Midterm survival of imaging-assisted robotic lung segmentectomy for non-small-cell lung cancer

The use of diagnostic complex robotic-assisted segmentectomy in the management of incidental and screen-detected pulmonary nodules

OBJECTIVES

Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) facilitates complex pulmonary segmentectomy which offers one-stage diagnostic and therapeutic management of small pulmonary nodules. We aimed to explore the potential advantages of a faster, simplified pathway and earlier diagnosis against the disadvantages of unnecessary morbidity in benign cases.

METHODS

In an observational study, patients with small, solitary pulmonary nodules deemed suspicious of malignancy by a multidisciplinary team were offered surgery without a pre or intraoperative biopsy. We report our initial experience with RATS complex segmentectomy (using >1 parenchymal staple line) to preserve as much functioning lung tissue as possible.

RESULTS

Over a 4-year period, 245 RATS complex segmentectomies were performed; 140 right: 105 left. A median of 2 (1-4) segments was removed. There was no in-hospital mortality and no requirement for postoperative ventilation. Complications were reported in 63 (25.7%) cases, of which 36 (57.1%) were hospital-acquired pneumonia. A malignant diagnosis was found in 198 (81%) patients and a benign diagnosis in 47 (19%). The malignant diagnoses included: adenocarcinoma in 136, squamous carcinoma in 31 and carcinoid tumour in 15. The most frequent benign diagnosis was granulomatous inflammation in 18 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

RATS complex segmentectomy offers a precise, safe and effective one-stop therapeutic biopsy in incidental and screen-detected pulmonary nodules.

Comparison of active versus passive robotic-endoscope-holder-assisted unisurgeon uniportal thoracoscopic surgery in terms of surgical efficacy and patient safety

Background

Few studies have compared robotic-arm-assisted unisurgeon uniportal surgeries with conventional human-assisted uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgeries (VATSs) in terms of surgical efficacy and patient safety. In the present study, we compared the aforementioned surgeries.

Methods

We explored two robotic endoscope holders-a passive robotic platform (ENDOFIXexo, EA group) and a pedal-controlled active robotic platform (MTG-100, MA group)-for unisurgeon uniportal surgeries and compared the surgical outcomes with those of human-assisted uniportal surgeries (HA group) in 228 patients with a lung lesion (size, <5 cm). The primary parameters for this comparison were surgical efficacy, patient safety, and short-term patient outcomes.

Results

No significant differences were observed among the EA, MA, and HA groups. The success rate of robotic-arm-assisted unisurgeon uniportal wedge resection was 100%, regardless of the group. No major differences were noted in preparation time between the EA and MA groups. Segmentectomy was more favorable in the EA group than in the MA group. The rates of surgical conversion were 5% and 60% in the EA and MA groups, respectively. The EA and MA groups did not differ considerably from the HA group in terms of postoperative complications.

Conclusions

Unisurgeon uniportal wedge resection may be effectively performed using a robotic endoscope holder, without the need for any human assistants with an expert hand. However, the rate of surgical conversion increases with the complexity of uniportal anatomic resections. The passive platform appears to be more suitable for unisurgeon uniportal surgery than the active pedal-controlled platform given the equipment in contemporary operating rooms.

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.

Long-Term Survival Following Minimally Invasive Lung Cancer Surgery: Comparing Robotic-Assisted and Video-Assisted Surgery

Simple Summary

Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) are known to be safe and efficient surgical procedures to treat lung cancer. Both VATS and RATS allow anatomical resection associated with radical lymph node dissection. However, RATS, unlike VATS, allows the thoracic surgeon to mimic an open approach and to perform lung resection. We hypothesized that the technical advantages of RATS, compared with VATS, would allow more precise resection, with “better lymph node dissection” which could increase survival compared to VATS. Nevertheless, VATS, and RATS nodal up-staging are still debated, with conflicting results and in our study, as well as in the medical literature, RATS failed to show its superiority over VATS in resectable non-small cell lung cancer.

Abstract

Background: Nowadays, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) are known to be safe and efficient surgical procedures to treat early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We assessed whether RATS increased disease-free survival (DFS) compared with VATS for lobectomy and segmentectomy. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients treated for resectable NSCLC performed by RATS or VATS, in our tertiary care center from 2012 to 2019. Patients’ data were prospectively recorded and reviewed in the French EPITHOR database. Primary outcomes were 5-year DFS for lobectomy and 3-year DFS for segmentectomy, compared by propensity-score adjusted difference of Kaplan–Meier estimates. Results: Among 844 lung resections, 436 VATS and 234 RATS lobectomies and 46 VATS and 128 RATS segmentectomies were performed. For lobectomy, the adjusted 5-year DFS was 60.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 52.9–68.8%) for VATS and 52.7% (95%CI 41.7–63.7%) for RATS, with a difference estimated at −8.3% (−22.2–+4.9%, p = 0.24). For segmentectomy, the adjusted 3-year DFS was 84.6% (95%CI 69.8–99.0%) for VATS and 72.9% (95%CI 50.6–92.4%) for RATS, with a difference estimated at −11.7% (−38.7–+7.8%, p = 0.21). Conclusions: RATS failed to show its superiority over VATS for resectable NSCLC.