The COMPARE Study: Comparing Perioperative Outcomes of Oncologic Minimally Invasive Laparoscopic, da Vinci Robotic, and Open Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Evidence

Abstract

Objective: To assess 30-day outcomes of da Vinci robotic-assisted (dV-RAS) versus laparoscopic or video-assisted thoracoscopic​​​​​ (lap/VATS) or open oncologic surgery.

Background: Complex procedures in deep/narrow spaces especially benefit from dV-RAS. Prior procedure-specific comparisons are not generalizable.

Methods: PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE were systematically searched (latest: November 17, 2023) following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and PROSPERO (Reg#CRD42023466759). Randomized, prospective, and database studies were pooled as odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) in R using fixed effects or random effects (heterogeneity significant). ROBINS-I/RoB 2 were used to assess bias.

Results: Of 56,314 unique references over 12 years from 22 countries, 230 studies (34 randomized, 74 prospective, and 122 database) comparing dV-RAS to lap/VATS or open surgery across 7 procedures, 4 specialties, representing 1,194,559 dV-RAS; 1,095,936 lap/VATS and 1,625,320 open cases were included. Operative time for dV-RAS was longer than lap/VATS [MD: 17.73 minutes (9.80, 25.67), P < 0.01] and open surgery [MD: 40.92 minutes (28.83, 53.00), P < 0.01], whereas hospital stay was shorter [lap/VATS MD: -0.51 days (-0.64, -0.38), P < 0.01; open MD: -1.85 days (-2.09, -1.62), P < 0.01] and blood loss was less versus open [MD: -293.44 mL (-359.53, -227.35)]. There were fewer dV-RAS conversions [OR: 0.44 (0.40, 0.49), P < 0.01], transfusions [OR: 0.79 (0.72, 0.88), P < 0.01], postoperative complications [OR: 0.90 (0.84, 0.96), P < 0.01], readmissions [OR: 0.91 (0.83, 0.99), P = 0.04], and deaths [OR: 0.86 (0.81, 0.92), P < 0.01] versus lap/VATS, and fewer transfusions [OR: 0.25 (0.21, 0.30), P < 0.01], postoperative complications [OR: 0.56 (0.52, 0.61), P < 0.01], readmissions [OR: 0.71 (0.63, 0.81), P < 0.01], operations [OR: 0.89 (0.81, 0.97), P < 0.01], and deaths [OR: 0.54 (0.47, 0.63), P < 0.01] versus open surgery. Blood loss [MD:- 12.26 mL (-29.44, 4.91), P = 0.16] and operations [OR: 1.03 (0.95, 1.11), P = 0.48] were similar for dV-RAS and lap/VATS. There was significant heterogeneity.

Conclusions: Da Vinci-RAS confers benefits across oncological procedures and study designs. These results provide clinical evidence to multispecialty-care decision-makers considering dV-RAS.

Keywords: cancer surgery; da Vinci; meta-analysis; oncologic surgery; outcomes; perioperative; robot surgery.