ObjectiveWe aimed to further investigate the feasibility of using small bore chest tubes or even without chest tube insertion after da Vinci robot-assisted thoracic surgery. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed initial 70 patients between September 12, 2014 and March 30, 2015 as a control group at the department of thoracic surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, and proposed four schemes. There are 31 males and 39 females with mean age of 57.1±9.8 (ranged from 30-80 years). We applied those four schemes for the last 30 patients as an experimental group. There are 12 males and 18 females with mean age of 58.8±8.1 (ranged 42-73 years). ResultsThe days in hospital after surgery ranged 2-25 days and there was no severe complication. After the surgery, the pain scores of the trial group are lower than that of the control group. And the schemes 1 and schemes 2 of trial group reduced significantly than the control group (P<0.05). There is no significant difference of the rate of the complication caused by poor drainage between the trial group and the control group (P>0.05). But the pain score after surgery is lower than that of the control group (P<0.05). ConclusionOptimizing thoracic drainage strategy after da Vinci robot-assisted thoracic surgery is safe, possible and helpful to relieve postoperative pain.
Objective To investigate the safety of thoracic surgery for high-altitude patients in local medical center. MethodsWe retrospectively collected 258 high-altitude patients who received thoracic surgery in West China Hospital, Sichuan University (plain medical center, 54 patients) and People's Hospital of Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture (high-altitude medical center, 204 patients) from January 2013 to July 2019. There were 175 males and 83 females with an average age of 43.0±16.8 years. Perioperative indicators, postoperative complications and related risk factors of patients were analyzed. ResultsThe rate of minimally invasive surgery in the high-altitude medical center was statistically lower than that in the plain medical center (11.8% vs. 55.6%, P<0.001). The surgical proportions of tuberculous empyema (41.2% vs. 1.9%, P<0.001) and pulmonary hydatid (15.2% vs. 0.0%, P=0.002) in the high-altitude medical center were statistically higher than those in the plain medical center. There was no statistical difference in perioperative mortality (0.5% vs. 1.9%, P=0.379) or complication rate within 30 days after operation (7.4% vs. 11.1%, P=0.402) between the high-altitude center and the plain medical center. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that body mass index≥25 kg/m2 (OR=8.647, P<0.001) and esophageal rupture/perforation were independent risk factors for the occurrence of postoperative complications (OR=15.720, P<0.001). ConclusionThoracic surgery in the high-altitude medical center is safe and feasible.
Objective To compare the short- and long-term survival of patients with stage T1N0M0 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) undergoing robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). Methods The clinical data of 396 patients with stage T1N0M0 NSCLC treated with RATS or VATS in our hospital from 2012 to 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 209 males and 187 females, with a mean age of 61.58±8.67 years. According to surgical procedures, they were separated into two groups: a RATS group (n=157) and a VATS group (n=239). The two groups were compared in terms of the survival and prognosis-influencing factors. Results The intraoperative blood loss and postoperative 24 h drainage volume in the RATS group were less than those in the VATS group (48±42 mL vs. 182±231 mL, P<0.001; 250±119 mL vs. 324±208 mL, P<0.001). The groups and number of dissected lymph node in the RATS group were more than those of the VATS group (5±2 groups vs. 3±2 groups, P<0.001; 17±9 vs. 11±8, P<0.001). There was no statistical difference in the postoperative 48 h drainage volume (P=0.497), postoperative intubation time (P=0.180) or hospital stay (P=0.313). The survival state and recurrence-free survival state in the VATS group were better than those in the VATS group (1-year survival rate: 98.7% vs. 94.8%, 5-year survival rate: 90.5% vs. 75.8%, 8-year survival rate: 76.9% vs. 62.1%, mean survival time: 93 months vs. 79 months, P=0.005; 1-year recurrence-free survival rate: 97.4% vs. 95.6%, 5-year recurrence-free survival rate: 94.8% vs. 77.8%, 8-year recurrence-free survival rate: 82.6% vs. 64.8%, mean recurrence-free survival time: 95 months vs. 79 months, P=0.004). Univariate analysis showed that surgical method, the groups and the number of dissected lymph nodes were the influencing factors for postoperative overall survival and recurrence-free survival. At the same time, the results of multivariate analysis showed that surgical method was a common independent factor for overall survival and recurrence-free survival.Conclusion RATS can obtain better survival in patients with T1N0M0 NSCLC, and RATS has more thorough lymph node dissection, less intraoperative blood loss and postoperative 24 h drainage volume.
Since the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, a large number of elective or limited operations, including tumor treatment, have been postponed. With the deepening of the understanding of the virus and the change of the prevention policy, the impact of the pandemic is gradually shrinking, and a large number of operations delayed by the pandemic will be rescheduled. However, there is no consensus on the best time to perform surgery for patients infected with SARS-CoV-2, and the consensus on thoracic surgery is more limited. This article reviews the research progress in the timing of surgical operations, especially thoracic surgery, after SARS-CoV-2 infection.
ObjectiveTo investigate the perioperative efficacy and safety of all-port robotic lobectomy versus thoracoscopic lobectomy in stageⅠA non-small cell lung cancer. MethodsThe clinical data of patients with stageⅠA non-small cell lung cancer who underwent lobectomy with lymph node dissection performed by the same operator in our center from June 2019 to June 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were divided into a robotic group and a thoracoscopic group according to different procedures. We compared the relevant indexes such as operation time, intraoperative bleeding, number of lymph node dissection stations, number of lymph node dissection, postoperative tube time, postoperative hospitalization time, closed chest drainage volume, postoperative pain, postoperative complications and hospitalization cost between the two groups. ResultsThere were 83 patients in the robotic group, including 34 males and 49 females with a median age of 60.0 (53.0, 67.0) years, and 94 patients in the thoracoscopic group, including 36 males and 58 females with a median age of 60.5 (54.0, 65.3) years. There was no conversion to thoractomy or death in postoperative 90 days in both groups. No statistical difference was seen in the operation time, total postoperative drainage volume and postoperative complication rates between the two groups (P>0.05). Patients in the robotic group had less intraoperative bleeding (P<0.001), more lymph node dissection stations (P=0.002) and numbers (P=0.005), less postoperative pain (P=0.002), and shorter postoperative time with tubes (P=0.031) and hospital stay (P<0.001). However, the surgery was more expensive in the robotic group (P<0.001). ConclusionAll-port robotic surgery is safe and effective for patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer with less intraoperative bleeding, more lymph node dissection, less postoperative pain, and shorter hospital stay compared with the thoracoscopic surgery.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 9, 2016), Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data and CBM databases to collect clinical studies about RATS vs. VATS for patients with NSCLC from inception to October 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 14 cohort studies involving 19 921 patients were included; among them, 4 322 cases were in the RATS group, and 15 599 were in the VATS group. The results of meta-analysis showed that the operation time (MD=22.90, 95%CI 9.97 to 35.84, P<0.000 5) was longer in the RATS group than the VATS group. However, the conversion rate (OR=0.72, 95%CI 0.44 to 1.18, P=0.20), the incidence of postoperative complications (OR=1.06, 95%CI 0.96 to 1.17, P=0.28), intraoperative blood loss (MD=2.75, 95%CI –8.39 to 13.89, P=0.63), postoperative hospitalization time (MD=–0.00, 95%CI –0.02 to 0.02, P=0.99) and in-hospital mortality rate (OR=0.60, 95%CI 0.35 to 1.05, P=0.07) were not significant differences between both groups.ConclusionThe current meta-analysis indicates that the efficacy and safety of RATS and VATS for NSCLC is equivalence, however the operation time for RATS is longer. Due to the limited quantity and quality of inclued studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high quality studies.