Health-Related Quality of Life Following Robotic-Assisted or Video-Assisted Lobectomy in Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Results from the RVlob Randomized Clinical Trial.

Runsen Jin,Zhengyuan Zhang,Yuyan Zheng,Zhenyi Niu,Siying Sun,Yuqin Cao,Yajie Zhang,Abbas E. Abbas,Toni Lerut,Jules Lin,Hecheng Li
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2022.12.037
2023-01-01
CHEST Journal
Abstract:BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted lobectomy (RAL) is increasingly used as an alternative to video-assisted lobectomy (VAL) for resectable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, there is little evidence of any difference in postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) between these two approaches. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is RAL superior to VAL in improving quality of life in patients with resectable NSCLC? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a single-center, open-label randomized clinical trial from May 2017 to May 2020 with 320 enrolled patients undergoing RAL or VAL for resectable NSCLC (RVlob trial; NCT03134534). Postoperative pain was evaluated by visual analog score or numeric rating score on postoperative day 1 and at weeks 4, 24, and 48. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30), EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire in Lung Cancer (QLQLC13), and the European Quality of Life 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire were also administered at weeks 4, 24, and 48 after surgery. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-seven patients underwent RAL and 163 underwent VAL. The mean pain score of patients after RAL was significantly lower at week 4 (2.097 +/- 0.111 vs 2.431 +/- 0.108; P = 032). QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 summary scores (P >.05) were similar for both RAL and VAL during the first 48 weeks of follow-up. HRQoL scores assessed with the EQ-5D questionnaire were also comparable between the two groups (P >.05) during the whole study period. INTERPRETATION: Both RAL and VAL showed satisfactory and comparable HRQoL and post-operative pain up to 48 weeks after surgery, despite some minor statistical differences at week 4.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?