O'Sullivan Katie E, Kreaden Usha S, Hebert April E, Eaton Donna, Redmond Karen C
Department of Thoracic Surgery, Mater Misericordiae University Hospital, Eccles St., Dublin, Ireland.
Clinical Affairs, Intuitive Surgical Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA.
Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2019 Mar;8(2):174-193. doi: 10.21037/acs.2019.02.04.
Median sternotomy has been the most commonly used approach for thymectomy to date. Recent advances in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic access with CO insufflation techniques have allowed more minimally invasive approaches. However, prior reviews have not compared robotic to both open and VATS thymectomy.
A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines using PubMed, Embase and Scopus databases. Original research articles comparing robotic to VATS or to open thymectomy for myasthenia gravis, anterior mediastinal masses, or thymomas were included. Meta-analyses were performed for mortality, operative time, blood loss, transfusions, length of stay, conversion to open, intraoperative and postoperative complication rates, and positive/negative margin rates.
Robotic thymectomy is a valid alternative to the open approach; advantages include: reduced blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD): -173.03, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): -305.90, -40.17, P=0.01], fewer postoperative complications (odds ratio: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.22, 0.60, P<0.00001), a shorter hospital stay (WMD: -2.78, 95% CI: -3.22, -2.33, P<0.00001), and a lower positive margin rate (relative difference: -0.04, 95% CI: -0.07, -0.01, P=0.01), with comparable operative times (WMD: 6.73, 95% CI: -21.20, 34.66, P=0.64). Robotic thymectomy was comparable with the VATS approach; both have the advantage of avoiding median sternotomy.
While randomized controlled studies are required to make definitive conclusions, current data suggests that robotic thymectomy is superior to open surgery and comparable to a VATS approach. Long-term follow-up is required to further delineate oncological outcomes.
迄今为止,正中胸骨切开术一直是胸腺切除术最常用的方法。电视辅助胸腔镜手术(VATS)以及采用二氧化碳充气技术的机器人手术的最新进展,使得手术方式更具微创性。然而,既往的综述尚未对机器人手术与开放性及VATS胸腺切除术进行比较。
按照PRISMA指南,使用PubMed、Embase和Scopus数据库进行系统综述。纳入比较机器人手术与VATS或开放性胸腺切除术治疗重症肌无力、前纵隔肿物或胸腺瘤的原始研究文章。对死亡率、手术时间、失血量、输血情况、住院时间、转为开放性手术、术中及术后并发症发生率以及切缘阳性/阴性率进行荟萃分析。
机器人胸腺切除术是开放性手术的有效替代方法;其优势包括:失血量减少[加权平均差(WMD):-173.03,95%置信区间(95%CI):-305.90,-40.17,P = 0.01],术后并发症更少(比值比:0.37,95%CI:0.22,0.60,P < 0.00001),住院时间更短(WMD:-2.78,95%CI:-3.22,-2.33,P < 0.00001),切缘阳性率更低(相对差异:-0.04,95%CI:-0.07,-0.01,P = 0.01),手术时间相当(WMD:6.73,95%CI:-21.20,34.66,P = 0.64)。机器人胸腺切除术与VATS手术相当;二者均具有避免正中胸骨切开术的优势。
虽然需要进行随机对照研究才能得出确切结论,但目前的数据表明,机器人胸腺切除术优于开放性手术,且与VATS手术相当。需要进行长期随访以进一步明确肿瘤学结局。