A Comparison of Short-Term Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Versus Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Following Lung Cancer Surgery at a Tertiary Hospital in the United Kingdom: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

Background: Robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) is gaining popularity in lung resection surgeries; however, its quality outcome measures require further evaluation. This study compared the short-term perioperative outcomes of lung resection surgeries performed using RATS and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) at a tertiary hospital in the UK. Methods: We performed a retrospective comparative analysis of 496 patients who underwent lung resection surgery at Castle Hill Hospital in the UK between January 2021 and April 2024. In the pre-matched cohort, 162 patients underwent RATS compared to 334 who underwent VATS. Using propensity matching based on the patient's forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) percentage of predicted age and body mass index (BMI), we included 324 patients in the analysis. Of these, 162 underwent RATS, and 162 underwent VATS, demonstrating satisfactory performance indicators. Results: The results from our analysis depicted that RATS had a significantly lower rate of prolonged air leak (≥7 minutes) than VATS (5.5% versus 7.1%, mean difference -1.32, 95% CI: -0.89-3.08, p = 0.034). RATS patients also had shorter duration of hospital stay (3.8 ± 4.1 days versus 4.7 ± 4.8, mean difference -0.901, 95% CI: -1.886-0.084; p = 0.073) and had more mediastinal lymph node dissections (39.5% versus 35.2%) than VATS. However, the proportion of patients who were upstaged after histopathological analysis of the resected lymph nodes was not different between the two groups. Furthermore, the groups had no significant differences regarding the infection rate, intermittent positive pressure ventilation (IPPV) use, and theatre return. Conclusion: Robotic and video-assisted technologies produced equivalent results for the majority of the short-term outcomes evaluated. Additional research is necessary to confirm RATS's efficacy and determine its potential advantages over VATS for lung resection surgeries.