Abstract
Objective
In the tide of robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery, few cases of robot-assisted pneumonectomy exist in the literature. This study evaluates the perioperative outcomes and risk factors for conversion to thoracotomy with an initial robotic approach to pneumonectomy for lung cancer.
Methods
This study is a single-center retrospective review of all pneumonectomies for lung cancer with an initial robotic approach between 2015 and 2019. Patients were divided into 2 groups: surgeries completed robotically and surgeries converted to thoracotomy. Patient demographics, preoperative clinical data, surgical pathology, and perioperative outcomes were compared for meaningful differences between the groups.
Results
Thirteen total patients underwent robotic pneumonectomy with 8 of them completed robotically and 5 converted to thoracotomy. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the groups. The Robotic group had a shorter operative time (P < 0.01) and less estimated blood loss (P = 0.02). There were more lymph nodes harvested in the Robotic group (P = 0.08) but without statistical significance. There were 2 major complications in the Robotic group and none in the Conversion group. Neither tumor size nor stage were predictive of conversion to thoracotomy. Conversions decreased over time with a majority occurring in the first 2 years. There were no conversions for bleeding and no mortalities.
Conclusions
Robotic pneumonectomy for lung cancer is a safe procedure and a reasonable alternative to thoracotomy. With meticulous technique, major bleeding can be avoided and most procedures can be completed robotically. Larger studies are needed to elucidate any advantages of a robotic versus open approach.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
