Compare the prognosis of Da Vinci robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) with video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for non-small cell lung cancer: A Meta-analysis

To determine if there are advantages to transitioning to Da Vinci robotics by a surgeon compared to the video-assisted thoracic surgical lobectomy.A systematic electronic search of online electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library updated on December 2017. Publications on comparison...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inMedicine (Baltimore) Vol. 98; no. 39; p. e17089
Main Authors Guo, Feng, Ma, Dongjie, Li, Shanqing
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published United States the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc 01.09.2019
Wolters Kluwer Health
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:To determine if there are advantages to transitioning to Da Vinci robotics by a surgeon compared to the video-assisted thoracic surgical lobectomy.A systematic electronic search of online electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library updated on December 2017. Publications on comparison Da Vinci-robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for non-small cell lung cancer were collected. Meta-analysis RevMan 5.3 software (The Cochrane collaboration, Oxford, UK) was used to analyze the combined pooled HRs using fixed or random-effects models according to the heterogeneity.Fourteen retrospective cohort studies were included. No statistical difference was found between the 2 groups with respect to conversion to open, dissected lymph nodes number, hospitalization time after surgery, duration of surgery, drainage volume after surgery, prolonged air leak, and morbidity (P > .05).Da Vinci-RATS lobectomy is a feasible and safe technique and can achieve an equivalent surgical efficacy when compared with VATS. There does not seem to be a significant advantage for an established VATS lobectomy surgeon to transition to robotics based on clinical outcomes.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0025-7974
1536-5964
DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000017089