PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 21, 2026International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery0 citations

Robot‐Assisted Thoracic Surgery Versus Video‐Assisted Thoracic Surgery for Lung Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

View Full Paper
AMAshraf MaghrabiSASamar M. AltoukhiFAFouad Abdulsalam S. Alghamidi

Key Points

  • This review aims to compare the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted thoracic surgery and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for lung resection.
  • Systematic review and meta-analysis of 29 studies
  • Databases searched: PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library until June 2025
  • Used random-effects models for data analysis with Review Manager v5.4.1.
  • Robot-assisted surgery significantly improved lymph node yield (MD 4.54; 95% CI 2.91–6.17)
  • Operative time was shorter for robot-assisted compared to video-assisted surgery (MD −6.09; 95% CI −13.20–1.03)
  • Robot-assisted surgery showed higher R0 resection rates, fewer complications, and lower recurrence rates.

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Lung resection is a standard treatment for lung cancer. Video‐assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) is widely used as a minimally invasive approach. Recent advancements in robotic technology enhances the safety and efficacy of robot‐assisted thoracic surgery (RATS). This systematic review and meta‐analysis compared the clinical outcomes of RATS and VATS in lung resection. Methods PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to June 2025. Primary outcomes were lymph node yield and operative time. Secondary outcomes included R0 resection, postoperative complications, and recurrence. Data were analysed using Review Manager v5.4.1 with random‐effects models. Results Twenty‐nine studies involving 66,406 patients were included. RATS significantly improved lymph node yield (MD 4.54; 95% CI 2.91–6.17) and showed shorter operative time (MD −6.09; 95% CI −13.20–1.03). RATS was associated with higher R0 resection rates, fewer complications, and lower recurrence. Conclusion The findings support the safety and oncologic effectiveness of RATS.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Maghrabi et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a37800c24f042ddf4c5a3f2https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.70191
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper