ObjectiveTo evaluate the curative effect of robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) and video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) for early stage lung cancer patients.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 80 patients with radical resection of lung cancer in Gansu Provincial Hospital between January 2016 and December 2017. The patients were divided into two groups: 43 patients in a VATS group and 37 in a RATS group. There were 51 males and 29 females. Data were processed with STATA v14.0 statistical software.ResultsThere were significant differences in the operative time, duration of hospital stay and operative costs between the two groups. In the RATS group, operative duration was longer (172.21 minutes versus 162.20 minutes, P=0.018), cost was higher (74 076.69 yuan versus 54 814.73 yuan, P<0.001), and required significantly shorter hospital stay (8.27 days versus 10.76 days, P=0.001) compared with those of the VATS group. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in terms of conversion (3 versus 0, P=0.144), blood loss during operation (61.29 ml versus 90.63 ml, P=0.213), dissected lymph node number (17.38 versus 12.63, P=0.095), drainage volume (1 406.76 ml versus 1 514.60 ml, P=0.617) and the drainage time (7.92 days versus 7.20 days, P=0.440).ConclusionIn the early lung cancer patients who underwent thoracic surgery, the postoperative hospitalization time of the RATS group is shorter than that of the VATS group, and the operation time is longer than that of the VATS group. The other short-term surgical indexes are similar to those of thoracoscopic surgery. However, the robot has great advantages in the treatment of patients with difficult lymph node dissection, serious pleural adhesion and complicated anatomical relationship.
ObjectiveTo collect the data of esophageal foreign body patients, and to evaluate the clinical effects of two different surgical methods in our hospital.MethodsThe clinical data of 294 patients who were treated in Gansu Provincal Hospital from January 2012 to June 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. The clinical data were collected and analyzed by SPSS 22.0. In order to to evaluate the efficacy of flexible esophagoscope (FE) and rigid esophagoscope (RE) in the treatment of esophageal foreign bodies.The patients were divided into two groups: a RE group including 118 patients with 62 males and 56 females at age of 6 (3-37) years and a FE group including 176 patients with 84 males and 92 females at age of 6 (3-59) years.ResultsThere was no significant difference in age, age stratification, gender and foreign body type between the two groups. There was a statistical difference in the initial clinical symptoms (P=0.041) or in esophageal foreign bodies position (P=0.037) between the two groups. The success rate of foreign body removal was similar between the two groups (P=0.632). The success rate was 88.9% (105/118) in the RE group, 87.5% (154/176) in the FE group. The operation time was significantly longer in the RE group than that in the FE group (10.8 ±17.4 min vs. 17.5±21.6 min, P<0.001). The postoperative hospitalization time in the RE groups was longer than that in the FE group (21.5 ±24.2 hours vs. 12.5 ±21.3 hours, P<0.05). There was a statistical difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups (P=0.034). In the RE group, the main complication was mucosal edema (15.3%). And the rate of bleeding was higher (15.9%) in the FE group. There were 30 patients (25.5%) in the RE group with minor postoperative complications versus the FE group with 40 patients (22.7%); and 1 patient (0.8%) in the RE group with severe complications versus the FE group with 5 paients (2.8%).ConclusionBased on the analysis of this study, it is found that RE has higher safety. But the indications are strict, the professional requirements of the operator and the selection of patients are stronger. The FE is convenient to use, the operation crowd is wide, and the suitable crowd is wide. Therefore, for specific patients, after improving the relevant examination and preoperative evaluation of patients, clinicians need to choose appropriate surgical methods to ensure the success of the operation, and reduce the postoperative complications as far as possible.
ObjectiveThrough the perioperative outcome analysis of da Vinci robot-assisted sleeve lobectomy, to clarify its efficacy and safety.MethodsA retrospective analysis was performed on 10 patients with centrally located lung cancer undergoing robot-assisted sleeve lobectomy from March to December 2019 in our center, including 9 males and 1 female, aged 45-67 (55.0±8.9) years. Preoperative imaging and bronchoscopy showed central non-small cell lung cancer, involving the right upper lung in 3 patients, right lower lung in 2 patients, the left upper lung in 4 patients, and left lower lung in 1 patient. The operation time, Docking time, intraoperative blood loss volume, bronchial anastomosis time, number of dissected lymph nodes, drainage volume and postoperative hospital stay were analyzed.ResultsThe da Vinci robot-assisted bronchial sleeve lobectomy was completed smoothly on 10 patients. The operation time was 135-183 (157.8±14.3) min, Docking time 6-15 (10.0±2.9) min, intraoperative blood loss volume 55-250 (124.5±61.8) mL, bronchial anastomosis time 17-40 (27.7±7.3) min, the number of dissected lymph nodes 16-23 (19.7±2.8), the drainage volume 200-600 (348.0±148.4) mL and postoperative hospital stay 7-11 (8.7±1.6) d. All patients had no bronchopleural fistula, pulmonary infection or atelectasis, and there was no perioperative death. Postoperative pathological findings were all squamous cell carcinoma.ConclusionDa Vinci robot-assisted sleeve lobectomy is safe and effective.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility and safety of da Vinci robotic surgery for elderly patients with radical surgery of lung cancer.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 59 patients aged over 70 years who underwent radical surgery of lung cancer in our hospital between 2016 and 2019. These patients were divided into two groups including a da Vinci robot group and a single-utility port video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) group according to the patients’ selection of the treatments. There were 32 patients with 20 males and 12 females aged 73.1±2.3 years in the da Vinci robot group and 27 patients with 16 males and 11 females aged 71.2±1.3 years in the VATS group. The clinical data of the two groups were compared.ResultsThere was no statistical difference in surgery time between the two groups (t=–0.341, P=0.484). Compared with the VATS group, the da Vinci robot group had more number of lymph nodes dissected (t=1.635, P=0.015), less intraoperative blood loss (t=–2.569, P <0.001), less postoperative drainage amount within 3 days after surgery (t=–6.325, P=0.045), lower visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at postoperative 3rd day (t=–7.214, P=0.021).ConclusionThe da Vinci robot system is safe and efficient in the treatment for elderly patients with radical surgery of lung cancer with less trauma.
At present, the application of the robot assisted surgery system in the surgical treatment of esophageal cancer is gradually emerging, and it is more and more widely used and recognized in the field of surgery. According to the domestic and foreign literatures, the robot has many advantages, and robotic assisted esophageal cancer surgery has been proved to be safe and effective, and its short-term efficacy is significantly better than thoracotomy. Other studies have shown that in long-term follow-up, the effect is comparable to video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. In this paper, the author are systematically reviewed the development history of the robot assisted surgery system, the effect of robotic assisted esophagectomy on safety, surgical method, short-term efficacy and long-term prognosis. The traditional open surgery and thoracoscopic laparoscopic esophagectomy has been carried on the detailed comparison to provide some advice and theoretical basis for esophageal cancer surgery robot system.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of nedaplatin versus cisplatin combined with fluorouracil in the treatment of esophageal neoplasms.MethodsPubMed, EMbase, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, WanFang, VIP and CBM databases were searched by computer to investigate the randomized controlled studies about the clinical effects of nedaplatin combined with fluorouracil versus cisplatin combined with fluorouracil in the treatment of esophageal neoplasms. The retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to January 2021. And meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4.ResultsA total of 12 randomized controlled studies involving 744 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the total effective rate of the nedaplatin group was better than that of the cisplatin group (P<0.05). The incidence of nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and renal impairment in the nedaplatin group was lower than that in the cisplatin group (P<0.05), but the incidence of leukopenia and hemoglobin decline was higher than that in the cisplatin group (P<0.05). There was no statistical difference in the incidence of liver injury, or platelet decline between the two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionNedaplatin combined with fluorouracil has more advantages than cisplatin combined with fluorouracil in the treatment of esophageal cancer, the incidence of nausea, vomiting and diarrhea is lower, and the damage to kidney function is also smaller.