An investigation of the differences in long-term patient survival rates between robotic and thoracoscopic lobectomy

Abstract

Author(s): Rashmi Gudur, Devanshu J. Patel, Guntaj J, Parag Amin, Jagtej Singh, Malathi H

Objective: Robotic surgery or thoracoscopic surgery are both options for minimally invasive lobectomy. While the two strategies are said to have comparable short-term results, it is unknown whether the strategy is more successful against cancer. This study's goal is to examine variations in the long-term patient endurance rates for robotic and thoracoscopic lobectomies.

Methods: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) sufferers who had a robotic-assisted (n=42) and thoracoscopic lobectomy (n=387), were analyzed using chance matching. The several groups were identical in every way, including the illnesses they experienced, the treatments they received and the qualities they shared. We analyzed the rates of Cancer Specific Mortality (CSM) and Overall Survival (OS) in the two distinct cohorts.

Results: The median follow-up time after surgical treatment was 35 months, and the middle age at operation was 72 (65-91). The OS and CSM of the robotic aided and thoracoscopic groups were identical.

Conclusions: The greater tendency research shows that, in comparison to patients who received Thoracoscopic Lobectomy (TL), both OS and CSM were similar for those who received robotic-assisted lobectomy compared to those who did not. There is no significant distinction between the two minimally invasive techniques in terms of oncologic outcomes. These results suggest that more study, such as a randomized control experiment or its differences or further important data analysis, is needed to corroborate these outcomes.

Share this article