Robotic lobectomy for lung cancer: initial experience of a single institution in Korea

Comparison of robot-assisted thoracic surgery versus video-assisted thoracic surgery in the treatment of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

Introduction

Previous studies have compared robot-assisted thoracic surgery(RATS) with video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) in the treatment of patients with lung cancer, but results were conflicting. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of RATS with VATS in the treatment of patients with lung cancer.

Materials and methods

Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase were comprehensively searched for randomized controlled trials or prospective cohort studies comparing the clinical outcomes of RATS and VATS from inception to 22 July 2023. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. Meta-analyses of length of hospital stay, postoperative duration of drainage, postoperative complications, operative time, conversion, estimated blood loss, the number of dissected lymph nodes and stations, 30-day readmission and 30-day mortality were performed.

Results

In total 5 studies were included in the meta-analysis. A total of 614 patients were included, of which 299 patients were treated by RATS and 315 patients treated by VATS. Blood loss was significantly less in RATS group than that in VATS (MD = -17.14, 95% CI -29.96 ~ -4.33, P = 0.009). More nodes stations were dissected in RATS group compared with VATS group(MD= 1.07, 95% CI 0.79 ~ 1.36, P < 0.001). No significant difference occurred between RATS and VATS in length of hospital stay(MD= -0.19, 95% CI -0.98~0.61), readmission(OR=0.74, 95%CI 0.36~1.51, P=0.41), operative time(MD=11.43 95% CI -8.41~31.26, P=0.26), conversion(OR=0.58, 95% CI 0.29~1.17, P=0.13), number of dissected lymph nodes(MD=0.98, 95% CI -0.02~1.97, P=0.05), upstaging rate(OR =0.67, 95% CI 0.38 ~ 1.18, P =0.16, I2 = 0%), time of chest tube drainage (MD= -0.34, 95%CI -0.84~0.15, P=0.17), post-operative complications(OR=0.76, 95% CI 0.52~ 1.11, P=0.16) and total cost(MD = 3103.48, 95% CI -575.78 ~ 6782.74, P=0.1, I2 = 99%).

Conclusion

RATS is a feasible and safe treatment that can achieve better surgical outcomes compared with VATS in terms of short-term outcomes. Except of higher total cost, RATS has obvious advantage in lymphadenectomy and control of intraoperative bleeding. However, large sample and long follow-up randomized clinical trials comparing RATS with VATS are still necessary to better demonstrate the advantages of RATS for lung cancer.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, Identifier CRD42023446653.

The learning curve of the robotic-assisted lobectomy-a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Early studies have illustrated the robotic lobectomy to be safe, oncologically effective, and economically feasible as a therapeutic modality in the treatment of thoracic malignancies. The 'challenging' learning curve seemingly associated with the robotic approach, however, continues to be an often-cited factor to its ongoing uptake, with the overwhelming volume of these surgeries being performed in centers of excellence where extensive experience with minimal access surgery is the norm. An exact quantification of this learning curve challenge, however, has not been made, begging the question of whether this is an outdated assumption, versus fact. This systematic review and meta-analysis sort to clarify the learning curve for robotic-assisted lobectomy based on the existing literature.

Methods

An electronic search of four databases was performed to identify relevant studies outlining the learning curve of robotic lobectomy. The primary endpoint was a clear definition of operator learning (e.g., cumulative sum chart, linear regression, outcome-specific analysis, etc.) which could be subsequently aggregated or reported. Secondary endpoints of interest included post-operative outcomes and complication rates. A meta-analysis using a random effects model of proportions or means was applied, as appropriate.

Results

The search strategy identified twenty-two studies relevant for inclusion. A total of 3,246 patients (30% male) receiving robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) were identified. The mean age of the cohort was 65.3±5.0 years. Mean operative, console and dock time was 190.5±53.8, 125.8±33.9 and 10.2±4.0 minutes, respectively. Length of hospital stay was 6.1±4.6 days. Technical proficiency with the robotic-assisted lobectomy was achieved at a mean of 25.3±12.6 cases.

Conclusions

The robotic-assisted lobectomy has been illustrated to have a reasonable learning curve profile based on the existing literature. Current evidence on the oncologic efficacy and purported benefits of the robotic approach will be bolstered by the results of upcoming randomized trials, which will be critical in supporting RATS uptake.

Global status of the robotic thoracic surgery

Robotics has taken its place in thoracic surgery since the end of the 20th century. Since then, it has been developed worldwide with many different applications, such as the treatment of mediastinal tumors and lung cancer. Although, the contradictory results comparing this new technology to other minimally invasive techniques may raise some skepticism, the high quality of the instrument and images provided by the robot brings a whole new perspective for the thoracic surgeon, since the robotic platform can ally the ease of movement obtained with open technique with the advantages of the minimally invasive surgery. When it comes to the implementation of a robotic program the costs of RATS are an important issue. However, it is necessary to take into account not only the cost of the robotic platform itself but also the maintenance expenses, disposable tools, and training programs. Nevertheless, the cost of the robotic surgery is expected to decrease in the coming years and like the instrumentation, virtual reality will see improvements. Many different countries around the world have contributed with original articles for the development of the robotic thoracic surgery and in this paper, we aim at describing the global status of the robotic thoracic surgery.

Training residents in robotic thoracic surgery

With growing integration of robotic technology in thoracic surgery, the need for structured training has never been greater with trainees expressing desire for additional experience. Determining the ideal education program is challenging as the collective experience is still relatively early and growing with many experienced surgeons still becoming facile with the platform. Understanding differences between robotic and thoracoscopic approaches including lung retraction and dissection, use of carbon dioxide insufflation, and lack of tactile feedback serves as the foundation for building a skillset. Currently, there is no standard accepted curriculum for residents. Inclusion of these trainees in structured programs has been shown to be safe with equivalent patient outcomes. There are multiple curricula under development, all of which incorporate use of simulation technology, dual console, and clear, graduated responsibilities within operations. These include introduction to the robotic system prior to progressing to bedside assistance and finally to time as console surgeon. The importance of clear definition of training milestones with deliberate graduation to more complex tasks once competency has been demonstrated cannot be overstated. It is crucial for surgeons practicing robotic surgery to make efforts to further the training of residents, but there has not been any perfect and suitable program identified yet.

Robot-assisted thoracic surgery versus video-assisted thoracic surgery for lung lobectomy or segmentectomy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis

Background

It 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.

Methods

Pubmed, 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.

Results

A 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.

Conclusions

The 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.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-08241-5.

Enhanced expression of queuine tRNA-ribosyltransferase 1 (QTRT1) predicts poor prognosis in lung adenocarcinoma

Background

Lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) is the most frequently diagnosed type of lung cancer with high percentage of tumor relapse and metastasis. The correlation between queuine tRNA-ribosyltransferase 1 (QTRT1) expression and LUAD remains largely unknown. In this study, we aim to investigate the potential role of QTRT1 expression in the prognosis of LUAD.

Methods

We abstracted data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) and four independent Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) datasets. In total, 1,012 LUAD samples and 112 normal tissue samples were selected. The relationship between QTRT1 expression, methylation, and clinical features in LUAD were determined, and bioinformatics analyses were also performed.

Results

The expression of QTRT1 was higher in LUAD patients. A marked downregulation in QTRT1 methylation in LUAD was also found. Low QTRT1 expression was associated with longer overall survival across the GEO and TCGA datasets (P=0.0033, 0.0022, respectively). Furthermore, QTRT1 expression was significantly correlated with 'axoneme assembly', 'androgen response', and 'epithelial mesenchymal transition', as determined by Gene Set Enrichment Analysis (GSEA) and Gene Ontology (GO) term enrichment analysis.

Conclusions

QTRT1 was highly expressed in LUAD, and enhanced expression of QTRT1 might therefore serve as a biomarker for poor prognosis in LUAD. The result of bioinformatic analyses might present a new insight for investigating the pathogenesis of LUAD.

Bioinformatics analysis to determine the prognostic value and prospective pathway signaling of miR-126 in non-small cell lung cancer

Background

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) have been demonstrated to play crucial roles in the initiation and development of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, further investigation of the specific role of miR-126 in NSCLC is still required.

Methods

An analysis of miR-126 expression in NSCLC was carried out using the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) database, and a literature review was also performed. The differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in three mRNA datasets, GSE18842, GSE19804, and GSE101929, from GEO were identified. Following the prediction of hsa-miR-126-5p target genes by TargetScan, the overlap of miR-126 target genes with DEGs in NSCLC was examined. After that, Gene Ontology enrichment and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes pathway analyses were performed. Finally, an analysis to identify the impact of hub genes on the prognosis of NSCLC was carried out on the basis of a protein-protein interaction (PPI) network constructed using STRING and Cytoscape.

Results

The data in the literature review revealed a trend that miR126 was downregulated in NSCLC. The number of both NSCLC-related and miR-126-related DEGs was 187. Dozens of DEGs were significantly enriched in biological regulation, cell membrane binding, and signal receptor binding. In the PPI network analysis, 3 of 10 identified hub genes, namely NCAPG, MELK, and KIAA0101, were obviously related to poor prognosis in NSCLC; the survival rate was low among patients with high expression levels of these genes. Furthermore, through network analysis, TPX2, HMMR, and ANLN were identified as recessive miR-126-related genes that may be involved in NSCLC.

Conclusions

MiR-126 plays an essential role in the biological processes of NSCLC through binding to target genes and influences the prognosis of patients with the disease.

Comparison of the outcomes of sublobar resection and stereotactic body radiotherapy for stage T1-2N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer with tumor size ≤ 5 cm: a propensity score matching analysis

Background

Surgery and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) are both suitable treatment options for early stage Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), which accounts for the majority of lung cancer. This study compared the outcomes of sublobar resection (SLR) and SBRT in patients with stage T1-2N0M0 NSCLC with tumor size ≤5 cm.

Methods

Patients with T1-2N0M0 lung cancer who underwent SLR or SBRT between January, 2012 and December, 2016 were included in this retrospective study. The survival outcomes and toxicity of the SLR and SBRT cohorts were compared using Kaplan-Meier survival plots. In a second exploratory analysis, propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to reduce selection bias between the two groups of patients.

Results

A total of 121 SLR and 109 SBRT cases were included. The average follow-up was 49.4 months. Prior to PSM, the 5-year overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) rates in the SLR group (82.8% and 89.0%, respectively) were superior to those in the SBRT group (67.0% and 75.3%; P=0.001 and P=0.013, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in the five-year locoregional control and disease-free survival (DFS) rates between the groups. PSM identified 40 patients from each treatment group who shared similar characteristics. At 5 years, the OS rates in the SLR and SBRT groups were comparable (79.9% vs. 66.5%, respectively; P=0.154). After PSM, the rates of CSS, locoregional control, and DFS were also similar between the groups (P=0.458, 0.369, and 0.698, respectively). In the SBRT group, one patient developed grade 3 radioactive pneumonitis. No grade >3 toxicities or treatment-related deaths occurred in either group.

Conclusions

SBRT may be an alternative option to SLR for patients who cannot tolerate lobectomy because of medical comorbidities and has a similar level of effectiveness.