RoboticAssisted (RATS) versus Video-Assisted (VATS) lobectomy: A monocentric prospective randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: The study aim is to compare Video-Assisted (VATS) and Robotic-Assisted (RATS) lobectomy in the effort to identify advantages and limits of robotic procedures considering the high costs and specific surgeon training. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a monocentric prospective randomized trial in which patients suitable for mini-invasive lobectomy were randomized 1:2 in two groups: Group A, RATS (25 patients), and Group B, VATS (50 patients). The two groups were compared in terms of perioperative and postoperative results with a mean follow up of 37.9 (±10.9) months. RESULTS: We observed a significant reduction of pleural effusion on day 1 (140 ml vs 214, p = 0.003) and day 2 (186 vs 321, p = 0.001) for group A. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) showed significantly lower pain in the 1st p.o. day in group A (0,92 vs 1,17, p = 0,005). Surgery time in Group B was significantly lower (160 min vs 180, p = 0.036), but had a higher onset of atrial fibrillation and other cardiac arrhythmias (0/25 vs 9/50, p = 0.038). The OS and DFS were similar between the two groups (95.5 % vs 93.1 %, and 95.5 % vs 89.7 %, respectively). Furthermore, no statistical difference in the evaluation of quality of life during follow-up was found. CONCLUSIONS: The RATS approach, although burdened by higher surgical costs, constitutes a valid alternative to VATS; as it determines a lower inflammatory insult, with a consequent reduction in pleural effusion, less post-operative pain and cardiological comorbidities for the patient, it can potentially determine the shortening in hospitalization. In addition, RATS allows accurate lymph node dissection, which permit to reach results that are not inferior to VATS in terms of long-term outcomes.

SARS-CoV-2 viability on different surfaces after gaseous ozone treatment: a preliminary evaluation.

COVID-19 is a global health threat with a huge number of confirmed cases and deaths all over the world. Human-to-human transmission via respiratory droplets and contact with aerosol-infected surfaces are the major routes of virus spread. Because SARS-CoV-2 can remain in the air and on surfaces from several hours to several days, disinfection of frequently touched surfaces and critical rooms, in addition to observing individual hygiene tips, is required to reduce the virus spreading. Here we report on an investigation into the use of gaseous ozone as a potentially effective sanitizing method against the new coronavirus.