OBJECTIVETo compare conventional open chest surgery and robotic surgery for their efficacy, short?term outcomes and patient selection in the treatment of heart tumors. Method The clinical data were collected from 225 patients (a total of 228 operations) who underwent cardiac neoplasm resection in our hospital between January, 1993 and April, 2016. A propensity score matching (PSM) was established according to the vital baseline data of the patients receiving conventional open chest surgery (n=125) and robotic surgery (n=60) after screening. The patients were matched for propensity into 60 pairs, and the efficacy, short?term outcomes and patient selection were compared between the two groups.

RESULTSBefore PSM, the patients in conventional surgery group had significantly greater tumor size (P<0.001) and a higher proportion of patients with New York Heart Association functional class III and IV (P<0.001). The patients' baseline data were nearly balanced (P=0.982) between the two groups after matching. No significant differences were found between the two groups in cardiopulmonary bypass time (P=0.256), crossclamp time (P=0.862), in?hospital mortality (P=1.000), arrhythmia (P=1.000), delayed mechanical ventilation (>24 h; P=0.209), thoracic complications (P=0.611) or systemic embolism (P=1.000). The survival rates were 100% in both groups in the 6?month follow?up after the operation, and no significant difference was found between the two groups in the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events within 6 months (P=0.438).

CONCLUSIONRobotic heart tumor resection has a favorable efficacy with a good short?term prognosis, and can serve as an alternative for treatment of solitary lesions in low?risk patients receiving operations for the first time.