切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华胸部外科电子杂志 ›› 2020, Vol. 07 ›› Issue (04) : 208 -213. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-8773.2020.04.02

所属专题: 专题评论 机器人专题 机器人手术 文献

论著

基于倾向性评分匹配法的机器人与胸腔镜辅助胸外科手术治疗肺癌的近期效果比较
马征1, 岳韦名1, 高存1, 司立博1, 孙振国1, 陈观卿1, 崔京京1, 曲成浩1, 田辉1,()   
  1. 1. 250014 济南,山东大学齐鲁医院胸外科
  • 收稿日期:2020-09-29 修回日期:2020-11-24 接受日期:2020-11-25 出版日期:2020-11-28
  • 通信作者: 田辉
  • 基金资助:
    山东省重点研发项目(2019GSF108072); 山东省自然科学基金(ZR201712087)

Comparison of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted thoracic surgery and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery on lung cancer: a study based on propensity score matching

Zheng Ma1, Weiming Yue1, Cun Gao1, Libo Si1, Zhenguo Sun1, Guanqing Chen1, Jingjing Cui1, Chenghao Qu1, Hui Tian1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan 250014, China
  • Received:2020-09-29 Revised:2020-11-24 Accepted:2020-11-25 Published:2020-11-28
  • Corresponding author: Hui Tian
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Tian Hui, Email:
引用本文:

马征, 岳韦名, 高存, 司立博, 孙振国, 陈观卿, 崔京京, 曲成浩, 田辉. 基于倾向性评分匹配法的机器人与胸腔镜辅助胸外科手术治疗肺癌的近期效果比较[J/OL]. 中华胸部外科电子杂志, 2020, 07(04): 208-213.

Zheng Ma, Weiming Yue, Cun Gao, Libo Si, Zhenguo Sun, Guanqing Chen, Jingjing Cui, Chenghao Qu, Hui Tian. Comparison of short-term outcomes between robot-assisted thoracic surgery and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery on lung cancer: a study based on propensity score matching[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Thoracic Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2020, 07(04): 208-213.

目的

在倾向性评分匹配配对良好的情况下,比较机器人与胸腔镜在肺癌手术治疗中的围手术期安全性与短期疗效。

方法

回顾性分析2020年8月至2020年10月期间,山东大学齐鲁医院胸外科田辉教授肺外科团队因原发性肺癌行肺叶或亚肺叶切除+肺门纵隔淋巴结清扫或采样术的286例患者的临床资料。其中,130例行达芬奇机器人辅助胸外科(RATS)肺切除术,为RATS组;156例行电视胸腔镜辅助胸外科(VATS)肺切除术,为VATS组。采用倾向性评分匹配方法进行混杂因素校正,比较匹配后两组病例的围手术期结果。

结果

倾向性评分匹配分析后,每组88例配对成功。对两组病例的围手术期临床资料行统计学分析,发现RATS组手术时间略长于VATS组,但差异无统计学意义(P=0.625)。RATS组术中出血量较VATS组更少(P<0.001)。RATS组淋巴结清扫站数(P<0.001)及清扫个数(P=0.031)均高于VATS组;RATS组住院费用较VATS组高,差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。术后第1~3天疼痛数字评分(NRS评分)差异有统计学意义(P<0.001),RATS组术后第1~3天NRS评分更高。两组淋巴结升期率、术后第1~3天引流量、术后全部拔管时间、术后住院天数、术后并发症差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。

结论

在可切除肺癌手术治疗上,RATS与VATS的围手术期安全性及短期疗效相似。此外,RATS在术中出血量、淋巴结清扫彻底性上存在优势,缺点是增加了住院总费用,潜在增加了术后疼痛。

Objective

To compare the perioperative safety and short-term efficacy between robot- and video-assisted thoracoscopic lung cancer surgery based on propensity scores matching.

Methods

The clinical data were from 286 patients with primary lung cancer undergoing lobectomy or sublobectomy and lymph node dissection or sampling in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University from August 2020 to October 2020. Among them, 130 cases underwent Da Vinci robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) , while 156 cases underwent video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) . The perioperative data were compared after controlling confounding factors by propensity score matching.

Results

Eighty-eight cases in each group were successfully matched by propensity score matching analysis. The operational time of the RATS group was slightly longer than that of the VATS group , the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.625) . The intraoperative blood loss in the RATS group was less than that in the VATS group (P<0.001) . The number of lymph node dissection stations (P<0.001) and the number of lymph node dissections (P=0.031) in the RATS group were higher. In terms of hospitalization expenses, the RATS group was higher than that compared with the VATS group (P<0.001) . There was a statistically significant difference in the results of the NRS score after operation (P<0.001) , and the NRS score was higher. There were no statistically significant differences in lymph node ascending rate, time of drainage, drainage, hospital stay after operation, and postoperative complications (P>0.05) .

Conclusion

RATS has similar perioperative safety and short-term efficacy to VATS in resectable lung cancer. RATS has advantages in intraoperative blood loss and lymph node dissection. The disadvantage is the increased hospitalization cost and postoperative pain.

表1 倾向性评分匹配前后两组患者基线资料比较
基线特征 匹配前 匹配后
RATS组(n=130) VATS组(n=156) t/χ2 P VATS组(n=88) RATS组(n=88) t/χ2 P
性别     1.331 0.249     0.094 0.759
  52(40.0%) 73(46.8%)     35(39.8%) 37(42.0%)    
  78(60.0%) 83(53.2%)     53(60.2%) 51(58.0%)    
年龄/岁 56.88±11.21 59.79±11.07 2.202 0.028 58.49±11.86 58.60±9.63 0.070 0.134
BMI 24.12±3.11 24.16±3.70 0.075 0.940 24.43±2.96 24.33±3.19 0.226 0.655
是否吸烟     0.130 0.792     1.422 0.233
  95(73.1%) 111(71.2%)     68(77.3%) 61(69.3%)    
  35(26.9%) 45(28.8%)     20(22.7%) 27(30.7%)    
手术方式     1.350 0.509     4.646 0.098
  楔形 4(3.1%) 9(5.8%)     7(8.0%) 1(1.1%)    
  肺段/叶 124(96.1%) 145(92.9%)     80(90.9%) 85(97.7%)    
  全肺 1(0.8%) 2(1.3%)     1(1.1%) 1(1.1%)    
肿瘤最长直径(cm) 1.48±1.27 2.13±1.59 3.494 0.001 1.54±0.86 1.47±0.81 0.572 0.419
肿瘤部位     3.430 0.753     0.349 0.997
  右上 47(36.2%) 49(31.4%)     31(35.2%) 31(35.2%)    
  右下 22(16.9%) 25(16.0%)     13(14.8%) 14(15.9%)    
  右中 8(6.2%) 11(7.1%)     8(9.1%) 7(8.0%)    
  左上 24(18.5%) 40(25.6%)     16(18.2%) 18(20.5%)    
  左下 21(16.2%) 21(13.5%)     14(15.9%) 13(14.8%)    
  全肺 8(6.2%) 10(6.4%)     6(6.8%) 5(5.7%)    
表2 倾向性评分匹配后两组患者围手术期部分指标比较
1
Gao S, Li N, Wang S,et al.Lung Cancer in People's Republic of China[J].J Thorac Oncol,2020,15(10): 1567-1576.
2
高树庚,邱斌,李放,等.胸腔镜下解剖性部分肺叶切除术与肺叶切除术治疗pT1aN0M0期周围型非小细胞肺癌的近期疗效比较[J].中华外科杂志,2015,53(10): 727-730.
3
Yan TD, Black D, Bannon PG,et al.Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized trials on safety and efficacy of video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy for early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer[J].J Clin Oncol,2009,27(15): 2553-2562.
4
Wei S, Chen M, Chen N,et al.Feasibility and safety of robot-assisted thoracic surgery for lung lobectomy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].World J Surg Oncol,2017,15(1): 98.
5
李树海,田辉,岳韦名,等.ERAS理念指导下VATS肺癌根治术流程优化之齐鲁实践[J].中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版),2020,13(3): 132-135.
6
Melfi FM, Menconi GF, Mariani AM,et al.Early experience with robotic technology for thoracoscopic surgery[J].Eur J Cardiothorac Surg,2002,21(5): 864-868.
7
Liang H, Liang W, Zhao L,et al.Robotic Versus Video-assisted Lobectomy/Segmentectomy for Lung Cancer: A Meta-analysis[J].Ann Surg,2018,268(2): 254-259.
8
Aiolfi A, Nosotti M, Micheletto G,et al.Pulmonary lobectomy for cancer: Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing open,video-assisted thoracic surgery,and robotic approach[J].Surgery,2020,[Epub ahead of print].
9
Paul S, Jalbert J, Isaacs AJ,et al.Comparative effectiveness of robotic-assisted vs thoracoscopic lobectomy[J].Chest,2014,146(6): 1505-1512.
10
Rajaram R, Mohanty S, Bentrem DJ,et al.Nationwide Assessment of Robotic Lobectomy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer[J].Ann Thorac Surg,2017,103(4): 1092-1100.
11
Hu J, Chen Y, Dai J,et al.Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted vs video-assisted and traditional open thoracic surgery for lung cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis[J].Int J Med Robot,2020,[Epub ahead of print].
12
Agzarian J, Fahim C, Shargall Y,et al.The use of robotic-assisted thoracic surgery for lung resection: a comprehensive systematic review[J].Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg,2016,28(1): 182-192.
13
Emmert A, Straube C, Buentzel J,et al.Robotic versus thoracoscopic lung resection: A systematic review and meta-analysis[J].Medicine (Baltimore),2017,96(35): e7633.
14
Hernandez JM, Humphries LA, Keeling WB,et al.Robotic lobectomy: flattening the learning curve[J].J Robot Surg,2012,6(1): 41-45.
15
Arnold BN, Thomas DC, Bhatnagar V,et al.Defining the learning curve in robot-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy[J].Surgery,2019,165(2): 450-454.
16
Li JT, Liu PY, Huang J,et al.Perioperative outcomes of radical lobectomies using robotic-assisted thoracoscopic technique vs.video-assisted thoracoscopic technique: retrospective study of 1,075 consecutive p-stage I non-small cell lung cancer cases[J].J Thorac Dis,2019,11(3): 882-891.
17
Merritt RE, Kneuertz PJ, D'Souza DM.Successful Transition to Robotic-Assisted Lobectomy With Previous Proficiency in Thoracoscopic Lobectomy[J].Innovations (Phila),2019,14(3): 263-271.
18
Licht PB, Jørgensen OD, Ladegaard L,et al.A national study of nodal upstaging after thoracoscopic versus open lobectomy for clinical stage I lung cancer[J].Ann Thorac Surg,2013,96(3): 943-950.
19
Zirafa C, Aprile V, Ricciardi S,et al.Nodal upstaging evaluation in NSCLC patients treated by robotic lobectomy[J].Surg Endosc,2019,33(1): 153-158.
20
Kwon ST, Zhao L, Reddy RM,et al.Evaluation of acute and chronic pain outcomes after robotic,video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery,or open anatomic pulmonary resection[J].J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg,2017,154(2): 652-659.
21
van der Ploeg APT, Ayez N, Akkersdijk GP,et al.Postoperative pain after lobectomy: robot-assisted,video-assisted and open thoracic surgery[J].J Robot Surg,2020,14(1): 131-136.
[1] 杨轲, 丁增巴姆, 马静, 李盼盼, 陈婷. 全程无缝隙肺康复训练在单孔胸腔镜肺叶切除术中的临床应用[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 801-804.
[2] 张礼江, 沈玲佳, 施我大. 倾向性评分匹配分析奥希替尼对晚期NSCLC 预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 820-822.
[3] 钱春蕊, 周燕, 张晶, 蔡笃财, 门慧, 王松海, 黎莉, 邢龙. 高分辨率CT 与多层螺旋CT 在肺结节及早期肺癌中的应用[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 827-830.
[4] 袁延丽, 屈卓军, 崔会慧, 王菁, 高贝贝, 潘院. 原发性肺癌切除术后谵妄的危险因素及预后分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 701-706.
[5] 井发红, 李丽娜, 高婷, 高艳梅, 杨楠, 李卓, 慕玉东. 肺癌立体定向放疗血清SAP 和MMPs 表达及临床意义[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 707-713.
[6] 邢嘉翌, 龚佳晟, 祝佳佳, 陆群. 肺癌化疗患者继发肺部感染的病原菌耐药性及炎症因子变化分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 714-718.
[7] 杨慧, 郭丽娟, 冯晓丹, 李静, 黄成谋, 蔡兴锐, 覃英娇, 王远礼. 非小细胞肺癌铂类药物耐药mi RNA表达特征及预测分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 719-724.
[8] 张卫锋, 张天翼, 赵正维, 王海强, 尹逊亮. VE /VCO2 斜率对肺癌肺叶切除术后心血管并发症的预测意义[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 725-730.
[9] 赖淼, 景鑫, 李桂珍, 李怡. 非小细胞肺癌EGFR 突变亚型的临床病理和预后意义[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 731-737.
[10] 梁丽斯, 李洁, 贺帅, 来艳君, 刘铭, 张琳. MMP-9、MMP-2 及TLR4、HE4对非小细胞肺癌早期诊断意义[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 756-761.
[11] 张璇, 高杨, 房雅君, 姚艳玲. 保护性机械通气在肺癌胸腔镜肺段切除术中的临床应用[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(04): 563-567.
[12] 陶银花, 张红杰, 王亚岚, 陈莲, 张珺. 间歇式气压治疗预防肺癌化疗下肢深静脉血栓的临床分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(04): 605-608.
[13] 任甜甜, 张玉慧, 祁玲霞, 朱梅冬, 胡佳. 多学科疼痛管理对胸腔镜肺叶切除术后胸痛及应激反应的影响分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(04): 630-633.
[14] 林建琴, 孔令敏, 陆银凤, 陈勇, 金凤, 叶磊, 陈方梅. PERMA模式对肺癌患者治疗获益感及生活质量的影响分析[J/OL]. 中华肺部疾病杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(04): 634-638.
[15] 刘一鸣, 温佳新, 赵恺, 薛志强. ⅢA 期肺腺癌新辅助治疗后胸腔镜右肺中下叶切除术[J/OL]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(05): 311-313.
阅读次数
全文


摘要