have profound knowledge of segmental resections. New imaging techniques will help them to locate these lesions and to achieve a complete oncologic resection. Current robotic techniques exist to help the thoracic surgeon overcome these challenges. In this review, an update of the latest MIS approaches and nodule detection techniques will be given.

Short-term outcomes of robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for non-small cell lung cancer patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy: a single-center retrospective study

Background

Neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy has been increasingly applied to treat non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the comparison between robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) in the feasibility and oncological efficacy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy is scarce. This study aims to assess the superiorities of RATS over (VATS) concerning short-term outcomes in treating NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy.

Methods

NSCLC patients receiving RATS or VATS lobectomy following neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy at Shanghai Chest Hospital from 2019 to 2022 were retrospectively identified. Baseline clinical characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and survival profiles were analyzed.

Results

Forty-six NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy were included and divided into the RATS (n=15) and VATS (n=31) groups. The baseline clinical characteristics and induction-related adverse events were comparable between the two groups (all p>0.050). The 30-day mortality in the RATS and VATS groups were 0% and 3.23%, respectively (p=1.000). Patients undergoing RATS were associated with reduced surgical-related intensive unit care (ICU) stay than those receiving VATS (0.0 [0.0-0.0] vs. 0.0 [0.0-1.0] days, p=0.026). Moreover, RATS assessed more N1 LNs (6.27 ± 1.94 vs 4.90 ± 1.92, p=0.042) and LN stations (3.07 ± 1.03 vs 2.52 ± 0.57, p=0.038) compared with VATS. By comparison, no difference was found in surgical outcomes, pathological results, and postoperative complications between the RATS and VATS groups (all p>0.050). Finally, RATS and VATS achieved comparable one-year recurrence-free survival (82.96% vs. 85.23%, p=0.821) and the timing of central nervous system, LN, and bone recurrences (all p>0.050).

Conclusion

RATS is safe and feasible for NSCLC patients with neoadjuvant immunochemotherapy, reducing surgical-related ICU stay, assessing increased N1 LNs and stations, and achieving similar survival profiles to VATS.

The Uncomfortable Truth: Open Thoracotomy versus Minimally Invasive Surgery in Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

For decades, lung surgery in thoracic cancer has evolved in two ways: saving more parenchyma and being minimally invasive. Saving parenchyma is a fundamental principle of surgery. However, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is a matter of approach, so it has to do with advances in surgical techniques and tools. For example, MIS has become possible with the introduction of VATS (video-assisted thoracic surgery), and the development of tools has extended the indication of MIS. Especially, RATS (robot-assisted thoracic surgery) improved the quality of life for patients and the ergonomics of doctors. However, the dichotomous idea that the MIS is new and right but the open thoracotomy is old and useless may be inappropriate. In fact, MIS is exactly the same as a classic thoracotomy in that it removes the mass/parenchyma containing cancer and mediastinal lymph nodes. Therefore, in this study, we compare randomized-controlled trials about open thoracotomy and MIS to find out which surgical method is more helpful.

Propensity score-matched comparison of robotic- and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, and open lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer patients aged 75 years or older

Introduction

Although robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) has been widely applied in treating non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), its advantages remain unclear for very old patients. The present study compared the perioperative outcomes and survival profiles among RATS, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), and open lobectomy (OL), aiming to access the superiority of RATS for NSCLC patients aged ≥75 years.

Methods

Pathological IA-IIIB NSCLC patients aged ≥75 years who underwent RATS, VATS, or OL between June 2015 and June 2021 in Shanghai Chest Hospital were included. Propensity score matching (PSM, 1:1:1 RATS versus VATS versus OL) was based on 10 key prognostic factors. The primary endpoints were perioperative outcomes, and the secondary endpoints were disease-free (DFS), overall (OS), and cancer-specific survival (CS).

Results

A total of 504 cases (126 RATS, 200 VATS, and 178 OL) were enrolled, and PSM led to 97 cases in each group. The results showed that RATS led to: 1) the best surgical-related outcomes including the shortest operation duration (p <0.001) and the least blood loss (p <0.001); 2) the fastest postoperative recoveries including the shortest ICU stay (p = 0.004), chest tube drainage duration (p <0.001), and postoperative stay (p <0.001), and the most overall costs (p <0.001); 3) the lowest incidence of postoperative complications (p = 0.002), especially pneumonia (p <0.001). There was no difference in the resection margins, reoperation rates, intraoperative blood transfusion, and volume of chest tube drainage among the three groups. Moreover, RATS assessed more N1 (p = 0.009) and total (p = 0.007) lymph nodes (LNs) than VATS, while the three surgical approaches dissected similar numbers of N1, N2, and total LN stations and led to a comparable incidence of postoperative nodal upstaging. Finally, the three groups possessed comparable DFS, OS, and CS rates. Further subgroup analysis found no difference in DFS or OS among the three groups, and multivariable analysis showed that the surgical approach was not independently correlated with survival profiles.

Conclusion

RATS possessed the superiority in achieving better perioperative outcomes over VATS and OL in very old NSCLC patients, though the three surgical approaches achieved comparable survival outcomes.

Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery following neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer: A real-world prospective cohort study

Objective

Stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a heterogeneous group of diseases. For this subset of patients, clinical management is still under debate and prognosis remains poor so far. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery after neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy in stage III NSCLC.

Methods

A real-world prospective cohort study was performed in a single-center setting from April 2021 to May 2022. Patients who were diagnosed with resectable or potentially resectable stage IIIA–B NSCLC and received neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy followed by robotic-assisted thoracic surgery were enrolled. Pathological response to neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy, treatment-related adverse events, and surgical outcomes of these patients were evaluated.

Results

A total of 44 patients who underwent robotic-assisted thoracic surgery after three doses of neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy were included in this study. Of these, 36 of 44 (81.8%) patients had a major pathological response, and 26 (59.1%) had a pathological complete response based on pathological examination of surgical specimen. Eight patients (18.2%) suffered grade 3 treatment-related adverse events, including neutropenia (n = 4), increased aminotransferases (n = 3), anemia (n = 1), and cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation (n = 1). Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery was performed subsequently, and R0 resection was achieved in all patients. Only two (4.5%) patients required conversion to thoracotomy. Surgical complications occurred in five (11.4%) patients, including air leak (n = 3), chylothorax (n = 2), and surgical site infection (n = 1). There was no re-surgery or postoperative mortality within 90 days.

Conclusion

Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery following neoadjuvant chemoimmunotherapy showed good feasibility and safety in stage III NSCLC. It was not associated with unexpected perioperative morbidity or mortality and may be a promising therapeutic option in stage III NSCLC. These results need further confirmation by more large-scale clinical trials.

Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery improves perioperative outcomes in overweight and obese patients with non-small-cell lung cancer undergoing lobectomy: A propensity score matching analysis

Background

The effectiveness of robotic‐assisted lobectomy (RAL) for patients with non–small‐cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has not been fully evaluated.

Methods

This retrospective study compared the perioperative outcomes of NSCLC patients who underwent RAL and video‐assisted lobectomy (VAL) using propensity score matching (PSM) analysis. Subgroup analyses were then performed.

Results

A total of 822 NSCLC patients (359 RAL cases and 463 VAL cases) were included, and there were 292 patients in each group after PSM. Compared with the VAL group, the RAL group had a significantly higher number of lymph nodes (LNs) harvested (10 vs. 8, p < 0.001) and more LN stations examined (6 vs. 5, p < 0.001). The operative duration (95 minutes vs. 115 minutes, p < 0.001) and intraoperative estimated blood loss (65 mL vs. 80 mL, p < 0.001) were significantly reduced, and the drainage volume on postoperative day (POD) 1 (240 mL vs. 200 mL, p < 0.001) and hospitalization costs (¥81084.96 vs. ¥66142.55, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the RAL group. Subgroup analysis indicated that the incidence of postoperative complications (17.9% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.042) was significantly reduced in the RAL group for overweight and obese patients (body mass index [BMI] ≥24 kg/m²), which became insignificant in the BMI < 24 kg/m² subgroup (31.0% vs. 24.8%, p = 0.307).

Conclusion

RAL might have potential advantages in terms of lymph node assessment, reducing intraoperative blood loss, and shortening operation duration. Overweight and obese patients could benefit more from RAL because of reduced risk of postoperative complications.

Comparison of the perioperative outcomes between robotic-assisted thoracic surgery and video-assisted thoracic surgery in non-small cell lung cancer patients with different body mass index ranges

Background

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is the most common malignancy and one of the most common causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) has gradually become a prevalent surgical method for patients with NSCLC. Previous studies have found that body mass index (BMI) is associated with postoperative outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of RATS compared to video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) in the treatment of NSCLC with different BMI, in terms of perioperative outcomes.

Methods

The baseline and perioperative data, including BMI, of 849 NSCLC patients who underwent minimally invasive anatomic lung resections from August 2020 to April 2021 were retrospectively collected and analyzed. Propensity score matching analysis was applied to minimize potential bias between the two groups (VATS and RATS), and the perioperative outcomes were compared. Subgroup analysis was subsequently performed.

Results

Compared to VATS, RATS had more lymph nodes dissected {9 [inter-quartile range (IQR), 6–12] vs. 7 (IQR, 6–10), P<0.001}, a lower estimated bleeding volume [40 (IQR, 30–50) vs. 50 (IQR, 40–60) mL, P<0.001], and other better postoperative outcomes, but a higher cost of hospitalization [¥83,626 (IQR, 77,211–92,686) vs. ¥75,804 (IQR, 66,184–83,693), P<0.001]. Multivariable logistic regression analysis indicated that RATS (P=0.027) and increasing BMI (P=0.030) were associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of postoperative complications. Subgroup analysis indicated that the advantages of RATS may be more obvious in patients with a BMI of 24–28 kg/m², in which the RATS group had more lymph nodes dissected [9 (IQR, 6–12) vs. 7 (IQR, 5–10), P<0.001] and a decreased risk of total postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR), 0.443; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.212–0.924; P=0.030] compared to the VATS group.

Conclusions

Both, RATS and VATS can be safely applied for patients with NSCLC. Perioperative outcome parameters indicate advantages for RATS, however at a higher cost of hospitalization. The advantages of RATS might be more obvious in patients with a BMI of 24–28 kg/m².

Updated Evaluation of Robotic- and Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy or Segmentectomy for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives

Robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) are the two principal minimally invasive surgical approaches for patients with lung cancer. This study aimed at comparing the long-term and short-term outcomes of RATS and VATS for lung cancer.

Methods

A comprehensive search for studies that compared RATS versus VATS for lung cancer published until November 31, 2021, was conducted. Data on perioperative outcomes and oncologic outcomes were subjected to meta-analysis. PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched based on a defined search strategy to identify eligible studies before November 2021.

Results

Twenty-six studies comparing 45,733 patients (14,271 and 31,462 patients who underwent RATS and VATS, respectively) were included. The present meta-analysis showed that there were no significant differences in operative time, any complications, tumor size, chest drain duration, R0 resection rate, lymph station, 5-year overall survival, and recurrence rate. However, compared with the VATS group, the RATS group had less blood loss, a lower conversion rate to open, a shorter length of hospital stay, more lymph node dissection, and better 5-year disease-free survival.

Conclusions

RATS is a safe and feasible alternative to VATS for patients with lung cancer.

Surgical site infection following minimally invasive lobectomy: Is robotic surgery superior?

Background

Surgical site infection (SSI) in thoracic surgery remains a significant cause of morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has significantly reduced the risk of SSI. We intended to compare whether there was difference between video‐assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) and robotic‐assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) in SSI and highlight possible factors influencing SSI in lobectomy.

Methods

This retrospective study analyzed patients who underwent minimally invasive lobectomy from January 2018 to December 2019. All patients' clinical characteristics and surgery‐related information which may be related to the likelihood of SSI were recorded.

Results

A total of 1231 patients' records were reviewed with 806 VATS and 425 RATS. SSI was classified as deep or superficial SSI. Eighty‐six (7.0%) patients were found to develop an SSI with 62 patients having deep infections and 24 had superficial infection. No statistical difference in the incidence rate and category of SSI was observed between patients undergoing VATS and RATS.

Conclusions

There was no difference in the incidence of SSI between VATS and RATS lobectomy. Male gender, heavy smoking, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, body mass index (BMI) > 27.9, more blood loss, and the higher National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) risk index score (1 or 2) were the independent risk factors of SSI following minimally invasive lobectomy, while male gender, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, BMI > 27.9, more blood loss and the higher NHSN risk index score (1 or 2) were the main predictors of deep SSI.

[Expert Consensus for Thermal Ablation of Pulmonary Subsolid Nodules (2021 Edition)]

局部热消融技术在肺部结节治疗领域正处在起步与发展阶段，为了肺结节热消融治疗的临床实践和规范发展，由“中国医师协会肿瘤消融治疗技术专家组”“中国医师协会介入医师分会肿瘤消融专业委员会”“中国抗癌协会肿瘤消融治疗专业委员会”“中国临床肿瘤学会消融专家委员会”组织多学科国内有关专家，讨论制定了“热消融治疗肺部亚实性结节专家共识（2021年版）”。主要内容包括：①肺部亚实性结节的临床评估；②热消融治疗肺部亚实性结节技术操作规程、适应证、禁忌证、疗效评价和相关并发症；③存在的问题和未来发展方向。