Updates in surgery · 2023
Perioperative outcomes comparison of robotic and video-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy for thymic epithelial tumor: a single-center experience.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
E Haoran, Yang Chenlu, Zhang Lei, Xia Lang, Xu Long, Song Nan, Hu Xuefei, Zhu Yuming, Chen Chang, Zhao Deping
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The advent of robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) has completely revolutionized the modality of thymectomy, which could reportedly achieve equivalent efficacy compared with a minimally invasive approach. This study was conducted to further compare the perioperative outcomes between these two modalities.
METHODS: A retrospective single-center study that included patients receiving either a robotic or video-assisted thoracoscopic (VAT) thymectomy between February 2021 and January 2023 was conducted. All the patients were pathologically confirmed with thymic epithelial tumors. Clinical and pathological characteristics and perioperative outcomes were collected and compared between these two cohorts.
RESULTS: A total of 190 patients were included in this study, with 61 (32.1%) and 129 (67.9%) receiving robotic and video-assisted thymectomy, respectively. The clinicopathological characteristics were not significantly different between these 2 groups. The size of the resected specimens in the RATS cohort was larger than the VATS cohort [median (IQR), 13.0 (8.0-16.0) vs. 9.0 (6.7-12.0) cm, p < 0.001], while the procedural duration was longer for the RATS group than its counterpart [median (IQR), 105 (85-143) vs. 85 (69-115) min, p = 0.001]. Moreover, no other significant difference was observed between these two groups. Since more than half of the robotic thymectomy was performed using a subxiphoid approach, a subgroup analysis was further conducted. Similarly, the robotic group through a subxiphoid approach harbored a longer procedural duration, and the size of the specimens obtained was larger than the VATS group [median (IQR), 14.0 (11.0-16.5) vs. 12.5 (8.5-15.0) cm, p = 0.061].
CONCLUSIONS: The early clinical efficacy of robotic thymectomy was proven comparable to the established VATS approach, and such a modality might have strength when obtaining larger specimens, which could contribute to improving long-term efficacy. Despite the longer procedural duration recorded in the early stage of conducting robotic thymectomy, further accumulation would help decrease the time.
METHODS: A retrospective single-center study that included patients receiving either a robotic or video-assisted thoracoscopic (VAT) thymectomy between February 2021 and January 2023 was conducted. All the patients were pathologically confirmed with thymic epithelial tumors. Clinical and pathological characteristics and perioperative outcomes were collected and compared between these two cohorts.
RESULTS: A total of 190 patients were included in this study, with 61 (32.1%) and 129 (67.9%) receiving robotic and video-assisted thymectomy, respectively. The clinicopathological characteristics were not significantly different between these 2 groups. The size of the resected specimens in the RATS cohort was larger than the VATS cohort [median (IQR), 13.0 (8.0-16.0) vs. 9.0 (6.7-12.0) cm, p < 0.001], while the procedural duration was longer for the RATS group than its counterpart [median (IQR), 105 (85-143) vs. 85 (69-115) min, p = 0.001]. Moreover, no other significant difference was observed between these two groups. Since more than half of the robotic thymectomy was performed using a subxiphoid approach, a subgroup analysis was further conducted. Similarly, the robotic group through a subxiphoid approach harbored a longer procedural duration, and the size of the specimens obtained was larger than the VATS group [median (IQR), 14.0 (11.0-16.5) vs. 12.5 (8.5-15.0) cm, p = 0.061].
CONCLUSIONS: The early clinical efficacy of robotic thymectomy was proven comparable to the established VATS approach, and such a modality might have strength when obtaining larger specimens, which could contribute to improving long-term efficacy. Despite the longer procedural duration recorded in the early stage of conducting robotic thymectomy, further accumulation would help decrease the time.