BackgroundInvasiveness is considered one of the cornerstones of every field of surgery, and video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) approaches are now routinely used worldwide to perform pulmonary resections. Recently, robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) has become the preferred technique in many centers; it is routinely performed using three or four ports with at least one service incision, contrasting with the real concept of invasiveness, especially when compared to uniportal VATS (U-VATS). Hereby, we present our early experience with uniportal RATS (U-RATS) pulmonary resections for early-stage lung cancer. Technical details of surgical steps are accurately described and commented on.ResultsTwenty-four consecutive patients with lung cancer underwent U-RATS anatomical pulmonary resections at our institute. All procedures were completed with the uniportal approach. The mean operative time was 210 min (range 120–350); in the last 10 cases, the operative time was significantly reduced (180 min) compared to the first 10 cases (232 min) (p < 0.02), showing a very fast learning curve. The postoperative pain score was comparable to that for U-VATS and was constantly low.ConclusionsU-RATS is a safe and feasible technique, combining the advantages of U-VATS with the well-known advantages of robotic surgery.
PURPOSE: The objective of the study was to highlight sources of harm that could negatively affect the lung cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) activities to reduce the level of risk of each factor. METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was used by a board of multi–health care professionals of the lung cancer MDT to identify the main processes, subprocesses, and risk factors of the multidisciplinary pathway of patients with lung cancer. A semiquantitative matrix was built with a five-point scale for probability of harm (likelihood) and severity of harm (consequences) according to the international risk management standards (ISO 31000-2018). The risk level was calculated by multiplying likelihood × consequences. Mitigation strategies have been identified and applied by the MDT to reduce risks to acceptable levels. RESULTS: Three main processes (outpatient specialist visit, MDT discussion, and MDT program implementation), eight related subprocesses, and 16 risk factors were identified. Four risk factors (25%) were related to outpatient specialist visit, seven (43.75%) to case discussion, and five (31.25%) to program implementation. Overall, two risk factors were assigned a low-risk level (12.5%), 11 a moderate-risk level (68.75%), one (6.25%) a high-risk level, and two (12.5%) a very high-risk level. After the implementation of mitigation measures, the new semiquantitative risk analysis showed a reduction in almost all hazardous situations: two risk factors (12.5%) were given a very low level, six (37.5%) a low level, seven (43.75%) a moderate level, and one (6.25%) a very high level. CONCLUSION: An interdisciplinary risk assessment analysis is applicable to MDT activities by using an ad hoc risk matrix: if the hazard is identified and monitored, the risk could be reduced and managed in a short time.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.