Comparison of clinical efficacy of da Vinci robot-assisted lung cancer surgery with two-, three- and four-hole approaches.

Abstract

Orifice reduction strategies for da Vinci robotic surgery have been a hot topic of research in recent years. We retrospectively analyzed the perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) with two, three, and four-hole approaches in radical lung cancer surgery. Our results revealed that the two-hole group has advantages in terms of operative time, postoperative 3-day drainage, postoperative drainage time, postoperative hospital stay and postoperative day 3 visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores. There were no significant differences between the three groups in terms of intraoperative bleeding, number of lymph nodes dissected, VAS pain scores on postoperative days 1 and 2, and postoperative complications. In addition, the two-hole group was superior to the three-hole and four-hole groups in terms of C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT) and interleukin 10 (IL-10). In summary, the RATS two-hole approach has advantages in operation time, rapid recovery after operation and some postoperative inflammatory indicators, and is worth promoting in hospitals that are skilled in three-hole and four-hole da Vinci robot surgery and have conditions.