Robotic assisted lung resection needs further evidence

Migliore, Marcello

doi:10.21037/jtd.2016.10.89

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(22 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering the high cost of robotic surgery and the outcome data, we thought that the transition from VATL to FARL by a surgeon who is already experienced in VATL could not be recommended because of safety issues and economic reasons. The similar results were reported in recent article; Migliore mentioned that the adoption of the robotic system in pulmonary resection is problematic due to no survival benefits, longer duration of the operation and the longer operative room usage and higher cost compared to open or VATS lobectomy (17).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Feasibility of four-arm robotic lobectomy as solo surgery in patients with clinical stage I lung cancer

Park¹,

Suh²,

Narm³

et al. 2017

J. Thorac. Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This study was performed to investigate the feasibility of four-arm robotic lobectomy (FARL) as a solo surgical technique in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Early outcome and long-term survival of FARL were compared with those of video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (VATL). 87.5%, P=0.386) and disease-free survival (82.5% vs. 75.6%, P=0.589) were comparable.Conclusions: FARL as solo surgery could not be recommended because of safety issues. It required a longer operation time and had no benefits over VATL in terms of early postoperative outcome or long-term survival.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Feasibility of four-arm robotic lobectomy as solo surgery in patients with clinical stage I lung cancer

Park¹,

Suh²,

Narm³

et al. 2017

J. Thorac. Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The advantages of the two techniques, combined in one, could make the difference. Despite some authors raised concern (21,22), the application of the robotic technology for thoracic surgery has clearly some potential advantages (23). This is true especially when performing complex resections, where there is a reconstructive part of the procedure (i.e., oesophageal surgery, sleeve lobectomy, carinal resection) which can be made easier with the aid of the robotic instrumentation.…”

Section: Future Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perspective on uniportal thoracic surgery: where do we stand and what is the future

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uniportal video assisted thoracic surgery (U-VATS) is undoubtedly one of the recent most significant innovation in the field of pulmonary resection. The concept of a single incision, minimally invasive, thoracic procedure moved its first step in the late 90'. In more recent years we had several reports of uniportal surgery for major lung resection, complex surgery and also awake major pulmonary surgery. In this perspective we will try to understand the definitions, the potential benefit, its limitation and the future possible evolution of this relatively novel technique.

show abstract

“…Nowadays open thoracic surgery is becoming very rare, and it is therefore very rare that we can teach junior surgeons to perform finger dissection of the main pulmonary artery and veins. Moreover, some studies have shown an higher incidence of vascular problems during RATS (8,9), and it is known that it could be a disaster if the surgeon has no experience in open surgery to control very quickly the main PA.…”

Section: Teaching Rats (And Vats)mentioning

confidence: 99%