Interactions between the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway and risk factors for lung infections after pulmonary malignancy operation

Robotic-assisted versus video-assisted lobectomy for resectable non-small-cell lung cancer: the RVlob randomized controlled trial

Background

The 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.

Methods

In 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.

Findings

A 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).

Interpretation

This 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.

Funding

National 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).

Sugammadex for reversing neuromuscular blockages after lung surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study determined whether sugammadex was associated with a lower risk of postoperative pulmonary complications and improved outcomes in lung surgeries.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from January 2000 to March 2022. The characteristics of lung surgeries using sugammadex treatment compared with control drugs and postoperative outcomes were retrieved. The primary outcome was estimated through a pooled odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) was identified using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

From 465 citations, 7 studies with 453 patients receiving sugammadex and 452 patients receiving a control were included. The risk of postoperative pulmonary complication (PPCs) was lower in the sugammadex group than in the control group. Also, it showed that the effect of sugammadex on PPCs in the subgroup analysis was significantly assessed on the basis of atelectasis or non-atelectasis. Furthermore, subgroup analysis based on the relationship between high body mass index (BMI) and PPCs also showed that sugammadex had less occurrence in both the high BMI (defined as BMI ≥ 25) and low BMI groups. No difference in length of hospital stay (LOS) between the two groups was observed.

CONCLUSION

This study observed that although reversing neuromuscular blockages with sugammadex in patients undergoing thoracic surgery recorded fewer PPCs and shorter extubation periods than conventional reversal agents, no difference in LOS, postanaesthesia care unit (PACU) stay length and chest tube insertion duration in both groups was observed.

Effects of enhanced recovery after surgery on robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has been shown to be an effective, reliable and practical clinical nursing method to support operations on a range of physiological systems, but its effects on robotic radical prostatectomy (RRP) are still unclear. This study assesses the clinical effects of ERAS in RRP.

METHODS

Various databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and China National Knowledge were searched for relevant studies, in particular full-text articles comparing ERAS groups and conventional groups for RRP. All included articles were subject to a quality assessment, and the data analysis was conducted with Review Manager (5.3). Forest plots, sensitivity analyses, and bias analyses were also prepared based on the included articles.

RESULTS

In total, 8 studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. The results showed that ERAS groups exhibited significantly reduced time of flatus [mean difference (MD) =-0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.88, -0.29; P=0.0001], time of catheter removal (MD =-1.65; 95% CI: -2.15, -1.16; P<0.00001), and length of stay (LOS) (MD =-1.49; 95% CI: -2.65, -0.34; P=0.01), and there was no significant difference in terms of postoperative complications between ERAS groups and conventional groups (P=0.07).

DISCUSSION

This study provides further evidence that ERAS improves postoperative recovery in patients undergoing RRP through reduced time of first flatus, time of catheter removal and LOS. Given the limited quality and quantity of the articles included in this study, further work is needed to validate these findings.

Robotic-Assisted versus Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Lobectomy: Short-Term Results of a Randomized Clinical Trial (RVlob Trial)

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether robotic-assisted lobectomy (RAL) affects perioperative outcomes and long-term efficacy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients, compared with traditional video-assisted lobectomy (VAL).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

RAL is a promising treatment for NSCLC. However, its efficacy has not been fully evaluated.

METHODS

A single-center, open-labeled prospective randomized clinical trial was launched in May 2017 to compare the efficacy of RAL and VAL. By May 2020, 320 patients were enrolled. The perioperative results of RAL and VAL were compared.

RESULTS

The 320 enrolled patients were randomly assigned to the RAL group (n = 157) and the VAL group (n = 163). Perioperative outcomes were comparable between the two groups, including the length of hospital stay (P = 0.76) and the rate of postoperative complications (P = 0.45). No perioperative mortality occurred in either group. The total amount of chest tube drainage (830 ml [IQR, 550-1130 ml] vs. 685 ml [IQR, 367.5-1160 ml], P = 0.007) and hospitalization costs ($12821 [IQR, $12145-$13924] vs. $8009 [IQR, $7014-$9003], P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the RAL group. RAL group had a significantly higher number of lymph nodes (LNs) harvested (11 [IQR, 8-15] vs. 10 [IQR, 8-13], P = 0.02), higher number of N1 LNs (6 [IQR, 4-8] vs. 5 [IQR, 3-7], P = 0.005), and more LN stations examined (6 [IQR, 5-7] vs. 5 [IQR, 4-6], P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both RAL and VAL are safe and feasible for the treatment of NSCLC. RAL achieved similar perioperative outcomes, together with higher LN yield. Further follow-up investigations are required to evaluate the long-term efficacy of RAL. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03134534).