Robotic lung resection: a narrative review of the current role on primary lung cancer treatment

A Thorough Review of the Clinical Applications of Artificial Intelligence in Lung Cancer

According to data from the World Health Organization (WHO), lung cancer is becoming a global epidemic. It is particularly high in the list of the leading causes of death not only in developed countries, but also worldwide; furthermore, it holds the leading place in terms of cancer-related mortality. Nevertheless, many breakthroughs have been made the last two decades regarding its management, with one of the most prominent being the implementation of artificial intelligence (AI) in various aspects of disease management. We included 473 papers in this thorough review, most of which have been published during the last 5-10 years, in order to describe these breakthroughs. In screening programs, AI is capable of not only detecting suspicious lung nodules in different imaging modalities-such as chest X-rays, computed tomography (CT), and positron emission tomography (PET) scans-but also discriminating between benign and malignant nodules as well, with success rates comparable to or even better than those of experienced radiologists. Furthermore, AI seems to be able to recognize biomarkers that appear in patients who may develop lung cancer, even years before this event. Moreover, it can also assist pathologists and cytologists in recognizing the type of lung tumor, as well as specific histologic or genetic markers that play a key role in treating the disease. Finally, in the treatment field, AI can guide in the development of personalized options for lung cancer patients, possibly improving their prognosis.

Robot-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery Can Be Safely Performed in Patients With Obesity from the Early Stages of Implementation

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) and conventional video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lung cancer in patients with obesity.

METHODS

Anatomical pulmonary lobectomy or segmentectomy performed at a single institution from April 2018 to September 2023 in patients with obesity (body mass index ≥25 kg/m2) were statistically compared in terms of perioperative clinical factors including operative time, blood loss, chest tube duration, pain score, intraoperative events, and early postoperative complications between RATS and VATS.

RESULTS

In all, 89 patients were evaluated; 43 underwent RATS and 46 underwent VATS. All RATS procedures were performed using the da Vinci Xi system. Patient characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups. The operative time, blood loss, number of dissected lymph nodes, intraoperative events, and conversion rate to open thoracotomy were similar between the 2 groups. The frequencies of postoperative complications and chest tube placement duration between the groups were also similar. The median pain scores were slightly higher in the RATS group on postoperative day 1 but were equivalent between the 2 groups on postoperative day 7. The RATS group had a shorter postoperative hospital stay than the VATS group (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

A surgical team proficient in conventional VATS can safely introduce RATS in patients with obesity and lung cancer with equivalent perioperative outcomes.

Factors affecting the short-term outcomes of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for lung cancer

PURPOSE

Robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) is a relatively new approach to lung cancer surgery. To promote the development of RATS procedures, we investigated the factors related to short-term postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

We analyzed the records of patients who underwent RATS lobectomy for primary lung cancer at our institution between June, 2018 and January, 2023. The primary outcome was operative time, and the estimated value of surgery-related factors was calculated by linear regression analysis. The secondary outcome was surgical morbidity and the risk was assessed by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The study cohort comprised 238 patients. Left upper lobectomy had the longest mean operative time, followed by right upper lobectomy. Postoperative complications occurred in 13.0% of the patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that upper lobectomy, the number of staples used for interlobular fissures, and the number of cases experienced by the surgeon were significantly associated with a longer operative time. The only significant risk factor for postoperative complications was heavy smoking.

CONCLUSION

Patients with well-lobulated middle or lower lobe lung cancer who are not heavy smokers are recommended for the introductory period of RATS lobectomy. Improving the procedures for upper lobectomy and dividing incomplete interlobular fissures will promote the further development of RATS.

Minimally invasive surgery for clinical T4 non-small-cell lung cancer: national trends and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Recent randomized data support the perioperative benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Its utility for cT4 tumours remains understudied. We, therefore, sought to analyse national trends and outcomes of minimally invasive resections for cT4 cancers.

METHODS

Using the 2010-2019 National Cancer Database, we identified patients with cT4N0-1 NSCLC. Patients were stratified by surgical approach. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to identify factors associated with use of a minimally invasive approach. Groups were matched using propensity score analysis to evaluate perioperative and survival end points.

RESULTS

The study identified 3715 patients, among whom 64.1% (n = 2381) underwent open resection and 35.9% (n = 1334) minimally invasive resection [robotic-assisted in 31.5% (n = 420); and video-assisted in 68.5% (n = 914)]. Increased MIS use was noted among patients with higher income [≥$40 227, odds ratio (OR) 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.51] and those treated at academic hospitals (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.07-1.45). Clinically node-positive patients (OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.55-0.83) and those who underwent neoadjuvant therapy (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.65-0.93) were less likely to have minimally invasive resection. In matched groups, patients undergoing MIS had a shorter median length of stay (5 vs 6 days, P < 0.001) and no significant differences between 30-day readmissions or 30/90-day mortality. MIS did not compromise overall survival (log-rank P = 0.487).

CONCLUSIONS

Nationally, the use of minimally invasive approaches for patients with cT4N0-1M0 NSCLC has increased substantially. In these patients, MIS is safe and does not compromise perioperative outcomes or survival.

Robotic-Assisted Ivor Lewis Esophagectomy Is Safe and Cost Equivalent Compared to Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy in a Tertiary Referral Center

In recent decades, robotic-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) has been increasingly adopted for patients with esophageal cancer (EC) or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). However, concerns regarding its costs compared to conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) have emerged. This study examined outcomes and costs of RAMIE versus total MIE in 128 patients who underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy for EC/GEJ at our department between 2017 and 2021. Surgical costs were higher for RAMIE (EUR 12,370 vs. EUR 10,059, p < 0.001). Yet, median daily (EUR 2023 vs. EUR 1818, p = 0.246) and total costs (EUR 30,510 vs. EUR 29,180, p = 0.460) were comparable. RAMIE showed a lower incidence of postoperative pneumonia (8% vs. 25%, p = 0.029) and a trend towards shorter hospital stays (15 vs. 17 days, p = 0.205), which may have equalized total costs. Factors independently associated with higher costs included readmission to the intensive care unit (hazard ratio [HR] = 7.0), length of stay (HR = 13.5), anastomotic leak (HR = 17.0), and postoperative pneumonia (HR = 5.4). In conclusion, RAMIE does not impose an additional financial burden. This suggests that RAMIE may be considered as a valid alternative approach for esophagectomy. Attention to typical cost factors can enhance postoperative care across surgical methods.