Objective:
The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes of open lobectomy (OL), VATS, and robotic-assisted lobectomy (RL).
Summary Background Data:
Robotic-assisted lobectomy has seen increasing adoption for treatment of early-stage lung cancer. Comparative data regarding these approaches is largely from single-institution case series or administrative datasets.
Methods:
Retrospective data was collected from 21 institutions from 2013 to 2019. All consecutive cases performed for clinical stage IA-IIIA lung cancer were included. Neoadjuvant cases were excluded. Propensity-score matching (1:1) was based on age, sex, race, smoking-status, FEV1%, Zubrod score, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor size, and clinical T and N stage.
Results:
A total of 2391 RL, 2174 VATS, and 1156 OL cases were included. After propensity-score matching there were 885 pairs of RL vs OL, 1,711 pairs of RL vs VATS, and 952 pairs of VATS vs OL. Operative time for RL was shorter than VATS (P < 0.0001) and OL (P = 0.0004). Compared to OL, RL and VATS had less overall postoperative complications, shorter hospital stay (LOS), and lower transfusion rates (all P<0.02). Compared to VATS, RL had lower conversion rate (P<0.0001), shorter hospital stay (P<0.0001) and a lower postoperative transfusion rate (P =0.01). RL and VATS cohorts had comparable postoperative complication rates. In-hospital mortality was comparable between all groups.
Conclusions:
RL and VATS approaches were associated with favorable perioperative outcomes compared to OL. Robotic-assisted lobectomy was also associated with a reduced length of stay and decreased conversion rate when compared to VATS.
Malignant mesothelioma is a very difficult malignancy to treat. Patients with the disease usually have an occupational asbestos exposure, and in some, viral exposure with SV40. There have been many historical treatments including combinations of local control with surgery and radiation as well as attempts to prevent systemic failure with chemotherapy. Novel therapies including intrapleural chemotherapy, photodynamic therapy and hyperthermic perfusion have also been used with some success. Finally there are several attempts at immunomodulating and targeted treatments, which are in phase I/II trials.
Endobronchial ultrasonography (EBUS) has emerged as a new diagnostic tool that allows the bronchoscopist to see beyond the airway, including pulmonary and mediastinal lesion. The real time EBUS-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) has advanced the diagnostic yield in primary lung pathology and mediastinal lymph node staging of lung carcinoma. Sixty-four patients (36 males, 28 females, ages ranging from 16 to 86 years) with peribronchial lung lesions and mediastinal and/or hilar lymph node lesions underwent EBUS-TBNA. All patients had intraoperative cytological assessment by smears on aspiration samples or touch preparation on needle core biopsies.The cytological final diagnoses were categorized as negative, suspicious/positive, and non-diagnostic. Forty-nine samples were obtained from lymph node lesions and 15 samples were obtained from lung lesions. In cytology specimens, 32 patients had suspicious/positive diagnoses and 32 patients had negative diagnosis. In follow-up histology specimens, 35 patients had malignant diagnoses, including 18 adenocarcinomas, 8 small cell carcinomas, 6 squamous cell carcinomas, 1 metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma, 1 metastatic melanoma, and 1 lymphoma. Twenty-nine patients had negative diagnoses. Sensitivity and specificity were 88.9% and 96.4%, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 97.0% and 87.1%, respectively. Diagnostic accuracy was 92.2%. EBUS-TBNA is an efficient and effective technique for diagnosis of intrapulmonary and mediastinal/hilar lymph nodes. It becomes significantly invaluable on clinical management for staging in those patients with lung cancer of other metastatic malignancies. This technique enables us to obtain tissue samples for quick diagnoses beyond central airway with minimal complications.
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.