Search

Objectives: Robotic thymectomy has been suggested and considered technically feasible for thymic tumours. However, because of small-sample series and the lack of data on long-term results, controversies still exist on surgical and oncological results with this approach. We performed a large national multicentre study sought to evaluate the early and long-term outcomes after robot-assisted thoracoscopic thymectomy in thymic epithelial tumours., Methods: All patients with thymic epithelial tumours operated through a robotic thoracoscopic approach between 2002 and 2022 from 15 Italian centres were enrolled. Demographic characteristics, clinical, intraoperative, postoperative, pathological and follow-up data were retrospectively collected and reviewed., Results: There were 669 patients (307 men and 362 women), 312 (46.6%) of whom had associated myasthenia gravis. Complete thymectomy was performed in 657 (98%) cases and in 57 (8.5%) patients resection of other structures was necessary, with a R0 resection in all but 9 patients (98.6%). Twenty-three patients (3.4%) needed open conversion, but no perioperative mortality occurred. Fifty-one patients (7.7%) had postoperative complications. The median diameter of tumour resected was 4 cm (interquartile range 3-5.5 cm), and Masaoka stage was stage I in 39.8% of patients, stage II in 56.1%, stage III in 3.5% and stage IV in 0.6%. Thymoma was observed in 90.2% of patients while thymic carcinoma occurred in 2.8% of cases. At the end of the follow-up, only 2 patients died for tumour-related causes. Five- and ten-year recurrence rates were 7.4% and 8.3%, respectively., Conclusions: Through the largest collection of robotic thymectomy for thymic epithelial tumours we demonstrated that robot-enhanced thoracoscopic thymectomy is a technically sound and safe procedure with a low complication rate and optimal oncological outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Robotic and thoracoscopic surgery are being increasingly adopted as minimally invasive alternatives to open sternotomy for complete thymectomy. The superior maneuverability range and three-dimensional magnified vision are potential ergonomical advantages of robotic surgery. To compare the ergonomic characteristics of robotic versus thoracoscopic thymectomy, a previously developed scoring system based on impartial findings was employed. The relationship between ergonomic scores and perioperative endpoints was also analyzed. Methods: Perioperative data of patients undergoing robotic or thoracoscopic complete thymectomy between January 2014 and December 2022 at three institutions were retrospectively retrieved. Surgical procedures were divided into four standardized surgical steps: lower-horns, upper-horns, thymic veins and peri-thymic fat dissection. Three ergonomic domains including maneuverability, exposure and instrumentation were scored as excellent(score-3), satisfactory(score-2) and unsatisfactory(score-1) by three independent reviewers. Propensity score matching (2:1) was performed, including anterior mediastinal tumors only. The primary endpoint was the total maneuverability score. Secondary endpoints included the other ergonomic domain scores, intraoperative adverse events, conversion to sternotomy, operative time, post-operative complications and residual disease. Results: A total of 68 robotic and 34 thoracoscopic thymectomies were included after propensity score matching. The robotic group had a higher total maneuverability score (p = 0.039), particularly in the peri-thymic fat dissection (p = 0.003) and peri-thymic fat exposure score (p = 0.027). Moreover, the robotic group had lower intraoperative adverse events (p = 0.02). No differences were found in residual disease. Conclusions: Robotic thymectomy has shown better ergonomic maneuverability compared to thoracoscopy, leading to fewer intraoperative adverse events and comparable early oncological results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Extended thymectomy is the gold standard in the treatment of patients with thymic neoplasm and affected by myasthenia gravis. For a long time, the traditional approach has been sternotomy, though the application of minimally invasive techniques has spread in recent decades. Several authors have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of minimally invasive thymectomy. This multicenter study aims to compare the outcomes of robotic and open thymectomy in myasthenic patients affected by thymic tumors. Short-term and long-term results were presented, showing how the robotic approach can be considered comparable to open surgery in terms of oncological radicality and the improvement of myasthenic symptomatology, with associated faster recovery. Thymectomy is the gold standard in the treatment of thymic neoplasm and plays a key role in the therapeutic path of myasthenia gravis. For years, sternotomy has been the traditional approach for removing anterior mediastinal lesions, although the robotic thymectomy is now widely performed. The literature is still lacking in papers comparing the two approaches and evaluating long-term oncological and neurological outcomes. This study aims to analyze the postoperative results of open and robotic thymectomy for thymic neoplasms in myasthenic patients. Surgical, oncological and neurological data of myasthenic patients affected by thymic neoplasms and surgically treated with extended thymectomy, both with the open and the robotic approach, in six Italian Thoracic Centers between 2011 and 2021 were evaluated. A total of 213 patients were enrolled in the study: 110 (51.6%) were treated with the open approach, and 103 (48.4%) were treated with robotic surgery. The open surgery, compared with the robotic, presented a shorter operating time (p < 0.001), a higher number of postoperative complications (p = 0.038) and longer postoperative hospitalization (p = 0.006). No other differences were observed in terms of surgical, oncological or neurological outcomes. The robotic approach can be considered safe and feasible, comparable to the open technique, in terms of surgical, oncological and neurological outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]