Objective To systematically evaluate the difference in clinical outcomes between subxiphoid video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (SVATS) and intercostal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (IVATS) for anterior mediastinal tumor resection. Methods Online databases including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, Wanfang from inception to December 19, 2022 were searched by two researchers independently for literature comparing the clinical efficacy of SVATS and IVATS in treating anterior mediastinal tumors. Two researchers independently screened literature and extracted relevant data. The quality of the included literature was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3. ResultsA total of 12 studies with 1 517 patients were enrolled. NOS score≥6 points. The results of meta-analysis showed that compared with the IVATS, SVATS had less blood loss (MD=?17.76, 95%CI ?34.21 to ?1.31, P=0.030), less total postoperative drainage volume (MD=?70.46, 95%CI ?118.88 to ?22.03, P=0.004), shorter duration of postoperative drainage tube retention (MD=?0.84, 95%CI ?1.57 to ?0.10, P=0.030), lower rate of postoperative lung infections (OR=0.33, 95%CI 0.16 to 0.70, P=0.004), lower postoperative 24 h VAS pain score (MD=?1.95, 95%CI ?2.64 to ?1.25, P＜0.001) and 72 h VAS pain score (MD=?1.76, 95%CI ?2.55 to ?0.97, P＜0.001), and shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD=?1.12, 95%CI ?1.80 to ?0.45, P=0.001). There was no statistical difference in the operation time, the incidence of postoperative complications, incidence of postoperative phrenic nerve palsy or incidence of postoperative arrhythmia (P＞0.05). ConclusionSVATS for the treatment of anterior mediastinal tumors has high safety. Compared with the IVATS, the patients have less intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume, lower risk of postoperative pulmonary infection, less postoperative short-term pain, and shorter postoperative catheter duration and hospital stay, which is more conducive to rapid postoperative recovery.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the clinical outcomes of minimally invasive lung segment resection (MILSR) and lobe resection (MILLR) for stageⅠA non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to provide reference for clinical application. MethodsOnline databases including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, SinoMed, CNKI, and Wanfang were searched from inception to January 21, 2023 by two researchers independently. The quality of the included literature was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The prognostic indicators included the overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). The meta-analysis was performed using STATA 14.0. ResultsA total of 13 studies with 1 853 patients were enrolled in the final study, with NOS scores ≥7 points. The results of meta-analysis showed that compared with the MILLR group, the blood loss was less [SMD=?0.36, 95%CI (?0.49, ?0.23), P<0.001], postoperative drainage tube retention time [SMD=?0.34, 95%CI (?0.62, ?0.05), P=0.019] and hospitalization time [SMD=?0.28, 95%CI (?0.40, ?0.15), P<0.001] were shorter in the MILSR group. More lymph nodes [SMD=?0.65, 95%CI (?0.78, ?0.53), P<0.001] and shorter operation time [SMD=0.20, 95%CI (0.07, 0.33), P=0.003] were found in the MILLR group. There were no statistical differences in the incidence of postoperative complications, postoperative recurrence rate, OS, DFS or RFS between the two groups. ConclusionAlthough the number of lymph nodes removed by MILSR is limited compared with MILLR, it does not affect the prognosis. MILSR has advantages in reducing intraoperative blood loss and shortening postoperative drainage tube retention time and hospital stay. For the surgical treatment of stageⅠA NSCLC, MILSR may be a more appropriate surgical approach.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate of the difference in clinical outcomes between Da-Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for mediastinal tumor resection. MethodsOnline databases including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, SinoMed, CNKI, and Wanfang were searched by two researchers independently from inception to October 10, 2022. The quality of the included literature was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3. ResultsA total of 23 studies with 5 646 patients were enrolled in the final study. The NOS scores of the studies were≥6 points. The results of meta-analysis showed that compared with the VATS group, the blood loss was less [MD=?18.11, 95%CI (?26.12, ?10.09), P＜0.001], time of postoperative drainage tube retention [MD=?0.79, 95%CI (?1.09, ?0.49), P＜0.001] and postoperative hospitalization time [MD=?1.00, 95%CI (?1.36, ?0.64), P＜0.001] were shorter, postoperative day 1 drainage [MD=?5.53, 95%CI (?9.94, ?1.12), P=0.010] and total postoperative drainage [MD=?88.41, 95%CI (?140.85, ?35.97), P=0.001] were less, the rates of postoperative complications [OR=0.66, 95%CI (0.46, 0.94), P=0.020] and conversion to thoracotomy [OR=0.32, 95%CI (0.19, 0.53), P＜0.001] were lower, and the hospitalization costs were higher [MD=2.60, 95%CI (1.40, 3.79), P＜0.001] in the RATS group. The operative time was not statistically different between the two groups [MD=5.94, 95%CI (?1.45, 13.34), P=0.120]. ConclusionRATS mediastinal tumor resection has a high safety profile. Compared with VATS, patients have less intraoperative blood loss, a lower rate of conversion to thoracotomy, and shorter postoperative tube time and hospital stay, which is more conducive to rapid postoperative recovery.
Objective To compare the clinical outcomes of subxiphoid robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (SRATS) and intercostal robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (IRATS) in the treatment of anterior mediastinal tumors. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients with anterior mediastinal tumors who underwent robot-assisted surgery in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Gansu Provincial Hospital, from May 2020 to July 2022. According to the surgical approach, patients were divided into an SRATS group and an IRATS group. Perioperative data were compared between the two groups. Results A total of 87 patients were included. There were 41 patients in the SRATS group [23 males, 18 females; mean age, (44.51±11.28) years] and 46 patients in the IRATS group [21 males, 25 females; mean age, (46.67±8.76) years]. Compared with the IRATS group, the SRATS group had significantly less intraoperative blood loss [(24.41±6.67) mL vs. (37.93±9.23) mL, P<0.001], shorter postoperative drainage duration [(1.73±0.59) days vs. (2.54±0.50) days, P<0.001], lower postoperative drainage volume [(94.46±34.08) mLvs. (116.72±24.90) mL, P=0.001], lower visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores on postoperative day 1 [(3.66±0.76) points vs. (4.15±0.84) points, P=0.005] and day 3 [(2.41±0.59) points vs. (2.89±0.82) points, P=0.003], shorter postoperative hospital stay [(4.12±0.81) days vs. (4.98±1.02) days, P<0.001], and lower hospitalization costs [(4.51±0.65) ten thousand yuan vs. (4.86±0.68) ten thousand yuan, P=0.020]. There were no statistical differences between the two groups in operative time or incidence of postoperative complications (P>0.05). Conclusion Both SRATS and IRATS are safe and effective for the treatment of anterior mediastinal tumors. However, SRATS is less invasive and more conducive to enhanced postoperative recovery.