Robotic-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery Versus Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: Which Is the Preferred Approach for Early-Stage NSCLC?

Abstract

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related mortality among both men and women worldwide, underscoring the need for an effective treatment strategy. For early-stage non-small cell lung cancer [NSCLC], surgical resection is the standard treatment. Robotic-assisted thoracic surgery [RATS] and video-assisted thoracic surgery [VATS] are better than open thoracotomy because they are less invasive. Recent lung cancer screening programs are detecting NSCLC at earlier stages, which is expected to result in an increase in the number of NSCLC surgeries as early-stage cases are diagnosed. A limited number of randomized controlled trials have compared RATS and VATS in operable NSCLC. We conducted a literature review to summarize the available evidence on these two surgical techniques. The purpose of this study is to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of RATS and VATS in early-stage NSCLC patients. RATS shows lower conversion rates to thoracotomy (6.3% vs. 13.1% p < 0.01) and more thorough lymph node dissection than VATS (e.g., 7.5 vs. 5.6 stations, p < 0.001). However, RATS is linked to considerably higher costs (USD 22,582 vs. USD 17,874, p < 0.05) and longer operative times (median 241.7 vs. 214.4 min, p = 0.06). The two techniques exhibited minimal differences in postoperative complications and pain, while RATS patients experienced shortened hospital stays (4–5 vs. 5–6 days, p < 0.006). While the accuracy of staging and treatment planning is improved by the improved lymph node retrieval in RATS, the long-term survival rate is still uncertain.