Robot-assisted lobectomy versus completely portal robotic lobectomy: What is the difference?

Robotic portal resection for mediastinal tumours: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

To demonstrate the effectiveness and feasibility of robotic portal resection (RPR) for mediastinal tumour using a prospectively collected database.

METHODS

Data from 73 consecutive patients with mediastinal tumours who underwent RPRs were prospectively collected from August 2018 to April 2023. All patients underwent chest and abdominal enhanced computed tomography (CT) and preoperative multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussion. The patients were stratified into two groups based on tumour size: Group A (tumour size < 4 cm) and Group B (tumour size ≥ 4 cm). General clinical characteristics, surgical procedures, and short outcomes were promptly recorded.

RESULTS

All of the cases were scheduled for RPRs. One patient (1/73, 1.4%) was switched to a small utility incision approach because of extensive pleural adhesion. Two patients (2.8%) converted to sternotomy, however, no perioperative deaths occurred. Most of the tumours were located in the anterior mediastinum (51/73, 69.9%). Thymoma (27/73, 37.0%) and thymic cyst (16/73, 21.9%) were the most common diagnoses. The median diameter of tumours was 3.2 cm (IQR, 2.4-4.5 cm). The median total operative time was 61.0 min (IQR, 50.0-90.0 min). The median intraoperative blood loss was 20 mL (IQR, 5.0-30.0 ml), and only one patient (1.4%) experienced an intraoperative complication. The median length of hospital stay was 3 days (IQR, 2-4 days). Compared with Group A, the median total operative time and console time of Group B were significantly longer (P = 0.006 and P = 0.003, respectively). The volume of drainage on the first postoperative day was greater in group B than in group A (P = 0.013).

CONCLUSION

RPR is a safe and effective technique for mediastinal tumour treatment, which can expand the application of minimally invasive surgery for the removal of complicated mediastinal tumours.

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.