ObjectiveTo evaluate the curative effect of robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for early stage lung cancer patients.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 80 patients with radical resection of lung cancer in Gansu Provincial Hospital between January 2016 and December 2017. The patients were divided into two groups: 43 patients in a VATS group and 37 in a RATS group. There were 51 males and 29 females. Data were processed with STATA v14.0 statistical software.ResultsThere were significant differences in the operative time, duration of hospital stay and operative costs between the two groups. In the RATS group, operative duration was longer (172.21 minutes versus 162.20 minutes, P=0.018), cost was higher (74 076.69 yuan versus 54 814.73 yuan, P<0.001), and required significantly shorter hospital stay (8.27 days versus 10.76 days, P=0.001) compared with those of the VATS group. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of conversion (3 versus 0, P=0.144), blood loss during operation (61.29 ml versus 90.63 ml, P=0.213), dissected lymph node number (17.38 versus 12.63, P=0.095), drainage volume (1 406.76 ml versus 1 514.60 ml, P=0.617) and the drainage time (7.92 days versus 7.20 days, P=0.440).ConclusionIn the early lung cancer patients who underwent thoracic surgery, the postoperative hospitalization time of the RATS group is shorter than that of the VATS group, and the operation time is longer than that of the VATS group. The other short-term surgical indexes are similar to those of thoracoscopic surgery. However, the robot has great advantages in the treatment of patients with difficult lymph node dissection, serious pleural adhesion and complicated anatomical relationship.
ObjectiveTo collect the data of esophageal foreign body patients, and to evaluate the clinical effects of two different surgical methods in our hospital.MethodsThe clinical data of 294 patients who were treated in Gansu Provincal Hospital from January 2012 to June 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. The clinical data were collected and analyzed by SPSS 22.0. In order to to evaluate the efficacy of flexible esophagoscope (FE) and rigid esophagoscope (RE) in the treatment of esophageal foreign bodies.The patients were divided into two groups: a RE group including 118 patients with 62 males and 56 females at age of 6 (3-37) years and a FE group including 176 patients with 84 males and 92 females at age of 6 (3-59) years.ResultsThere was no significant difference in age, age stratification, gender and foreign body type between the two groups. There was a statistical difference in the initial clinical symptoms (P=0.041) or in esophageal foreign bodies position (P=0.037) between the two groups. The success rate of foreign body removal was similar between the two groups (P=0.632). The success rate was 88.9% (105/118) in the RE group, 87.5% (154/176) in the FE group. The operation time was significantly longer in the RE group than that in the FE group (10.8 ±17.4 min vs. 17.5±21.6 min, P<0.001). The postoperative hospitalization time in the RE groups was longer than that in the FE group (21.5 ±24.2 hours vs. 12.5 ±21.3 hours, P<0.05). There was a statistical difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups (P=0.034). In the RE group, the main complication was mucosal edema (15.3%). And the rate of bleeding was higher (15.9%) in the FE group. There were 30 patients (25.5%) in the RE group with minor postoperative complications versus the FE group with 40 patients (22.7%); and 1 patient (0.8%) in the RE group with severe complications versus the FE group with 5 paients (2.8%).ConclusionBased on the analysis of this study, it is found that RE has higher safety. But the indications are strict, the professional requirements of the operator and the selection of patients are stronger. The FE is convenient to use, the operation crowd is wide, and the suitable crowd is wide. Therefore, for specific patients, after improving the relevant examination and preoperative evaluation of patients, clinicians need to choose appropriate surgical methods to ensure the success of the operation, and reduce the postoperative complications as far as possible.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library (Issue 9, 2016), Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, WanFang Data and CBM databases to collect clinical studies about RATS vs. VATS for patients with NSCLC from inception to October 2016. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 14 cohort studies involving 19 921 patients were included; among them, 4 322 cases were in the RATS group, and 15 599 were in the VATS group. The results of meta-analysis showed that the operation time (MD=22.90, 95%CI 9.97 to 35.84, P<0.000 5) was longer in the RATS group than the VATS group. However, the conversion rate (OR=0.72, 95%CI 0.44 to 1.18, P=0.20), the incidence of postoperative complications (OR=1.06, 95%CI 0.96 to 1.17, P=0.28), intraoperative blood loss (MD=2.75, 95%CI –8.39 to 13.89, P=0.63), postoperative hospitalization time (MD=–0.00, 95%CI –0.02 to 0.02, P=0.99) and in-hospital mortality rate (OR=0.60, 95%CI 0.35 to 1.05, P=0.07) were not significant differences between both groups.ConclusionThe current meta-analysis indicates that the efficacy and safety of RATS and VATS for NSCLC is equivalence, however the operation time for RATS is longer. Due to the limited quantity and quality of inclued studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high quality studies.
At present, the application of the robot assisted surgery system in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer is gradually emerging, and it is more and more widely used and recognized in the field of surgery. According to the domestic and foreign literatures, the robot has many advantages, and robotic assisted esophageal cancer surgery has been proved to be safe and effective, and its short-term efficacy is significantly better than thoracotomy. Other studies have shown that in long-term follow-up, the effect is comparable to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. In this paper, the author are systematically reviewed the development history of the robot assisted surgery system, the effect of robotic assisted esophagectomy on safety, surgical method, short-term efficacy and long-term prognosis. The traditional open surgery and thoracoscopic laparoscopic esophagectomy has been carried on the detailed comparison to provide some advice and theoretical basis for esophageal cancer surgery robot system.