Multicentre randomized clinical trial on robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic oesophagectomy (REVATE trial)

被引:9
|
作者
Chao, Yin-Kai [1 ]
Li, Zhigang [2 ]
Jiang, Hongjing [3 ]
Wen, Yu-Wen [1 ,4 ]
Chiu, Chen-Hung [1 ]
Li, Bin [2 ]
Shang, Xiaobin [3 ]
Fang, Tuan-Jen [5 ]
Yang, Yang [2 ]
Yue, Jie [3 ]
Zhang, Xiaobin [2 ]
Zhang, Chen [3 ]
Liu, Yun-Hen [1 ]
机构
[1] Chang Gung Univ, Chang Gung Mem Hosp Linkou, Div Thorac Surg, Taoyuan, Taiwan
[2] Shanghai Chest Hosp, Dept Thorac Surg, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[3] Tianjin Med Univ Canc Inst & Hosp, Natl Clin Res Ctr Canc, Dept Minimally Invas Oesophageal Surg, Key Lab Prevent & Therapy, Tianjin, Peoples R China
[4] Chang Gung Univ, Coll Med, Dept Biomed Sci, Taoyuan, Taiwan
[5] Chang Gung Univ, Chang Gung Mem Hosp Linkou, Dept Otorhinolaryngol Head & Neck Surg, Taoyuan, Taiwan
关键词
LYMPH-NODE DISSECTION; SQUAMOUS-CELL CARCINOMA; SHORT-TERM; COMPLICATIONS; OUTCOMES; ESOPHAGUS; PARALYSIS; CANCER; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1093/bjs/znae143
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Surgery for oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma involves dissecting lymph nodes along the recurrent laryngeal nerve. This is technically challenging and injury to the recurrent laryngeal nerve may lead to vocal cord palsy, which increases the risk of pulmonary complications. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted oesophagectomy (RAO) versus video-assisted thoracoscopic oesophagectomy (VAO) for dissection of lymph nodes along the left RLN. Methods: Patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma who were scheduled for minimally invasive McKeown oesophagectomy were allocated randomly to RAO or VAO, stratified by centre. The primary endpoint was the success rate of left recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node dissection. Success was defined as the removal of at least one lymph node without causing nerve damage lasting longer than 6 months. Secondary endpoints were perioperative and oncological outcomes. Results: From June 2018 to March 2022, 212 patients from 3 centres in Asia were randomized, and 203 were included in the analysis (RAO group 103; VAO group 100). Successful left recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node dissection was achieved in 88.3% of the RAO group and 69% of the VAO group (P < 0.001). The rate of removal of at least one lymph node according to pathology was 94.2% for the RAO and 86% for the VAO group (P = 0.051). At 1 week after surgery, the RAO group had a lower incidence of left recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy than the VAO group (20.4 versus 34%; P = 0.029); permanent recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy rates at 6 months were 5.8 and 20% respectively (P = 0.003). More mediastinal lymph nodes were dissected in the RAO group (median 16 (i.q.r. 12-22) versus 14 (10-20); P = 0.035). Postoperative complication rates were comparable between the two groups and there were no in-hospital deaths. Conclusion: In patients with oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, RAO leads to more successful left recurrent laryngeal nerve lymph node dissection than VAO, including a lower rate of short- and long-term recurrent laryngeal nerve injury. Registration number: NCT03713749 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). Lay summary Oesophageal cancer often requires complex surgery. Recently, minimally invasive techniques like robot- and video-assisted surgery have emerged to improve outcomes. This study compared robot- and video-assisted surgery for oesophageal cancer, focusing on removing lymph nodes near a critical nerve. Patients with a specific oesophageal cancer type were assigned randomly to robot- or video-assisted surgery at three Asian hospitals. Robot-assisted surgery had a higher success rate in removing lymph nodes near the important nerve without permanent damage. It also had shorter operating times, more lymph nodes removed, and faster drain removal after surgery. In summary, for oesophageal cancer surgery, the robotic approach may provide better lymph node removal and less nerve injury than video-assisted techniques.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Retrospective Analysis of Operative Outcomes Between Robot-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery and Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery
    Barmanwalla, A.
    Rangarajan, S.
    Fowler, A.
    Malkoc, A.
    Daoud, A.
    Bhat, G.
    Kong, I. L.
    Kong, L. B.
    Navarro, R. A.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF RESPIRATORY AND CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2024, 209
  • [22] Paravertebral vs Epidural Anesthesia for Video-assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Trial
    Wu, Zixiang
    Wang, Qi
    Wu, Cong
    Wu, Chuanqiang
    Yu, Huan
    Chen, Congcong
    He, Hong
    Wu, Ming
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2023, 116 (05): : 1006 - 1012
  • [23] COMPARING LENGTH OF STAY OF OPEN, VIDEO-ASSISTED THORACOSCOPIC, AND ROBOT-ASSISTED LOBECTOMY IN JAPAN
    Lin, P. L.
    Shin, M.
    D'Attilio, D.
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2022, 25 (01) : S37 - S37
  • [24] Spontaneous versus mechanical ventilation during video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for spontaneous pneumothorax: A randomized trial
    Liu, Jun
    Liang, Hengrui
    Cui, Fei
    Liu, Hui
    Zhu, Chengchu
    Liang, Wenhua
    He, Jianxing
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2022, 163 (05): : 1702 - +
  • [25] Drainless robot-assisted minimally invasive oesophagectomy-randomized controlled trial (RESPECT)
    Muessle, B.
    Kirchberg, J.
    Buck, N.
    Radulova-Mauersberger, O.
    Stange, D.
    Richter, T.
    Mueller-Stich, B.
    Klotz, R.
    Larmann, J.
    Korn, S.
    Klimova, A.
    Graehlert, X.
    Trips, E.
    Weitz, J.
    Welsch, T.
    TRIALS, 2023, 24 (01)
  • [26] Complete vs assisted thoracoscopic approach - A prospective randomized trial comparing a variety of video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy techniques
    Shigemura, N
    Akashi, A
    Nakagiri, T
    Ohta, M
    Matsuda, H
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2004, 18 (10): : 1492 - 1497
  • [27] Outcomes of single- versus multi-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: Data from a multicenter randomized controlled trial of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy for lung cancer
    Lim, Eric
    Harris, Rosie A.
    Batchelor, Tim
    Casali, Gianluca
    Krishnadas, Rakesh
    Begum, Sofina
    Jordan, Simon
    Dunning, Joel
    Paul, Ian
    Shackcloth, Michael
    Feeney, Sarah
    Anikin, Vladimir
    Mcgonigle, Niall
    Fallouh, Hazem
    Hernandez, Luis
    Di Chiara, Franscesco
    Stavroulias, Dionisios
    Loubani, Mahmoud
    Qadri, Syed
    Zamvar, Vipin
    Marshall, Lucy
    Kaur, Surinder
    Rogers, Chris A.
    JTCVS OPEN, 2024, 19 : 296 - 308
  • [28] Robot-assisted vs. video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: a systematic review of cost effectiveness
    Keeney-Bonthrone, Toby P.
    Frydrych, Lynn M.
    Karmakar, Monita
    Hawes, Armani M.
    Reddy, Rishindra M.
    VIDEO-ASSISTED THORACIC SURGERY, 2020, 5 : 1 - 11
  • [29] Coagulation profile in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: A randomized, controlled trial
    Christensen, Thomas Decker
    Vad, Henrik
    Pedersen, Soren
    Hornbech, Kare
    Zois, Nora Elisabeth
    Licht, Peter B.
    Nybo, Mads
    Hvas, Anne-Mette
    PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (02):
  • [30] Discussion to: Outcomes of single- versus multi-port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: Data from a multicenter randomized controlled trial of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy for lung cancer
    Lim, Eric
    Seder, Christopher
    JTCVS OPEN, 2024, 19 : 309 - 310