Long-term outcomes of robotic versus video-assisted pulmonary lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of reconstructed patient data

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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, I(2)=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, I(2)=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. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing lobectomy for NSCLC, VATS and RATS have equivalent overall and DFS at a median follow-up of 51.7 months.