Robotic-assisted videothoracoscopic surgery (R-VATS) has become increasingly popular and widely used since its introduction and is nowadays considered a standard treatment approach in many centres for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer. R-VATS was initially developed to overcome the drawbacks of VATS by offering surgeons more flexibility and three-dimensional optics during thoracoscopic surgery. The effectiveness of R-VATS lobectomy regarding oncological outcomes, morbidity, mortality, and postoperative quality of life (QoL) has been shown in an increasing number of studies. More recently, these results have also been corroborated for sublobar resections, more specifically for segmentectomy. However, no well-powered, multicentre randomized trials have been performed to demonstrate the superiority of R-VATS compared with open surgery or conventional types of VATS (total VATS, uniportal VATS, etc.). The majority of the evidence currently available is based on non-randomized studies, and many studies report conflicting results when comparing R-VATS and conventional VATS. Moreover, there is a lack of data regarding the cost and the cost-efficiency of robotic surgery compared with VATS and open surgery. Current evidence suggests that R-VATS costs are higher than VATS and that a deficit can only be prevented when up to 150-300 thoracic surgery procedures are performed annually. Finally, robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery showed better ergonomics and reduced musculoskeletal disorders compared with non-robotic laparoscopic surgery.
Keywords: Lobectomy; Minimally invasive surgery; Non-small cell lung cancer; Robotic-assisted videothoracoscopic surgery (R-VATS); Segmentectomy; da Vinci.