Robot-assisted versus conventional neck dissection: a propensity score matched case–control study on perioperative and oncologic outcomes

The widespread acceptance of robotic surgery is extending to oral procedures. The demand for minimally invasive techniques is driving research into the cosmetic and oncologic benefits of robotic neck surgery. This study used propensity score matching to analyze the clinical course and postoperative outcomes of robot-assisted neck dissections for oncologic efficacy and surgical safety. Between May 2020 and April 2024, 200 OSCC patients underwent surgery and 42 were excluded. The cohort included 158 patients, 128 of whom underwent unilateral neck dissection and 30 of whom underwent bilateral neck dissection. Robotic-assisted neck dissection (RAND) was performed in 36 patients while conventional transcervical neck dissection (CTND) was performed in 122 patients. Data analysis included several factors, including lymph node retrieval and perioperative outcomes, with 1:1 propensity score matching to ensure fairness. Each of the 39 neck specimens with 36 patients was selected. The CTND group was 8 years older overall than the RAND group, but otherwise similar in terms of primary site and clinical stage. The RAND group had a 55-min longer operative time and 140 cc more hemovac drainage than the CTND group, but the hospital stay and intensive care unit duration were the same, and the number of lymph nodes retrieved was the same. Survival rates also showed no difference across all stages. This shows that RAND is in no way inferior to CTND in terms of perioperative or oncologic outcomes, and demonstrates the safety of robot-assisted surgery, even in patients who require flaps or in patients with advanced stages.