Clinical trial · Interventional
Robotic Lobectomy vs. Thoracoscopic Lobectomy for Early Stage Lung Cancer: RCT
Robotic Lobectomy vs. Thoracoscopic Lobectomy for Early Stage Lung Cancer: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- Source
- ClinicalTrials.gov
- Retrieved
- Sep 8, 2026
- Layer
- normalized (units and labels harmonized; values unchanged)
- Run
- ING-CLINICALTRIALS-20260908-000001
Summary
Brief summary (as posted)
During video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (VATS), the surgeon inserts a small camera attached to a thoracoscope that puts the image onto a video screen. Instruments are inserted via small incisions, and the lung resection is completed. Robotic thoracic surgery (RTS) uses a similar minimally invasive approach, but the very precise instruments involved with RTS allow the surgeon to view the lung using 3-dimensional imaging. The instruments give the surgeons increased range of motion during the surgery, and research demonstrates that RTS has a less steep learning curve as compared to VATS. Both VATS and RTS demonstrated better results as compared to traditional thoracotomy (open surgery). However, Robotic lobectomy has not yet been compared directly to video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy (VATS) in a prospective manner. There are two major barriers against the widespread adoption of robotic thoracic surgery. The first barrier is the lack of high-quality prospective data. To our knowledge, there are no prospective trials comparing VATS to RTS for early stage lung cancer. The second major barrier to the widespread adoption of robotic technology in thoracic surgery is the perceived higher cost of Robotic lobectomy. To address these barriers, the investigators will undertake the first randomized controlled trial comparing Thoracoscopic Lobectomy to Robotic Lobectomy for early stage lung cancer. Prospective randomization will eliminate the biases of retrospective data and will serve to determine whether there exist any advantages to Health Related Quality of life (HRQOL) or patient outcomes in favour of Robotic Lobectomy over VATS Lobectomy. Furthermore, through a prospective cost-utility analysis, this trial will provide the highest quality data to evaluate the true economic impact of robotic technology in thoracic surgery in a Canadian health system.
Conditions
Conditions (2)
Free-text conditions as registered, with the CancerIndex entity they were reconciled to and the match type.
| Condition (as posted) | Mapped entity | Match | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Non-small Cell Lung Cancer | Lung Non-Small Cell Carcinoma | ALIAS | 0.90 |
| Thoracic Surgery | — | UNRESOLVED | — |
Interventions
Interventions (2)
| Intervention | Type | Mapped drug | Match |
|---|---|---|---|
| Robotic thoracic surgery | Procedure | — | UNRESOLVED |
| Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery | Procedure | — | UNRESOLVED |
Design
Arms and outcomes
Arms (2)
- type
- ACTIVE_COMPARATOR
- label
- Thoracoscopic Lobectomy
- interventionNames
- Procedure: Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery
- type
- ACTIVE_COMPARATOR
- label
- Robotic Lobectomy
- interventionNames
- Procedure: Robotic thoracic surgery
Primary outcomes (1)
- measure
- Difference in HRQOL scores at week 12 between the treatment groups
- timeFrame
- 12 weeks post-surgery
- description
- Difference in HRQOL scores between the treatment groups, as measured by the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire at week 12.
Secondary outcomes (21)
Eligibility
Eligibility (as posted)
- Sex
- All
- Minimum age
- 18 Years
Show eligibility criteria text
Inclusion Criteria: 1. Age \>/= 18 years 2. Clinical stage I, II or IIIa non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) 3. Candidates for minimally invasive pulmonary lobectomy, as determined by the operating surgeon. Exclusion Criteria: 1. Clinical stage IIIb or IV NSCLC 2. Not a candidate for minimally invasive surgery.
References
Publications (21)
- BACKGROUNDGrogan EL, Jones DR. VATS lobectomy is better than open thoracotomy: what is the evidence for short-term outcomes? Thorac Surg Clin. 2008 Aug;18(3):249-58. doi: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2008.04.007. PMID 18831499
- BACKGROUNDOnaitis MW, Petersen RP, Balderson SS, et al. Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Is a Safe and Versatile Procedure. Transactions of the Meeting of the American Surgical Association. 2006;124:86-91. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000234892.79056.63.
- BACKGROUNDVeronesi G. Robotic thoracic surgery: technical considerations and learning curve for pulmonary resection. Thorac Surg Clin. 2014 May;24(2):135-41, v. doi: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2014.02.009. PMID 24780416
- BACKGROUNDNasir BS, Bryant AS, Minnich DJ, Wei B, Cerfolio RJ. Performing robotic lobectomy and segmentectomy: cost, profitability, and outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014 Jul;98(1):203-8; discussion 208-9. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2014.02.051. Epub 2014 May 1. PMID 24793685
- BACKGROUNDPark BJ, Melfi F, Mussi A, Maisonneuve P, Spaggiari L, Da Silva RK, Veronesi G. Robotic lobectomy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): long-term oncologic results. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2012 Feb;143(2):383-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.10.055. Epub 2011 Nov 20. PMID 22104677
- BACKGROUNDWei B, D'Amico TA. Thoracoscopic versus robotic approaches: advantages and disadvantages. Thorac Surg Clin. 2014 May;24(2):177-88, vi. doi: 10.1016/j.thorsurg.2014.02.001. PMID 24780422
- BACKGROUNDLouie BE, Farivar AS, Aye RW, Vallieres E. Early experience with robotic lung resection results in similar operative outcomes and morbidity when compared with matched video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery cases. Ann Thorac Surg. 2012 May;93(5):1598-604; discussion 1604-5. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2012.01.067. Epub 2012 Mar 20. PMID 22440364