Overview of the outcomes of robotic segmentectomy and lobectomy.

Abstract

Segmentectomy has gained popularity in the latest years as a valid alternative to lobectomy. Initially reserved to patient unfit for lobar lung resection, this procedure is now offered also in selected patient with <2 cm peripheral lung cancer confined to an anatomic segment with no nodal involvement on preoperative evaluation. The introduction of screening with low-dose CT chest scan allowed the identification of lung cancer at early stages, making possible to schedule a more conservative lung surgery. A major improvement came also from minimally invasive surgery (MIS), reducing complication rate with comparable survival rates when compared to open surgery. However, due to long learning curve and uncomfortable instruments handling of video-assisted thoracoscopy, many surgeons still prefer to perform segmentectomies through a thoracotomy and thus increasing perioperative morbidity and leading to post-thoracotomy syndrome due to rib-spreading. Robotic assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) can avoid this throwback, combining the handling of open surgery with lesser invasiveness of thoracoscopy. Although literature has given strong evidences in favour of robotic lobectomies, data are still limited regarding segmentectomies performed with this technique. Moreover, no results are still available from the two ongoing randomized controlled trials comparing segmentectomy to lobectomy and so the latter represent the oncologically proper procedure for lung cancer along with lymph-node dissection. In this review we analyse the literature currently available on outcomes of lobar and sublobar anatomical resection performed by RATS, with a brief mention of the existing surgical techniques of port positioning and the costs of this procedure.