Long-term outcome of robotic versus video-assisted thoracic surgery for stageⅠ lung adenocarcinoma: A propensity score matching study
- VernacularTitle:达芬奇机器人与电视胸腔镜辅助手术治疗 Ⅰ期肺腺癌远期结果的倾向性评分匹配研究
- Author:
HU Boxiao
1
;
LIU Bo
2
;
XU Shiguang
2
;
LIU Xingchi
2
;
XU Wei
2
;
WANG Xilong
2
;
XUE Jialong
2
;
LI Xu
2
;
GONG Xiaokang
2
;
WANG Shumin
2
Author Information
1. Graduate Training Base of General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Dalian Medical School, Shenyang, 110016, P.R.China
2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, 110016, P.R.China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Da Vinci surgical system;
lung adenocarcinoma;
overall survival;
disease free survival;
propensity score matching
- From:
Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2020;27(03):284-289
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the the effectiveness of robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) with video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS), in stageⅠ lung adenocarcinoma. Methods From January 2012 to December 2018, 291 patients were included. The patients were allocated into two groups including a RATS group with 125 patients and a VATS group with 166 patients. Two cohorts (RATS, VATS ) of clinical stageⅠ lung adenocarcinoma patients were matched by propensity score. Then there were 114 patients in each group (228 patients in total). There were 45 males and 69 females at age of 62±9 years in the RATS group; 44 males, 70 females at age of 62±8 years in the VATS group. Overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were assessed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with the outcomes. Results Compared with the VATS group, the RATS group got less blood loss (P<0.05) and postoperative drainage (P<0.05) with a statistical difference. There was no statistical difference in drainage time (P>0.05) or postoperative hospital stay (P>0.05) between the two groups. The RATS group harvested more stations and number of the lymph nodes with a statistical difference (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference in 1-year, 3-year and 5-year OS and mean survival time (P>0.05). While there was a statistical difference in DFS between the two groups (1-year DFS: 94.1% vs. 95.6%; 3-year DFS: 92.6% vs. 75.2%; 5-year DFS: 92.6% vs. 68.4%, P<0.05; mean DFS time: 78 months vs. 63 months, P<0.05) between the two groups. The univariate analysis found that the number of the lymph nodes dissection was the prognostic factor for OS, and tumor diameter, surgical approach, stations and number of the lymph nodes dissection were the prognostic factors for DFS. However, multivariate analysis found that there was no independent risk factor for OS, but the tumor diameter and surgical approach were independently associated with DFS. Conclusion There is no statistical difference in OS between the two groups, but the RATS group gets better DFS.
