PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) are two viable options in patients undergoing lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); however, the debate on which one is superior is unceasing.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed and Scopus databases were queried for studies including patients who underwent either VATS or RATS lobectomy. This meta-analysis is in accordance with the recommendations of the PRISMA statement. Individual patient data on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were extracted from Kaplan-Meier curves. One- and two-stage survival analyses, and random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.
UNASSIGNED: Ten studies met our eligibility criteria, incorporating 1,231 and 814 patients in the VATS and RATS groups, respectively. Patients who underwent VATS had similar OS compared with those who underwent RATS [hazard ratio (HR): 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88-1.27, P=0.538] during a weighted median follow-up of 51.7 months, and this was validated by the two-stage meta-analysis (HR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.85-1.90, P=0.24, I2=68.50%). Regarding DFS, the two groups also displayed equivalent outcomes (HR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.92-1.25, P=0.371) and this was once again validated by the two-stage meta-analysis (HR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.85-1.30, P=0.67, I2=28.27%). Both RATS and VATS had similar postoperative complication rates, prolonged air leak, conversion to thoracotomy and operative times. RATS was found to be superior to VATS in terms of length of hospital stay and number of lymph nodes dissected.
UNASSIGNED: In patients undergoing lobectomy for NSCLC, VATS and RATS have equivalent overall and DFS at a median follow-up of 51.7 months.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed and Scopus databases were queried for studies including patients who underwent either VATS or RATS lobectomy. This meta-analysis is in accordance with the recommendations of the PRISMA statement. Individual patient data on overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were extracted from Kaplan-Meier curves. One- and two-stage survival analyses, and random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.
UNASSIGNED: Ten studies met our eligibility criteria, incorporating 1,231 and 814 patients in the VATS and RATS groups, respectively. Patients who underwent VATS had similar OS compared with those who underwent RATS [hazard ratio (HR): 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88-1.27, P=0.538] during a weighted median follow-up of 51.7 months, and this was validated by the two-stage meta-analysis (HR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.85-1.90, P=0.24, I2=68.50%). Regarding DFS, the two groups also displayed equivalent outcomes (HR: 1.07, 95% CI: 0.92-1.25, P=0.371) and this was once again validated by the two-stage meta-analysis (HR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.85-1.30, P=0.67, I2=28.27%). Both RATS and VATS had similar postoperative complication rates, prolonged air leak, conversion to thoracotomy and operative times. RATS was found to be superior to VATS in terms of length of hospital stay and number of lymph nodes dissected.
UNASSIGNED: In patients undergoing lobectomy for NSCLC, VATS and RATS have equivalent overall and DFS at a median follow-up of 51.7 months.
摘要：
■电视辅助胸腔镜手术（VATS）和机器人辅助胸腔镜手术（RATS）是非小细胞肺癌（NSCLC）肺叶切除术患者的两种可行选择；然而，关于哪个更好的争论不断。
■PubMed和Scopus数据库的研究包括接受VATS或RATS肺叶切除术的患者。此荟萃分析符合PRISMA声明的建议。从Kaplan-Meier曲线中提取个体患者总生存期(OS)和无病生存期(DFS)的数据。一阶段和两阶段生存分析，并进行随机效应荟萃分析。
■十项研究符合我们的资格标准，将1,231和814名患者纳入VATS和RATS组，分别。在51.7个月的加权中位随访期间，接受VATS的患者与接受RATS的患者的OS相似[风险比（HR）：1.05，95％置信区间（CI）：0.88-1.27，P=0.538]，这通过两阶段荟萃分析得到了验证(HR:1.27,95%CI:0.85-1.90,P=0.24,I2=68.50%).关于DFS，两组也显示了相同的结局(HR:1.07,95%CI:0.92~1.25,P=0.371),这再次通过两阶段荟萃分析得到验证(HR:1.05,95%CI:0.85~1.30,P=0.67,I2=28.27%).RATS和VATS术后并发症发生率相似，长时间的漏气,转换为开胸手术和手术时间。在住院时间和解剖的淋巴结数量方面，发现大鼠优于VATS。
■在接受非小细胞肺癌肺叶切除术的患者中，VATS和RATS在51.7个月的中位随访中具有相同的总体和DFS。
■PubMed和Scopus数据库的研究包括接受VATS或RATS肺叶切除术的患者。此荟萃分析符合PRISMA声明的建议。从Kaplan-Meier曲线中提取个体患者总生存期(OS)和无病生存期(DFS)的数据。一阶段和两阶段生存分析，并进行随机效应荟萃分析。
■十项研究符合我们的资格标准，将1,231和814名患者纳入VATS和RATS组，分别。在51.7个月的加权中位随访期间，接受VATS的患者与接受RATS的患者的OS相似[风险比（HR）：1.05，95％置信区间（CI）：0.88-1.27，P=0.538]，这通过两阶段荟萃分析得到了验证(HR:1.27,95%CI:0.85-1.90,P=0.24,I2=68.50%).关于DFS，两组也显示了相同的结局(HR:1.07,95%CI:0.92~1.25,P=0.371),这再次通过两阶段荟萃分析得到验证(HR:1.05,95%CI:0.85~1.30,P=0.67,I2=28.27%).RATS和VATS术后并发症发生率相似，长时间的漏气,转换为开胸手术和手术时间。在住院时间和解剖的淋巴结数量方面，发现大鼠优于VATS。
■在接受非小细胞肺癌肺叶切除术的患者中，VATS和RATS在51.7个月的中位随访中具有相同的总体和DFS。
