Objective To compare the short-term efficacy and safety of inflatable video-assisted mediastinoscopic transhiatal esophagectomy (IVMTE) and minimally invasive transthoracic esophagectomy (MITE) in the treatment of esophageal cancer. MethodsThe Cochrane Library, EMbase, PubMed, Wanfang Database, VIP, and CNKI were searched. Literatures related to the short-term efficacy and safety of IVMTE and MITE in the treatment of esophageal neoplasms published from the establishment of the database to December 2023 were searched and meta-analysis was conducted by using RevMan5.4. Quality of case control study or cohort study was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and quality of randomized controlled trial was assessed by Cochrane Handbook. Results A total of 14 studies (12 case control studies and 1 prospective cohort study wiht NOS score more than 7 points and 1 randomized controlled trial wiht low bias risk) were included, comprising 1 163 patients, with 525 in the IVMTE group and 638 in the MITE group. The results of meta-analysis revealed that the IVMTE group exhibited significantly shorter operative time [MD=−60.42, 95%CI (−83.78, −37.07), P<0.001] and postoperative hospital stay [MD=−2.44, 95%CI (−2.93, −1.94), P<0.01] compared to the MITE group. Moreover, intraoperative blood loss [MD=−34.67, 95%CI (−59.11, −10.23), P=0.005], three-day postoperative drainage [MD=−286.66, 95%CI (−469.93, −103.40), P=0.002], incidence of postoperative pulmonary infection [OR=0.38, 95%CI (0.26, 0.56), P<0.001], lung leakage rate [OR=0.12, 95% CI (0.02, 0.63), P=0.01] and overall complication rate [MD=0.41, 95%CI (0.22, 0.75), P=0.004] were all lower in the IVMTE group compared to those in the MITE group. However, the MITE technique demonstrated superiority over IVMTE regarding intraoperative lymph dissection number [MD=−3.52, 95%CI (−6.36, –0.68), P=0.02] and intraoperative recurrent laryngeal nerve injury [OR=1.78, 95%CI (1.22, 2.60), P=0.003]. No significant difference was observed between both methods concerning anastomotic fistula. Conclusion Compared to MITE, IVMTE has advantages such as shorter operation time, less intraoperative blood loss, shorter hospital stay, less postoperative drainage within 3 days, and a lower incidence of pulmonary complications. In terms of laryngeal recurrent nerve injury and lymphatic dissection, MITE operation offers more benefits.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant radiotherapy after thymoma resection. MethodsThe PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Wanfang, VIP, CNKI databases were systematically searched to find relevant literature comparing the efficacy and effectiveness of thymoma resection and thymoma resection+postoperative radiation therapy (PORT) for treating thymoma published from inception to January 2024. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of included retrospective studies, and Review Manager 5.4 software was used to perform meta-analysis. ResultsA total of 23 articles were included, all of which were retrospective studies. There were a total of 13742 patients, including 6980 patients in the simple surgery group, with 3321 males and 3659 females, and an average age of 54.08 years; 6762 patients in the surgery+PORT group, with 3385 males and 3377 females, and an average age of 53.76 years. The NOS scores of the included literature were all≥7 points. The results of the meta-analysis showed that compared with the simple surgery group, the surgery+PORT group had higher 1-year overall survival rate [OR=0.32, 95%CI (0.25, 0.42), P<0.001], 3-year overall survival rate [OR=0.55, 95%CI (0.48, 0.64), P<0.001], 5-year overall survival rate [OR=0.66, 95%CI (0.58, 0.75), P<0.001], 10-year overall survival rate [OR=0.71, 95%CI (0.57, 0.88), P=0.002], 1-year disease-free survival rate [OR=0.47, 95%CI (0.23, 0.93), P=0.030], 5-year disease-free survival rate [OR=0.61, 95%CI (0.45, 0.84), P=0.003], 3-year disease-specific survival rate [OR=0.44, 95%CI (0.35, 0.55), P<0.001], 5-year disease-specific survival rate [OR=0.53, 95%CI (0.44, 0.63), P<0.001] and 10-year disease-specific survival rate [OR=0.53, 95%CI (0.35, 0.82), P=0.004]. But there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of 3-year disease-free survival rate [OR=0.86, 95%CI (0.61, 1.22), P=0.400], 10-year disease-free survival rate [OR=0.70, 95%CI (0.47, 1.05), P=0.080] and 1-year disease-specific survival rate [OR=0.83, 95%CI (0.55, 1.26), P=0.380]. ConclusionPORT after thymoma resection has more advantages than simple surgical treatment in terms of 1-, 3-, 5-, and 10-year overall survival, 1- and 5-year disease-free survival, and 3-, 5- and 10-year disease-specific survival.
ObjectiveTo compare the differences in the learning curve and surgeon's perception for pulmonary lobectomy performed by a single surgeon using the da Vinci surgical robot versus a domestically-made robotic system. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of the first 70 consecutive patients who underwent lobectomy with the da Vinci robot and the first 70 with a domestic robot. All procedures were performed by a single thoracic surgeon at Gansu Provincial Hospital who initiated the use of both systems concurrently between 2021 and 2024. Data were analyzed using SPSS 26.0, and learning curves for both groups were plotted and analyzed using the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method. Results The da Vinci group included 41 males and 29 females with a mean age of (66.0±6.83) years and the domestic robot group included 42 males and 28 females;with a mean age of (65.09±6.14) years. For the da Vinci group, the mean operative time was (196.14±29.63) min. The CUSUM learning curve was best fitted by a cubic equation (R2=0.986; CUSUM=0.012X3−1.799X2+69.149X−59.239, where X was the surgical volume), which peaked at the 26th case, delineating the learning and mastery phases. Statistically significant differences were observed between these phases in operation time, setup time, console time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative day 1 drainage, and number of lymph nodes dissected (all P<0.01). For the domestic robot group, the mean operative time was (187.57±24.62) min. Its CUSUM learning curve also followed a cubic fit (R2=0.910; CUSUM=0.008X3−1.152X2+40.465X+91.940), peaking at the 18th case. Significant improvements between the learning and mastery phases were also found for the same surgical metrics (all P<0.05). The surgeon's perception score was significantly higher for the da Vinci system compared to the domestic system (4.21±0.88 vs. 3.29±1.02, P<0.05). ConclusionCUSUM analysis effectively distinguishes the learning and mastery phases for both systems. The learning curve for da Vinci robotic lobectomy is overcome after 26 cases, whereas the domestic robot required 18 cases. In the mastery phase, operative time, setup time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative day 1 drainage are significantly lower, while the number of lymph nodes dissected is significantly higher compared to the learning phase for both systems. There are no significant differences in short-term efficacy or safety between the two groups. However, the da Vinci system provids a superior surgeon experience.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RAS) and conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) in hiatus hernia repair. MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, Web of Science, VIP, and Wanfang databases were searched to collect literature comparing the efficacy and safety of RAS and CLS for hiatus hernia repair published from their inception to November 7, 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and RevMan 5.4.1 software was used for meta-analysis. ResultsA total of 15 retrospective cohort studies with 18239 patients were finally included. The NOS scores of the included literature were all≥7 points. Meta-analysis results showed that RAS was superior to CLS in terms of postoperative complications as the primary outcome [OR=0.56, 95%CI (0.42, 0.77), P<0.01]. There was no statistical difference between the two methods in terms of average operation time [MD=−0.74, 95%CI (−12.99, 11.51), P=0.91], average intraoperative blood loss [MD=−24.47, 95%CI (−54.80, 5.87), P=0.11], intraoperative complications [OR=0.76, 95%CI (0.29, 2.01), P=0.58], average postoperative hospital stay [MD=−0.24, 95%CI (−0.75, 0.27), P=0.36], postoperative GERD score [MD=−0.04, 95%CI (−0.41, 0.33), P=0.81], and 30-day readmission rate [OR=0.60, 95%CI (0.30, 1.20), P=0.15]. The cost of CLS surgery was less than that of RAS [SMD=1.59, 95%CI (1.16, 2.01), P<0.01]. ConclusionRAS has comparable efficacy and safety to CLS in hiatus hernia repair.
ObjectiveTo compare the short-term outcomes of Da Vinci robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) and video-assisted thoracoscopic-laparoscopic minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE) for esophageal cancer. MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on the data of patients with esophageal cancer admitted to Gansu Provincial People's Hospital from January 2021 to February 2025. Based on the surgical method, patients were divided into a RAMIE group and a VAMIE group. Both groups underwent standard McKeown three-incision surgery and systematic three-field lymph node dissection. Intraoperative blood loss, number of lymph nodes dissected, postoperative recovery indicators, and complication rates were compared. ResultsA total of 126 patients with esophageal cancer were included, of which 109 were male and 17 were female, with an average age of (64.6±8.8) years. The RAMIE group consisted of 36 patients and the VAMIE group 90 patients. There was no statistical difference in baseline indicators such as age, sex, and body mass index between the two groups (P>0.05). The difference in operation time between the two groups was not statistically significant [305.0 (280.0, 348.0) min vs. 300.0 (268.8, 340.0) min, P=0.457]. Compared with the VAMIE group, the RAMIE group had less intraoperative blood loss [100.0 (100.0, 120.0) mL vs. 100.0 (100.0, 200.0) mL, P=0.035], more intraoperative fluid infusion [(2244.7±610.3) mL vs. (1954.4±457.9) mL, P=0.013], a higher number of lymph nodes dissected [(27.9±10.6) nodes vs. (21.3±5.1) nodes, P<0.001], and the difference in the number of lymph node dissection groups was not statistically significant [8.0 (6.0, 8.0) groups vs. 7.0 (5.0, 8.0) groups, P=0.268]. In terms of postoperative recovery indicators, compared with the VAMIE group, the RAMIE group had shorter postoperative hospital stay [12.5 (9.0, 18.0) d vs. 17.0 (14.0, 22.0) d, P＜0.001] and shorter time with tubes [9.0 (8.0, 10.0) d vs. 10.0 (9.0, 12.0) d, P=0.007]. In terms of postoperative complications, the incidence of recurrent laryngeal nerve injury in the RAMIE group was significantly lower than that in the VAMIE group (2.8% vs. 16.7%, P=0.039), there was no statistical difference in pulmonary infection, anastomosis leakage, and incision infection between the two groups (P>0.05). The total hospitalization cost of the RAMIE group was significantly higher than that of the VAMIE group (P<0.001). ConclusionRAMIE has significant advantages over VAMIE in terms of intraoperative bleeding control, the number of lymph node dissections, postoperative recovery speed, and reducing the risk of incision infection and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, with good safety and feasibility.