Comparative Effectiveness of Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Resectable Lung Cancer in Older Patients
- PMID: 31589843
- PMCID: PMC8500998
- DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2019.09.017
Comparative Effectiveness of Robotic-Assisted Surgery for Resectable Lung Cancer in Older Patients
Abstract
Background: Robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) is a novel surgical approach increasingly used for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, data comparing the effectiveness and costs of RAS vs open thoracotomy and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for NSCLC are limited.
Methods: Patients > 65 years old with stage I to IIIA NSCLC treated with RAS, VATS, or open thoracotomy were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database and matched according to age, sex, stage, and extent of resection. Propensity score methods were used to compare adjusted rates of postoperative complications, adequate lymph node staging, survival, and treatment-related costs.
Results: In this matched study cohort of 2,766 patients with resected NSCLC, RAS was associated with lower complication rates (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42-0.79) compared with open thoracotomy, and similar complication rates (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.76-1.37) compared with VATS. Patients undergoing RAS were as likely to have adequate lymph node sampling as those undergoing open thoracotomy (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.94-1.74) or VATS (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66-1.18). There was no significant difference in overall survival after RAS vs open thoracotomy (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.63-1.04) or VATS (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.70-1.18). Costs were similar for RAS ($54,702) vs open thoracotomy ($57,104; P = .08), and higher compared with VATS ($48,729; P = .02).
Conclusions: RAS led to improved operative outcomes compared with open thoracotomy but may not offer an advantage over VATS. The comparative effectiveness of RAS should be further evaluated prior to widespread adoption.
Keywords: NSCLC; early stage; minimally invasive; robotic surgery; treatment.
Copyright © 2019 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Figures
Comment in
-
Big Data…Small Conclusion.Chest. 2020 May;157(5):1060-1061. doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2020.02.060. Chest. 2020. PMID: 32386627 No abstract available.
References
-
- Moyer V.A. Screening for lung cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(5):330–338. - PubMed
-
- Howlader N., Noone A.M., Krapcho M. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2011. http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2011/ Accessed August, 2015.
-
- National Comprehensive Cancer Network Non-small cell lung cancer (version 4.2016) http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/nscl.pdf
-
- Scott W.J., Matteotti R.S., Egleston B.L., Oseni S., Flaherty J.F. A comparison of perioperative outcomes of video-assisted thoracic surgical (VATS) lobectomy with open thoracotomy and lobectomy: results of an analysis using propensity score based weighting. Ann Surg Innov Res. 2010;4(1):1. - PMC - PubMed
-
- Whitson B.A., Groth S.S., Duval S.J., Swanson S.J., Maddaus M.A. Surgery for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review of the video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy approaches to lobectomy. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;86(6):2008–2016. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
