Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Efficacy of Using Maryland Forceps Versus Electrocoagulation Hooks in RATS Lung Cancer Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matched Study

  • Thoracic Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Here we compare the difference in recent outcomes between the use of Maryland forceps (MF) and electrocoagulation hooks (EH) in robotic-assisted thoracoscopic radical lung cancer resection.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively analyze the clinical data of 247 patients with lung cancer who underwent robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery from February 2018 to December 2022. On the basis of the intraoperative use of energy devices, we divided the clinical data into two groups, including 84 cases in the MF group and 163 cases in the EH group, respectively. The patients in the two groups were matched with propensity score matching analysis, and further, the perioperative clinical data of the two groups were compared.

Results

Compared with the EH group, patients in the MF group had shorter operative time, lesser intraoperative bleeding, shorter postoperative drainage time, and shorter postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.05). By comparing the intraoperative and postoperative complications in the two groups, it was found that the incidence of intraoperative lymph node fragmentation, the incidence of postoperative celiac disease, and the incidence of postoperative food choking were significantly lower in the MF group than that in the EH group. The increase of CRP, IL-6, IL-8, and TNF-α levels in the MF group was less than that in the EH group.

Conclusions

The use of MF in robotic-assisted thoracoscopic radical lung cancer surgery is safe and effective, with advantages in lymph node dissection, reduced surgical trauma, and fewer postoperative complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin. 2022;72(1):7–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bendzsak AM, Waddell TK, Urbach DR, Darling GE. Surgery and surgical consult rates for early stage lung cancer in Ontario: a population-based study. Ann Thorac Surg. 2017;103(3):906–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Zhang F, Xu L, Lu H, Ma A, Wang G. Short-term surgical outcomes for lobectomy between robot-assisted thoracic surgery and uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. Front Oncol. 2022;12:914059.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Jian Z, Li C, Feng X, et al. Robotic versus thoracoscopic combined anatomic subsegmentectomy for early-stage lung cancer: early results of a cohort study. J Thorac Dis. 2022;14(5):1441–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Park JH, Kim SY, Lee CR, et al. Robot-assisted posterior retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy using single-port access: technical feasibility and preliminary results. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(8):2741–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hernández-Rodríguez RA, Rosell Echevarría MJ, Ravelo Díaz FD, Villamil V, Pérez-Etchepare Figueroa EL. Mid- to long-term results of SuPerLap single-port treatment in inguinal hernia. Resultados a medio-largo plazo del tratamiento monopuerto SuPerLap de la hernia inguinal. Cir Pediatr. 2022; 35(1): 14–17.

  7. Zheng L, Song P, Jiang Y, et al. Outcomes and quality of life after robot-assisted lobectomy/segmentectomy for lung cancer compared to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: both three-port procedures performed by a single surgeon. J Thorac Dis. 2022;14(3):689–98.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Gergen AK, White AM, Mitchell JD, et al. Introduction of robotic surgery leads to increased rate of segmentectomy in patients with lung cancer. J Thorac Dis. 2021;13(2):762–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Jin R, Zheng Y, Yuan Y, et al. Robotic-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: short-term results of a randomized clinical trial (RVlob Trial). Ann Surg. 2022;275(2):295–302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Yoon A, Yoo HN, Lee YY, et al. Robotic single-port hysterectomy, adnexectomy, and lymphadenectomy in endometrial cancer. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2015;22(3):322.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Yu M, Ge M. Non-energy devices to dissect recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph nodes of non-small cell lung cancer under video-assisted thoracic surgery. BMC Surg. 2021;21(1):172.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Kobayashi S, Kanetaka K, Nagata Y, et al. Predictive factors for major postoperative complications related to gastric conduit reconstruction in thoracoscopic esophagectomy for esophageal cancer: a case control study. BMC Surg. 2018;18(1):15.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Repo JP, Häkkinen AH, Porkka T, et al. Increased interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein levels after instrumented lumbar spine fusion in older patients. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2019;27(1):2309499019826406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gazzoni FF, Hochhegger B, Severo LC, et al. High-resolution computed tomographic findings of Aspergillus infection in lung transplant patients. Eur J Radiol. 2014;83(1):79–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by Gansu Province Key R&D Project (22YF7FA095).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ziqiang Hong and Xiangdou Bai have contributed equally to this study.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The First Clinical Medical College of Gansu University of Chinese Medicine, Lanzhou, China

    Ziqiang Hong MD, Xiangdou Bai MD, Yannan Sheng MD, Baiqiang Cui MD, Tao Cheng MD, Yingjie Lu MD & Xusheng Wu MD

  2. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Gansu Provincial Hospital, Lanzhou, China

    Ziqiang Hong MD, Xiangdou Bai MD, Baiqiang Cui MD, Tao Cheng MD, Xusheng Wu MD, Dacheng Jin MD & Yunjiu Gou MD

Authors
  1. Ziqiang Hong MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xiangdou Bai MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yannan Sheng MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Baiqiang Cui MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Tao Cheng MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yingjie Lu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Xusheng Wu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Dacheng Jin MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Yunjiu Gou MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conception and design: ZH, YS, YG; administrative support: YG; provision of study materials or patients: XB, BC, YL; collection and assembly of data: XW, TC; data analysis and interpretation: DJ; manuscript writing: all authors; final approval of manuscript: All authors.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yunjiu Gou MD.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

The authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This study has been reviewed by the Ethics Committee of Gansu Provincial People's Hospital, Approval Number: 2022-361. All patients signed the informed consent form for surgery before surgery.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hong, Z., Bai, X., Sheng, Y. et al. Efficacy of Using Maryland Forceps Versus Electrocoagulation Hooks in RATS Lung Cancer Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matched Study. Ann Surg Oncol 30, 5923–5929 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-13813-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-023-13813-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation