Robotic sleeve lobectomy: technical details and early results

Adoption of the Robotic Platform across Thoracic Surgeries

With the paradigm shift in minimally invasive surgery from the video-assisted thoracoscopic platform to the robotic platform, thoracic surgeons are applying the new technology through various commonly practiced thoracic surgeries, striving to improve patient outcomes and reduce morbidity and mortality. This review will discuss the updates in lung resections, lung transplantation, mediastinal surgeries with a focus on thymic resection, rib resection, tracheal resection, tracheobronchoplasty, diaphragm plication, esophagectomy, and paraesophageal hernia repair. The transition from open surgery to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) to now robotic video-assisted thoracic surgery (RVATS) allows complex surgeries to be completed through smaller and smaller incisions with better visualization through high-definition images and finer mobilization, accomplishing what might be unresectable before, permitting shorter hospital stay, minimizing healing time, and encompassing broader surgical candidacy. Moreover, better patient outcomes are not only achieved through what the lead surgeon could carry out during surgeries but also through the training of the next generation via accessible live video feedback and recordings. Though larger volume randomized controlled studies are pending to compare the outcomes of VATS to RVATS surgeries, published studies show non-inferiority data from RVATS performances. With progressive enhancement, such as overcoming the lack of haptic feedback, and future incorporation of artificial intelligence (AI), the robotic platform will likely be a cost-effective route once surgeons overcome the initial learning curve.

Robotic chest wall resection for primary benign chest wall tumors and locally advanced lung cancer: an institutional case series and national report

Background

Limited data exists for robotic chest wall resection; we report institutional and national experience of robotic chest wall resection.

Methods

In this comparative retrospective case series we describe patients who underwent robotic chest wall resection at our institution and enrich this case series with data from the National Cancer Database (NCDB). We describe our preoperative workup, operative technique, and postoperative care. Outcomes included conversion to open, length of stay, readmissions, and 30- and 90-day mortality. The results are descriptively reported and compared.

Results

We describe 6 patients institutionally and 96 NCDB patients. At our institution 66.7% were males, median age was 70.0 (range, 39-91) years, and 50% were primary chest wall tumors. Median tumor size was 5.25 (range, 2.3-8.3) cm. Outcomes were as follows: no open conversions, median length of stay 3 (range, 1-6) days, no unplanned 30-day readmissions or 90-day mortality. In the NCDB, 55.2% were males with median age of 68.5 (range, 30-89) years. Median tumor size was 3.90 (range, 2.4-6.0) cm. NCDB outcomes were as follows: 18.8% open conversion, median length of stay 7 (range, 5-10) days, 3.1% unplanned 30-day readmission, and 8.3% 90-day mortality. Our institutional case series had 18.0 months median follow-up (range, 6-54 months) with no functional deficits. Median survival in NCDB was 49.6 months.

Conclusions

Robotic chest wall resection is feasible and is performed nationally with acceptable short- and long-term outcomes. Our institutional experience reports our technique, resultant short hospital stay, and excellent functional outcomes.

How to Perform and Prepare for Robotic Sleeve Lobectomy

Compared with video-assisted thoracic surgery, robotic surgery may be particularly useful for reconstructive procedures such as sleeve lobectomy. However, specific training for robot-specific tricks and pitfalls is warranted. Using running suture with a short double-armed suture, we have demonstrated the feasibility of simulating robotic sleeve resection with a previously developed 3-dimensional operable airway model. This training can be done in any institution with robots with flexible timing for the busy thoracic surgeon. The durability and synthetic nature of this model allow repeated training. This can help surgeons to be well prepared for robotic sleeve lobectomy.

Robot-Assisted Left Lower Sleeve Lobectomy for Mucoepidermoid Carcinoma

Surgical resection with lung preservation is the treatment of choice for low-grade mucoepidermoid carcinoma of the tracheobronchial tree. This report describes a case of minimally invasive robot-assisted sleeve resection for tracheobronchial mucoepidermoid carcinoma and provides detailed instruction, with video demonstration, of the operative technique.

[Robot-assisted Lung Surgery: Techniques, Evidence and Data on Anatomical Resections]

Thanks to improved visualisation and instruments with an endowrist function, robot-assisted thoracic surgery has led to technical progress in thoracic surgery. This makes it easier to carry out complex thoracic surgical interventions, e.g. with an intrathoracic suture. As a result, this technology is increasingly being adopted and implemented in therapeutic use. Worldwide, the number of thoracotomies for lung cancer has decreased, while the number of minimally invasive surgical thoracic resections has increased. The aim of this work is to give an up-to-date overview of robotic operations on bronchial carcinoma.

Uniportal fully robotic-assisted sleeve resections: surgical technique and initial experience of 30 cases

Since the first uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (uVATS) performed in 2010, the uniportal approach has evolved up to a point where even the most complex cases can be done. This is thanks to the experience acquired over the years, the specifically designed instruments and improvements in imaging. However, in these last few years, robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) has also shown progress and distinct advantages compared to the uniportal VATS approach, thanks to advanced maneuverability of the robotic arms as well as the three-dimensional (3D) view. Excellent surgical outcomes have been reported and so too, the ergonomic benefits to the surgeon. The main limitation we find of the robotic systems is that they are designed for a multiport approach, requiring between three to five incisions to be able to perform surgeries. With the aim to offer the least invasive approach, using the robotic technology we decided to adapt the Da Vinci Xi® in September 2021 to develop the uniportal pure RATS approach (uRATS) performed by a single intercostal incision, without rib spreading and using the robotic staplers. We have now reached a point where we perform all type of procedures, including the more complex sleeve resections. Sleeve lobectomy is now widely accepted as a reliable and safe procedure to allow complete resection of centrally located tumors. Although it is a technically challenging surgical technique, it offers better outcomes when compared to pneumonectomy. The intrinsic characteristics of the robot such as the 3D view and improved maneuverability of instruments make the sleeve resections easier compared to thoracoscopic techniques. As in uVATS vs. multiport VATS, the uRATS approach, due to its geometrical characteristics, requires specific instrumentation, different movements and learning curve compared to multiport RATS. In this article we describe the surgical technique and our initial uniportal pure RATS experience with bronchial, vascular sleeves and carinal resections in 30 patients.

Early Outcomes of Robotic Versus Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Anatomical Resection for Lung Cancer

Background

We compared the safety and effectiveness of robotic anatomical resection and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted of the records of 4,283 patients, in whom an attempt was made to perform minimally invasive anatomical resection for lung cancer at Seoul National University Hospital from January 2011 to July 2020. Of these patients, 138 underwent robotic surgery and 4,145 underwent VATS. Perioperative outcomes were compared after propensity score matching including age, sex, height, weight, pulmonary function, smoking status, performance status, comorbidities, type of resection, combined bronchoplasty/angioplasty, tumor size, clinical T/N category, histology, and neoadjuvant treatment.

Results

In total, 137 well-balanced pairs were obtained. There were no cases of 30-day mortality in the entire cohort. Conversion to thoracotomy was required more frequently in the VATS group (VATS 6.6% vs. robotic 0.7%, p=0.008). The complete resection rate (VATS 97.8% vs. robotic 98.5%, p=1.000) and postoperative complication rate (VATS 17.5% vs. robotic 19.0%, p=0.874) were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The robotic group showed a slightly shorter hospital stay (VATS 5.8±3.9 days vs. robotic 5.0±3.6 days, p=0.052). N2 nodal upstaging (cN0/pN2) was more common in the robotic group than the VATS group, but without statistical significance (VATS 4% vs. robotic 12%, p=0.077).

Conclusion

Robotic anatomical resection in lung cancer showed comparable early outcomes when compared to VATS. In particular, robotic resection presented a lower conversion-to-thoracotomy rate. Furthermore, a robotic approach might improve lymph node harvesting in the N2 station.

Endobronchial Carcinoids: Surgical Outcome in 100 Consecutive Patients and Factors Affecting Lung Preservation

Bronchial carcinoids are slow-growing tumours of the neuroendocrine family. Most of them have a benign course with excellent outcome after complete resection. Due to their location in the primary bronchi, adequate resection with lung preservation requires considerable technical expertise. In this paper we present our surgical experience with endobronchial carcinoids and analyse the factors that predict possibility of lung preservation surgery. Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients operated for endobronchial carcinoids for the period March 2012 to September 2019 was carried out. Demographic factors and peri-operative variables were recorded and analysed. Factors that influence surgical outcome and possibility of lung preservation surgery were analysed. A total of 137 patients underwent surgery for resection of carcinoid tumours, out of which 100 had endobronchial carcinoids whereas 37 had peripheral carcinoids. The surgical procedure in 100 patients with endobronchial carcinoids included 14 left main bronchus sleeve resections, 13 pneumonectomies (7 right sided and 6 left sided), 10 right lower and middle bi-lobectomies, 10 lobectomies (4 left upper, 2 left lower and 4 right upper), and 53 sleeve lobectomies (18 left upper lobe sleeves, 8 left lower lobe sleeves, 20 right upper lobe sleeves, 5 right middle lobe sleeves and 2 right lower lobe sleeve lobectomies). There was no operative mortality. Median tumour size was 3.9 cm (range 5-130 mm). On univariate analysis, longer duration of symptoms was associated with poor surgical outcomes. On multivariate analysis, tumour in the main bronchus, duration of disease < 3 months (p = 0.006), left-sided disease (p = 0.03), and presence of healthy distal lung parenchyma (p < 0.001) were associated with successful lung preservation. Majority of endobronchial carcinoid tumours can be managed with lung-sparing procedures with minimal morbidity and mortality and excellent immediate and short-term outcomes. Early referral and experience of team performing these complex procedures are the key to success.

Introduction of robotic surgery leads to increased rate of segmentectomy in patients with lung cancer

Background

Pulmonary segmentectomy provides an anatomic lung resection while avoiding removal of excess normal lung tissue. This may be beneficial in patients with minimal pulmonary reserve who present with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, the operative performance of a segmentectomy using a video-assisted thoracoscopic approach can be technically challenging. We hypothesized that introduction of the robotic surgical system would facilitate the performance of a segmentectomy as measured by an increase in the proportion of segmentectomies being pursued.

Methods

We completed a retrospective analysis of thoracoscopic and robotic anatomic lung resections, including lobectomies and segmentectomies, performed in patients with primary lung cancer from the time of initiation of the robotic thoracic surgery program in November 2017 to November 2019. We compared the proportion of thoracoscopic and robotic segmentectomies performed during the first year compared to the second year of the data collection period.

Results

A total of 138 thoracoscopic and robotic anatomic lung resections were performed for primary lung cancer. Types of lung cancer resected (adenocarcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, or other), tumor size based on clinical T staging (T1–T4), and tumor location were not significantly different between years (P=0.44, P=0.98, and P=0.26, respectively). The proportion of segmentectomies increased from 8.6% during the first year to 25.0% during the second year (P=0.01). One out of 6 (16.7%) segmentectomies were performed using the robot during the first year versus 15 out of 17 (88.2%) during the second year (P=0.003).

Conclusions

Use of the robot led to a significant increase in the number of segmentectomies performed in patients undergoing anatomic lung resection. With increasing lung cancer awareness and widely available screening, a greater number of small, early-stage tumors suitable for segmentectomy will likely be detected. We conclude that robotic-assisted surgery may facilitate the challenges of performing a minimally invasive segmentectomy.

Comparison of Sleeve Lobectomy for Lung Cancer Using Mini-Thoracotomy and an Optimized Robot-Assisted Technique

Objective: To evaluate the clinical significance of an optimized approach to improve surgical field visualization and simplify anastomosis techniques using robotic-assisted sleeve lobectomy for lung or bronchial carcinoma. Method: A total of 26 consecutive patients who underwent sleeve lobectomy between January 2017 and April 2020 were enrolled in the study. The cohort included 11 cases of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS group) and 15 cases of mini-thoracotomy (MT group). RAS was performed via an exclusive optimized approach utilizing the "3 to 4-6 to 8/9" four-port technique. Retrieved demographical and clinical data included operation time, anastomosis time, blood loss, chest drainage time and volume, postoperative pain scores, complications, white blood cell (WBC) levels, and duration of hospital stay and follow-up. Results: No cases of perioperative death were recorded. Compared to MT group, the RAS group had a similar anastomosis time (30.82  ±  6.08 vs 33.20  ±  7.73 min, respectively, p > 0.05) and shorter operation time (189.73  ±  36.41 vs 225.33  ±  38.19 min, respectively, p < 0.05). The RAS group had lower pain scores (4.23  ±  0.26 vs 4.91  ±  0.51, p < 0.05), lower levels of WBC (p < 0.05), and no anastomotic complications postoperatively. The RAS and MT groups demonstrated a successful bronchus reconstruction with low risk of angulation (1/11 vs 1/15, p > 0.05) and satisfactory disease-free survival (eight cases, 72.73% and 12 cases, 80%, respectively). Conclusion: The optimized approach to RA sleeve lobectomy is convenient and efficient and provides satisfactory clinical outcomes. Further study with a large sample size and evaluation of long-term survival are warranted. Key points: (i) we present a novel, convenient, and efficient approach for robotic-assisted sleeve lobectomy, ie, "3 to 4-6 to 8/9" four-port technique. The optimized approach for RA sleeve lobectomy is convenient and efficient and provides satisfactory clinical outcomes; (ii) details for the "3 to 4-6 to 8/9" four-port method: the assistant port was located at the fourth intercostal space. The 1-cm camera port was inserted at the sixth intercostal space in the posterior axillary line. The 0.5-cm da Vinci ports of the instrument arms were placed at the third intercostal space in the anterior axillary line and the eighth or ninth intercostal space in the posterior axillary line. The patient cart was inserted from the back of the patient's head and shoulders at 75° to the longitudinal line.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of thoracoscopic versus thoracotomy sleeve lobectomy

Background

Operative safety and oncologic adequacy of thoracoscopic sleeve lobectomy remain controversial. As such, the purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate evidence comparing thoracoscopy and thoracotomy in sleeve lobectomy for centrally located non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

Methods

Electronic searches of PubMed and Web of Science databases were undertaken from inception to March 2020. Comparative studies about thoracoscopic and thoracotomy sleeve lobectomy, with evaluation for perioperative outcomes and oncological results were identified. The following outcomes were measured in this meta-analysis: operating time, blood loss, numbers of lymph node, postoperative hospital stay, chest drainage time, postoperative complication rate, mortality, overall survival (OS). The standardized difference (SMD), relative risk (RR) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were pooled using Stata software.

Results

Six studies generating 281 thoracoscopy and 369 thoracotomy cases were finally included. There was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss, number of resected lymph nodes, chest drainage time, postoperative complication rate and mortality between two groups. However, thoracoscopic sleeve lobectomy was associated with longer operation time (SMD 0.59, 95% CI: 0.14 to 1.03, P=0.010). And shorter postoperative hospital stays (SMD −0.24, 95% CI: −0.51 to 0.03, P=0.078) were observed in the thoracoscopy group with marginal significance. Furthermore, sleeve lobectomy via thoracoscopy could achieve comparable OS compared to that via thoracotomy (HR 0.69, 95% CI: 0.38 to 1.00; P<0.001). In addition, there were no evident publication bias in all observational outcomes.

Conclusions

Current evidence suggests that thoracoscopic sleeve lobectomy is a safe and efficient surgical procedure for centrally located NSCLC, with comparable perioperative outcomes and equivalent oncological results compared to thoracotomy sleeve lobectomy.

Robotic-assisted tracheobronchial surgery

Robotic technology is positioned to transform the approach to tracheobronchial surgery. With its magnified 3D view, intuitive controls, wristed-instruments, high-fidelity simulation platforms, and the steady implementation of new technical improvement, the robot is well-suited to manage the careful dissection and delicate handling of the airway in tracheobronchial surgery. This innovative technology has the potential to promote the widespread adoption of minimally invasive techniques for this complex thoracic surgery.

Why comprehensive adoption of robotic assisted thoracic surgery is ideal for both simple and complex lung resections

Minimally invasive thoracoscopic surgical techniques have grown increasingly popular due to improved outcome measures compared to conventional rib-spreading thoracotomy. However, video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) presents with unique technical challenges that have limited its role in certain cases. Here, we discuss our perspectives on the implementation of a successful robotic thoracic program. We will then present the case for how the adoption of robotic assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) provides the benefits of minimally invasive VATS while still retaining the technical finesse of bimanual articulating instruments and 3-dimensional imaging that is a universal component of any open surgery. We will also discuss how to overcome some of the perceived disadvantages to RATS in regard to the higher cost, lack of tactile feedback and potential safety concerns.

Resource implications of robotic thoracic surgery: what are the wider issues?

The benefits of minimally invasive thoracic surgery are well documented when compared to the use of standard thoracotomy. Much controversy exists, however, regarding the resource implications when using robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS), especially when compared to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). Much of the costs attributed to a particular approach center around the frequency and severity of the complications that may arise. Little exists in the literature to appropriately compare and contrast the complication rate following either of the minimally invasive approaches. There is a suggestion that many conventional open surgeons are more readily persuaded to adopt a minimally invasive approach through the use of the robotic platform, therefore reducing the complication-related costs of standard thoracotomy by an increase in minimally invasive resection rates. Further gains may be made in the ability to perform more complex minimally invasive procedures via a RATS approach without recourse to open conversion when compared to VATS. As opportunities and competition increase in the commercial market place, it is reasonable to assume costs will fall and further savings will be made.

Robotic sleeve resection for pulmonary disease

Background

Few studies have described robotic sleeve resection with pulmonary resection. Here, we report the successful implementation of a completely portal robotic sleeve resection with or without pulmonary resection using a modified suture mode.

Methods

In total, 339 patients underwent curative robotic pulmonary surgery at Ruijin Hospital between May 2015 and September 2017. Three of these patients underwent robotic sleeve resection (right upper lobe, one; left upper lobe, one; and lingular segmental bronchus, one). Five port incisions were utilized, and a simple continuous running suture combined with two interrupted sutures of the membranous and cartilaginous junction portion was preferred for the anastomosis.

Results

The postoperative course was uneventful for two patients with squamous cell carcinoma. The lingular segmental bronchus patient without pulmonary resection (a salivary gland tumor) underwent short-term atelectasis. The median operation time was 155 (range 132–230) minutes. The median anastomosis time was 25 (range 23–32) minutes. The median length of postoperative hospital stay was 7 (range 6–10) days. There was no mortality or conversion to thoracotomy for any of the patients. All patients were followed for 3–6 months, and there is no tumour recurrence.

Conclusions

Our limited experience suggested that robotic sleeve resection for pulmonary disease with or without pulmonary resection may be safe and effective. The anastomosis time can be shortened with more robotic surgery experiences and the modified suture mode.

Initial Results of Robotic Surgery for Primary Lung Cancer: Feasibility, Safety and Learning Curve

BACKGROUND

At the end of 2016, robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) was still not covered by Japanese national health insurance. Therefore, few institutions in Japan perform RATS and even fewer have reported procedures as they occurred earlier. So, we decided to focus on the initial results of RATS for primary lung cancer.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 44 patients who underwent RATS for primary lung cancer from January 2011 to August 2016. After mastering the initial procedure, we introduced a completely portal robotic pulmonary resection procedure using a carbon dioxide insufflation system. Cases were divided into 2 groups: the early period (20 cases) and the later period (24 cases).

RESULTS

There was no case of conversion to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery or thoracotomy. In the 44 cases of primary lung cancer, median operating time was 239.5 min, console time was 179 min, blood loss was 10 mL, drainage period was 2 days, morbidity of Grade 2 or more (Clavien-Dindo classification) was 18.2%, morbidity of Grade 3 or more was only 4.6%, and there was no 30-day mortality. Median operating and console times were significantly shorter in the later period (215 min and 159.5 min, respectively) than in the initial period (300.5 min and 228 min, respectively). Median blood loss was significantly lower in the later period (5 mL) than in the initial period (50 mL). Five-year overall and disease-free survival rates were 100% and 88.9%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

RATS for primary lung cancer is feasible and safe, has a faster learning curve, and provides satisfactory. Studies with longer follow-ups and larger numbers of cases are necessary.

Four arms robotic-assisted pulmonary resection-left lower lobectomy: how to do it

Numerous published articles have shown the safety and efficacy of robotic lung resection, including lobectomy. The robotic approach offers similar survival rate to the open and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery methods. Potential advantages provided by robotic technology, such as three-dimensional (3D) high-quality camera, wristed tools and ergonomic ease that seems to overcome certain video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) limits have been widely described. Several techniques have been developed by different surgeons to perform a robotic lobectomy. In this study, we present our technique for performing a four-arm robotic lobectomy for the treatment of early stage lung cancer. This is shown in clear, sequential steps. We also provide an instrument preference card, some operative tips and a high-quality video.

Robotic-assisted double-sleeve lobectomy

Double-sleeve lobectomy, which includes bronchoplasty and pulmonary arterial angioplasty, is required for certain cases of central-type lung cancer. It is usually done by open surgery or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). In recently, da Vinci system and robotic surgery have been applied in such complicated cases. Here we describe the details associated with robotic-assisted double-sleeve lobectomy.