BACKGROUND: Recent trials suggest that more conservative resections such as segmentectomy are non-inferior to more radical approaches. Most segmentectomy can be safely performed using video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). The clinical benefits of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) remain unclear. We aimed to perform a systematic review evaluating the outcome of open thoracotomy, VATS, and RATS for segmentectomy. METHODS: A systematic database search was conducted of original articles exploring the outcome of open versus VATS versus RATS segmentectomy in PubMed, EMBASE and SCOPUS. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were hospital readmission, air leak, and post-operative pneumonia respectively. RESULTS: 11 studies were included with a total patient sample size of 7280. There were no differences between the three approaches in terms of 30-day mortality, hospital readmission, air leak, and post-operative pneumonia. CONCLUSION: There are no significant differences between the three approaches in the clinical outcomes measured. While our analysis demonstrates the potential benefits of RATS, it is important to note that the steep learning curve associated with this technique may impact its wider adoption and efficacy in the community. Further randomised control studies are required to compare the short and long terms results of VATS and RATS approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Francis et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: