Lymph Node Upstaging for Robotic, Thoracoscopic, and Open Lobectomy for Stage T2-3N0 Lung Cancer

Provider and procedural factors associated with guideline-concordant lymph node sampling in lung cancer resection

OBJECTIVE

The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer Standard 5.8 requires sampling of 3 mediastinal and 1 hilar lymph node stations during lung cancer resection. This study explores provider and procedural factors associated with guideline-concordant lymph node sampling during lung cancer resection.

METHODS

Prospectively collected statewide quality collaborative data were queried for adult patients undergoing lung cancer resection between July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2024. Guideline concordance was defined per American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer Standard 5.8. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the likelihood of guideline-concordant sampling across surgeon volume, practice distribution, resection type, and procedural approach. Rates of nodal upstaging and postoperative complications were compared between guideline-concordant and nonconcordant sampling cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 3031 patients were analyzed. Of 43 surgeons, 26 were general thoracic surgeons and 17 were mixed-practice cardiothoracic surgeons. 77.8% of cases demonstrated guideline-concordant sampling. Patients treated by highest-volume surgeons were more likely to receive concordant sampling than patients treated by lowest-volume surgeons (odds ratio, 2.27 [1.03-5.01], P = .042) with no significant difference between general thoracic surgeons and cardiothoracic surgeons. Patients undergoing wedge resection were less likely to receive concordant sampling (odds ratio, 0.17 [0.13-0.23], P < .001), as were patients undergoing open (odds ratio, 0.46 [0.33-0.66], P < .001) or video-assisted thoracic surgery (odds ratio, 0.35 [0.25-0.48], P < .001) resection compared with robotic resection. No differences in nodal upstaging or complications were found between the guideline-concordant and nonconcordant cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Guideline-concordant lymph node sampling is associated with surgeon volume, resection type, and operative approach. These findings inform initiatives to improve performance in lymph node sampling during lung cancer resection.

Trends and comparative outcomes between operative approaches for segmentectomy in lung cancer

BACKGROUND

Segmentectomy is increasingly performed for non-small cell lung cancer. However, comparative outcomes data among open, robotic-assisted, and video-assisted thoracoscopic approaches are limited.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of non-small cell lung cancer segmentectomy cases (2013-2021) from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons General Thoracic Surgery Database was performed. Baseline characteristics were balanced using inverse probability of treatment weighting and compared by operative approach. Volume trends, outcomes, and nodal upstaging were assessed.

RESULTS

Of 9927 patients who underwent segmentectomy, 84.8% underwent minimally invasive surgery, with robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery becoming the most common approach in 2019. Open segmentectomy is more likely to be performed at low-volume centers (P < .0001), whereas robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery is more likely to be performed at high-volume centers (P < .0001). Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery had a higher open conversion rate than robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (odds ratio, 11.8; CI, 7.01-21.6; P < .001). Minimally invasive surgery had less 30-day morbidity compared with open segmentectomy (video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.94; P = .013; robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery odds ratio, 0.59; CI, 0.43-0.81; P = .001). The number of nodes and stations harvested were highest for robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery; however, N1 upstaging was more likely in open compared with robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (odds ratio, 0.63; CI, 0.45-0.89; P < .007) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (odds ratio, 0.61; CI, 0.46-0.83; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Segmentectomy volume has increased considerably, with robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery becoming the most common approach. Minimally invasive surgery has less major morbidity compared with open segmentectomy, with no difference between video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. However, risk of open conversion is higher with video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery had increased nodal harvest, whereas hilar nodal upstaging was highest with thoracotomy. This study reveals significant differences in outcomes exist between segmentectomy operative approach; the impact of approach on survival merits further investigation.

Quality of lymph node dissection and early recurrence in robotic versus thoracoscopic lobectomy for stage N1-2 non-small cell lung cancer: Eleven-year real-world data from a high-volume center

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of lymph node dissection (LND) and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted (RL) versus video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (VL) for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with nodal involvement remains controversial. This study aims to compare LND quality and early recurrence (ER) rate between RL and VL for stage N1-2 NSCLC patients based on eleven-year real-world data from a high-volume center.

METHODS

Pathologic stage IIB-IIIB (T1-3N1-2) NSCLC patients undergoing RL or VL in Shanghai Chest Hospital from 2010 to 2021 were retrospectively reviewed from a prospectively maintained database. Propensity-score matching (PSM, 1:4 RL versus VL) was performed to mitigate baseline differences. LND quality was evaluated by adequate (≥16) LND and nodal upstaging rates. ER was defined as recurrence occurring within 24 months post-surgery.

RESULTS

Out of 1578 cases reviewed, PSM yielded 200 RL and 800 VL cases. Without compromising perioperative outcomes, RL assessed more N1 and N2 LNs and N1 stations, and led to higher incidences of adequate LND (58.5 % vs. 42.0 %, p < 0.001) and nodal upstaging (p = 0.026), compared to VL. Notably, RL improved perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing adequate LND than VL. Finally, RL notably reduced ER rate (22.0 % vs. 29.6 %, p = 0.032), especially LN ER rate (15.0 % vs. 21.5 %, p = 0.041), and prolonged disease-free survival (DFS; hazard ratio = 0.837, p = 0.040) compared with VL. Further subgroup analysis of ER and DFS within the cN1-2-stage cohort verified this survival benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

RL surpasses VL in enhancing LND quality, reducing ER rates, and improving perioperative outcomes when adequate LND is performed for stage N1-2 NSCLC patients.

What is new in mediastinal staging?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Appropriate staging is of utmost importance in nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC), as the pathologic stage dictates both overall prognosis and appropriate therapeutic pathways. This article seeks to review the current recommendations for mediastinal staging of NSCLC and available modalities to achieve this. Landmark publications pertaining to recent advancements in NSCLC treatments are also highlighted and the role of specific bronchoscopic modalities for tissue acquisition are reviewed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent advancements in the treatment of NSCLC have made accurate mediastinal staging more important than ever. Guidelines and recommendations outlining patients that warrant invasive mediastinal staging are available and a systematic approach should be utilized when sampling is performed. Ensuring the adequacy of tissue for the growing number of molecular biomarkers that must be tested has been the focus of many recent studies.

SUMMARY

Appropriate mediastinal staging is crucial for the management of patients with NSCLC as is obtaining adequate tissue for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes. EBUS-TBNA is sufficient for the diagnosis of nonsmall cell and small cell lung carcinomas, but EBUS-guided intranodal forceps and cryobiopsy may provide more optimal specimen for patients with benign disease, such as sarcoidosis, or in cases of lymphoma. Further studies are necessary to better delineate the role of these techniques in the diagnosis and staging of mediastinal diseases before they become the primary diagnostic modalities.

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.

Approaches and outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (RATS) for lung cancer: a narrative review

Robotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgery (RATS) is considered one of the main issues of present thoracic surgery. RATS is a minimally invasive surgical technique allowing enhanced view, accurate and complex movements, and high ergonomics for the surgeon. Despite these advantages, its application in lung procedures has been limited, mainly by its costs. Since now many different approaches have been proposed and the experience in RATS for lungs ranges from wedge resection to pneumonectomy and is mainly related to lung cancer. The present narrative review explores main approaches and outcomes of RATS lobectomy for lung cancer. A non-systematic review of literature was conducted using the PubMed search engine. An overview of lung robotic surgery is given, and main approaches of robotic lobectomy for lung cancer are exposed. Initial experiences of biportal and uniportal RATS are also described. So far, retrospective analysis reported satisfactory robotic operative outcomes, and comparison with VATS might suggest a more accurate lymphadenectomy. Some Authors might even suggest better perioperative outcomes too. From an oncological standpoint, no definitive prospective study has yet been published but several retrospective analyses report oncological outcomes comparable to those of VATS and open surgery. Literature suggests that RATS for lung procedures is safe and effective and should be considered as a valid additional surgical option.

Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: A propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The existing literature on perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lung lobectomy is inconclusive.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of VATS and RATS lobectomy procedures for patients with non-small cell lung cancer to compare the short-term perioperative outcomes by propensity score matching (PSM) analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 418 patients were enrolled in this study. After PSM, 71 patients each received VATS and RATS lobectomy for further analysis. RATS lobectomy was associated with a lower rate of conversion to thoracotomy (0% vs. 5.63%, p = 0.006), a lower rate of postoperative prolonged air leak (1.14% vs. 19.72%, p = 0.001) and a shorter duration of postoperative chest tube drainage (3 days interquartile range [IQR: 3, 4] vs. 4 days IQR [3-5], p = 0.027). Subgroup analysis indicated that after acquiring proficiency in the RATS procedure, its disadvantages diminished while its advantages were enhanced. In terms of rate of conversion to thoracotomy, length of hospital stays, and duration of postoperative chest tube drainage, RATS was comparable to uniportal VATS and superior to triportal VATS.

CONCLUSION

RATS has advantages over VATS in terms of early chest tube removal, early discharge, lower thoracotomy rate, less postoperative air leak, and a potential trend of more lymph node dissection numbers. These advantages are more pronounced after acquiring proficiency in RATS.

Risk Factor Analysis of Postoperative Venous Thromboembolism in Patients After Thoracoscopic Lobectomy

OBJECTIVE

To analyze independent risk factors for postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients after thoracoscopic lobectomy and establish a risk model for predicting thrombosis.

METHODS

We selected 135 patients who underwent thoracoscopic lobectomy and assigned them to a VTE group (n = 31) and a non-VTE group (n = 104) according to the presence or absence of postoperative VTE. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were built to identify independent risk factors for postoperative thrombosis. A nomogram to predict the risk of thrombosis was generated, with the predictive performance of the model being evaluated by plotting calibration curve and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS

D-dimer on the first postoperative day and Caprini scores were independent high-risk factors for VTE after thoracoscopic lobectomy as revealed by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses (p < .05). The nomogram was evaluated, and the fitting degree of calibration curve indicated good accuracy of the model in predicting thrombosis. The area under the curve (AUC) value was 0.8654, suggesting favorable diagnostic efficacy of the model.

CONCLUSION

The D-dimer on the first postoperative day and Caprini scores were independent risk factors for VTE after thoracoscopic lobectomy. The nomogram that was generated to predict the risk of thrombosis had good accuracy and diagnostic efficacy, which can guide individual risk assessment and management decisions in clinical practice.