[The Results of RATS and VATS Anatomical Resections in the Initial Phase].

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 SURGERY
Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-05 DOI:10.1055/a-2351-4297
Tamas Szöke, Christian Großer, Rudolf Schemm, Martin Bruckmeier, Hans Stefan Hofmann
{"title":"[The Results of RATS and VATS Anatomical Resections in the Initial Phase].","authors":"Tamas Szöke, Christian Großer, Rudolf Schemm, Martin Bruckmeier, Hans Stefan Hofmann","doi":"10.1055/a-2351-4297","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Robot-assisted (RATS) anatomical resection is a new method in the treatment of lung tumours, but is controversial due to its cost. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare the clinical results of the RATS and VATS anatomical resections.The first 100 VATS and RATS resections were analysed with regard to tumour stage, intra- and postoperative complications, conversion, operation time, hospital stay and length of drainage treatment, postoperative pain (numerical rating scale, NRS) and mortality. The results were compared using the chi-square, Fisher and independent t tests.In the VATS group, stage I was more frequent, stage II less frequent (stage I: 73.4%, stage II: 19.2%) than in the RATS group (stage I: 65.5%, stage II. 23%, p = 0.695). The operating time was longer with RATS (213.5 min vs. 190.3 min, p = 0.008), due to the docking and undocking time of the robotic system to the patient. The proportion of sublobar resections was significantly higher in the RATS group (28% vs. 7%, p < 0.001). The proportion of intraoperative complications (7% vs. 14%, p = 0.073) and conversion rate (9% vs. 11%, p = 0.407) were lower in the RATS surgery. The number of lymph nodes removed was high in both groups and not significantly different (VATS: 21.6, RATS: 22.1). The hospital stay was shorter after RATS (8.8 days) than after VATS (12.5 days, p < 0.001), as was the length of postoperative drainage treatment (5.6 vs. 8 days, p < 0.001). In the RATS group, postoperative pain on the 1st and 2nd postoperative day was significantly lower, as based on the numeric rating scale (1.68 vs. 2.83, p < 0.001, 0.99 vs. 2.41, p < 0.001). The complication rate was significantly higher after VATS than after RATS (57% vs. 33%, p = 0.001), and fewer reoperations were necessary after RATS (3%) than in the VATS group (8%, p = 0.121). Four patients died in the VATS group, none after RATS (p = 0.043).The robot-assisted technique enables anatomical resections with lower conversion, complication rates and mortality, as well as less postoperative pain. Robotic surgery has proven to be safe and oncologically comparable to anatomical VATS resections for lung cancer.</p>","PeriodicalId":23956,"journal":{"name":"Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie","volume":"150 1","pages":"28-34"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2351-4297","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Robot-assisted (RATS) anatomical resection is a new method in the treatment of lung tumours, but is controversial due to its cost. The aim of our retrospective study was to compare the clinical results of the RATS and VATS anatomical resections.The first 100 VATS and RATS resections were analysed with regard to tumour stage, intra- and postoperative complications, conversion, operation time, hospital stay and length of drainage treatment, postoperative pain (numerical rating scale, NRS) and mortality. The results were compared using the chi-square, Fisher and independent t tests.In the VATS group, stage I was more frequent, stage II less frequent (stage I: 73.4%, stage II: 19.2%) than in the RATS group (stage I: 65.5%, stage II. 23%, p = 0.695). The operating time was longer with RATS (213.5 min vs. 190.3 min, p = 0.008), due to the docking and undocking time of the robotic system to the patient. The proportion of sublobar resections was significantly higher in the RATS group (28% vs. 7%, p < 0.001). The proportion of intraoperative complications (7% vs. 14%, p = 0.073) and conversion rate (9% vs. 11%, p = 0.407) were lower in the RATS surgery. The number of lymph nodes removed was high in both groups and not significantly different (VATS: 21.6, RATS: 22.1). The hospital stay was shorter after RATS (8.8 days) than after VATS (12.5 days, p < 0.001), as was the length of postoperative drainage treatment (5.6 vs. 8 days, p < 0.001). In the RATS group, postoperative pain on the 1st and 2nd postoperative day was significantly lower, as based on the numeric rating scale (1.68 vs. 2.83, p < 0.001, 0.99 vs. 2.41, p < 0.001). The complication rate was significantly higher after VATS than after RATS (57% vs. 33%, p = 0.001), and fewer reoperations were necessary after RATS (3%) than in the VATS group (8%, p = 0.121). Four patients died in the VATS group, none after RATS (p = 0.043).The robot-assisted technique enables anatomical resections with lower conversion, complication rates and mortality, as well as less postoperative pain. Robotic surgery has proven to be safe and oncologically comparable to anatomical VATS resections for lung cancer.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
14.30%
发文量
116
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Konzentriertes Fachwissen aus Forschung und Praxis Das Zentralblatt für Chirurgie – alle Neuigkeiten aus der Allgemeinen, Viszeral-, Thorax- und Gefäßchirurgie.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信