The objective of this study is to undertake a narrative review of the oncological adequacy of mediastinal lymphadenectomy performed via robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) in comparison with video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) and thoracotomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The focus of the review is on lymph node yield, nodal station dissection, and nodal upstaging rates. A narrative review of literature published in the last decade was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. Studies examining mediastinal lymphadenectomy outcomes for RATS, VATS, or thoracotomy were included in the discussion. The analysis of 19 studies from diverse geographical regions showed that in six out of nine comparative studies, RATS demonstrated superior lymph node retrieval compared to VATS, with statistically significant differences. RATS achieved comparable or superior nodal station dissection rates and showed particular advantages in upstaging from clinical N0 to pathological N2 status. Additionally, RATS demonstrated favourable perioperative outcomes with reduced morbidity and mortality rates compared to conventional approaches. RATS represents a reliable and oncologically sound approach to mediastinal lymphadenectomy, with potential advantages over conventional techniques. Its enhanced visualization and precision make it an increasingly utilised option for NSCLC treatment in centres with robotic capabilities.

Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine University Hospital Ostrava 17 Listopadu 1790 Ostrava 708 52 Czech Republic

Department of Surgery University Hospital Ostrava 17 Listopadu 1790 Ostrava 708 52 Czech Republic

Department of Surgical Studies Faculty of Medicine University of Ostrava Syllabova 19 Ostrava 703 00 Czech Republic

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Haruki T, Takagi Y, Kubouchi Y, Kidokoro Y, Nakanishi A, Nozaka Y et al (2021) Comparison between robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for mediastinal and hilar lymph node dissection in lung cancer surgery. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 33(3):409–417 PubMed DOI PMC

Wang Y, Darling GE (2017) Complete mediastinal lymph node dissection versus systematic lymph node sampling in surgical treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: do we have the answer? J Thorac Dis 9(11):4169–4170 PubMed DOI PMC

Aprile V, Ceccarelli I, Stylianos K, Mastromarino MG, Bacchin D, Sicolo E et al (2021) A narrative review on lymphadenectomy: from open to minimally invasive surgery. Video-assist Thorac Surg 7:6–6 DOI

Tulinský L, Kepičová M, Ihnát P, Tomášková H, Mitták M, Staníková L et al (2023) Radicality and safety of mediastinal lymphadenectomy in lung resection: a comparative analysis of uniportal thoracoscopic, multiportal thoracoscopic, and thoracotomy approaches. Surg Endosc Other Interv Tech 37(12):9208–9216 DOI

Rusch VW, Asamura H, Watanabe H, Giroux DJ, Rami-Porta R, Goldstraw P (2009) The IASLC Lung Cancer Staging Project A Proposal for a New International Lymph Node Map in the Forthcoming Seventh Edition of the TNM Classification for for Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol 4(5):568–577 PubMed DOI

Lardinois D, Deleyn P, Vanschil P, Porta R, Waller D, Passlick B et al (2006) ESTS guidelines for intraoperative lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 30(5):787–792 PubMed DOI

Cardillo G, Horsleben-Petersen R (2023) European guidelines for the surgical management of pure ground-glass opacities and part-solid nodules: Task Force of the European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 64(4):ezad222 PubMed DOI

Ureña A, Moreno C, Macia I, Rivas F, Déniz C, Muñoz A et al (2023) A comparison of total thoracoscopic and robotic surgery for lung cancer lymphadenectomy. Cancers 15(13):3442 PubMed DOI PMC

Ramadan OI, Wei B, Cerfolio RJ (2017) Robotic surgery for lung resections—total port approach: advantages and disadvantages. J Vis Surg 3:22–32 PubMed DOI PMC

Miyajima M, Maki R, Arai W, Tsuruta K, Shindo Y, Nakamura Y et al (2022) Robot-assisted vs. video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery in lung cancer. J Thorac Dis 14(6):1890–1899 PubMed DOI PMC

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ 372(71):n71 PubMed DOI PMC

Cerfolio RJ, Ghanim A, Dylewski M, Veronesi G, Spaggiari L, Park BJ (2018) The long-term survival of robotic lobectomy for non–small cell lung cancer: A multi-institutional study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 155(2):778–786 PubMed DOI

Casiraghi M, Cara A, Mazzella A, Girelli L, Lo Iacono G, Uslenghi C et al (2024) 1000 Robotic-assisted lobectomies for primary lung cancer: 16 years single center experience. Lung Cancer 195:107903 PubMed DOI

Casiraghi M, Galetta D, Borri A, Tessitore A, Romano R, Diotti C et al (2018) Ten years’ experience in robotic-assisted thoracic surgery for early stage lung cancer. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Rep 67(07):564–572

Park BJ (2014) Robotic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. Thorac Surg Clin 24(2):157–162 PubMed DOI

Toosi K, Velez-Cubian FO, Glover J, Ng EP, Moodie CC, Garrett JR et al (2016) Upstaging and survival after robotic-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer. Surgery 160(5):1211–1218 PubMed DOI

Shahin GM, Topal B, Pouwels S, Markou TL, Boon R, Stigt JA (2021) Quality assessment of robot assisted thoracic surgical resection of non-small cell lung cancer: nodal upstaging and mediastinal recurrence. J Thorac Dis 13(2):592–599 PubMed DOI PMC

Velez-Cubian FO, Rodriguez KL, Thau MR, Moodie CC, Garrett JR, Fontaine JP et al (2016) Efficacy of lymph node dissection during robotic-assisted lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer: retrospective review of 159 consecutive cases. J Thorac Dis 8(9):2454–2463 PubMed DOI PMC

Shindo Y, Miyajima M, Nakamura Y, Chiba Y, Arai W, Aoyagi M et al (2022) Number of lymph nodes dissected and upstaging rate of the N factor in robot-assisted thoracic surgery versus video-assisted thoracic surgery for patients with cN0 primary lung cancer. Surg Today 53(4):428–434 PubMed DOI

Bao F, Zhang C, Yang Y, He Z, Wang L, Hu J (2016) Comparison of robotic and video-assisted thoracic surgery for lung cancer: a propensity-matched analysis. J Thorac Dis 8(7):1798–1803 PubMed DOI PMC

Li C, Hu Y, Huang J, Li J, Jiang L, Lin H et al (2019) Comparison of robotic-assisted lobectomy with video-assisted thoracic surgery for stage IIB-IIIA non-small cell lung cancer. Transl Lung Cancer Res 8(6):820–828 PubMed DOI PMC

Veronesi G, El-Sayed A, Piergiorgio M, Lembo R, Bottoni E, Perroni G et al (2021) Perioperative outcome of robotic approach versus manual videothoracoscopic major resection in patients affected by early lung cancer: results of a randomized multicentric study (ROMAN Study). Front Oncol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.726408 PubMed DOI PMC

Tang A, Raja S, Bribriesco AC, Raymond DP, Monisha S, Murthy SC et al (2020) Robotic approach offers similar nodal upstaging to open lobectomy for clinical stage I non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Thorac Surg 110(2):424–433 PubMed DOI

Zirafa C, Aprile V, Ricciardi S, Romano G, Davini F, Cavaliere I et al (2018) Nodal upstaging evaluation in NSCLC patients treated by robotic lobectomy. Surg Endosc 33(1):153–158 PubMed DOI

Huang J, Li C, Li H, Lv F, Jiang L, Lin H et al (2019) Robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy for c-N2 stage NSCLC: short-term outcomes of a randomized trial. Transl Lung Cancer Res 8(6):951–958 PubMed DOI PMC

Gallina FT, Melis E, Forcella D, Mercadante E, Marinelli D, Ceddia S et al (2021) Nodal upstaging evaluation after robotic-assisted lobectomy for early-stage non-small cell lung cancer compared to video-assisted thoracic surgery and thoracotomy: a retrospective single center analysis. Front Surg. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2021.666158 PubMed DOI PMC

Novellis P, Maisonneuve P, Dieci E, Voulaz E, Bottoni E, Di Stefano S et al (2021) Quality of life, postoperative pain, and lymph node dissection in a robotic approach compared to VATS and OPEN for early stage lung cancer. J Clin Med 10(8):1687 PubMed DOI PMC

Toker A, Özyurtkan MO, Demirhan Ö, Ayalp K, Kaba E, Uyumaz E (2016) Lymph node dissection in surgery for lung cancer: comparison of open vs. Video-Assisted vs. Robotic-Assisted approaches. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 22(5):284–290 PubMed DOI PMC

Goossen K, Hess S, Lunny C, Pieper D (2020) Database combinations to retrieve systematic reviews in overviews of reviews: a methodological study. BMC Med Res Methodol. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-020-00983-3 PubMed DOI PMC

Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Kleijnen J, Franco OH (2017) Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Syst Rev 6(1):245 PubMed DOI PMC

Gusenbauer M, Haddaway NR (2020) Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of google scholar, pubmed, and 26 other resources. Res Synth Methods 11(2):181–217 PubMed DOI PMC

Asemota N, Alessandro M, Savvas L, Pilling J, King J, Corinne LR et al (2023) Comparison of quality of life after robotic, video-assisted, and open surgery for lung cancer. J Clin Med 12(19):6230 PubMed DOI PMC

Veronesi G, Novellis P, Voulaz E, Alloisio M (2016) Robot-assisted surgery for lung cancer: State of the art and perspectives. Lung Cancer 101:28–34 PubMed DOI

Liu S, Li S, Tang Y, Chen R, Qiao G (2023) Minimally invasive surgery vs. open thoracotomy for non-small-cell lung cancer with N2 disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Med 10:1152421 DOI

Hu J, Chen Y, Dai J, Zhu X, Gonzalez-Rivas D, Jiang G et al (2020) Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted vs video-assisted and traditional open thoracic surgery for lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Int J Med Robot Comp 16(5):1–14 DOI