Summary
BACKGROUND: Recently, minimally invasive approaches for pulmonary lobectomy have gained increasing interest and acceptance. Besides, the "conventional" video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) approach, the robotic technique with the da Vinci™ surgical system has been evaluated by different groups. METHODS: An appraisal of both approaches is given based on profound personal experiences and with reflexion of the current literature. RESULTS: Both techniques have been proven to be feasible and safe. Operating times and costs are higher with the robotic approach, without proven advantages over conventional VATS. Long-term follow-up data support the oncologic accuracy of the VATS approach but are still lacking for the robotic approach. CONCLUSIONS: The robotic approach provides no proven benefits over the conventional thoracoscopic approach and is thus not recommended for pulmonary lobectomy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Thomas P, Doddoli C, Yena S, et al. VATS is an adequate oncological operation for stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2002;21:1094–9
Roviaro GC, Varoli F, Vergani C, et al. State of the art in thoracoscopic surgery: a personal experience of 2000 videothoracoscopic procedures and an overview of the literature. Surg Endosc 2002;16:881–92
Nagahiro I, Andou A, Aoe M, et al. Pulmonary function, postoperative pain, and serum cytokine level after lobectomy: a comparison of VATS and conventional procedure. Ann Thorac Surg 2001;72:362–5
Forster R, Storck M, Schafer JR, et al. Thoracoscopy versus thoracotomy: a prospective comparison of trauma and quality of life. Langenbecks Arch Surg 2002;387:32–6
Dieter RA Jr, Kuzycz GB. Complications and contraindications of thoracoscopy. Int Surg 1997;82:232–9
Cadiere GB, Himpens J, Vertruyen M, et al. Nissen fundoplication done by remotely controlled robotic technique. Ann Chir 1999;53:137–41
Shennib H, Bastawisy A, McLoughlin J, et al. Robotic computer-assisted telemanipulation enhances coronary artery bypass. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;117:310–3
Schmid T. Robotic Surgery. Eur Surg 2002;34:155–7
Augustin F, Bodner J, Wykypiel H, et al. Initial experience with robotic lung lobectomy: report of two different approaches. Surg Endosc 2011;25:108–13
Rocco G, Internullo E, Cassivi SD, et al. The variability of practice in minimally invasive thoracic surgery for pulmonary resections. Thorac Surg Clin 2008;18:235–47
Ninan M, Dylewski MR. Total port-access robot-assisted pulmonary lobectomy without utility thoracotomy. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2010;38:231–2
Veronesi G, Galetta D, Dipeng PM, et al. Four-arm robotic lobectomy for the treatment of early-stage lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010;140:19–24
Gharagozloo F, Margolis M, Tempesta B, et al. Robot-assisted lobectomy for early-stage lung cancer: report of 100 consecutive cases. Ann Thorac Surg 2009;88:380–4
Park BJ, Flores RM, Rusch VW. Robotic assistance for video-assisted thoracic surgical lobectomy: technique and initial results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006;131:54–9
Bodner J, Wykypiel H, Wetscher G, et al. First experiences with the da Vinci operating robot in thoracic surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2004;25:844–51
Morgan JA, Ginsburg ME, Sonett JR, et al. Thoracoscopic lobectomy using robotic technology. Heart Surg Forum 2003;6:167–9
Ashton RC Jr, Connery CP, Swistel DG, et al. Robot-assisted lobectomy. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003;126:292–3
Dolezel J, Vlcek P. Robot-assisted pulmonary lobectomy. Bratisl Lek Listy 2008;109:251–3
Braumann C, Jacobi CA, Menenakos C, et al. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic and thoracoscopic surgery with the da Vinci system: a 4-year experience in a single institution. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2008;18:260–6
Kirby TJ, Mack MJ, Landreneau RJ, et al. Lobectomy–videoassisted thoracic surgery versus muscle-sparing thoracotomy: a randomized trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1995;109:997–1002
Sugi K, Kaneda Y, Esato K. Video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy achieves a satisfactory long-term prognosis in patients with clinical stage IA lung cancer. World J Surg 2000;24:27–31
Craig SR, Leaver HA, Yap PL, et al. Acute phase responses following minimal access and conventional thoracic surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2001;20:455–63
Shigemura N, Akashi A, Nakagiri T, et al. Complete vs. assisted thoracoscopic approach: a prospective randomized trial comparing a variety of video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy techniques. Surg Endosc 2004;18:1492–7
Yan TD, Black D, Bannon PG, McCaughan BC. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized trials on safety and efficacy of video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy for early-stage non-small-call lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:2553–62
Whitson BA, Groth SS, Duval SJ, Swanson SJ, Maddaus MA. 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;86:2008–16
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bodner, J., Schmid, T. & Augustin, F. Minimally invasive approaches for lung lobectomy – from VATS to robotic and back!. Eur Surg 43, 224–228 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10353-011-0029-8
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10353-011-0029-8