Table 4. Literature review on robotically-assisted atrial myxomas excision.

Author	Article type / patient group	Outcomes	Key results	Comments
Moss et al.[12]	Original article /retrospective, multicenter Robotic surgery (n=30) versus sternotomy incision (n=39)	Mechanical ventilation time ICU length of stay Hospital length of stay Perioperative blood transfusion	Significantly shorter in robotic surgery Shorter ICU stay (16.3 fewer hours; p=0.11) in robotic surgery Hospital LOS (1.1 fewer days; p=0.17) in robotic surgery Decreased blood transfusions (adjusted odds ratio, 0.33; CI: 0.09-1,20; p= 0.09)	Comparison with sternotomy Robotic surgery may be associated with a lower incidence of perioperative blood transfusion as well as shorter ventilation time, and shorter ICU and hospital LOS.
Yang et al.[11]	Original article/robotic surgery (n=49) versus sternotomy incision (n=44)	Mortality Conversion Re-exploration CPB time Ventilation time ICU time Hospitalization time Postoperative atrial fibrillation QoL postoperatively, at day 30 and 6 months The degree of pain Time to return to work	No mortality No conversion No re-exploration 79.7±16.5 in robotic group vs 68.6±27.8 min, p=0.03 7.1±2.1 h vs. 8.4±3.0 h, p= 0.00 2.7±1.0 days vs. 4.1±3.6 days, p=0.04 6.2±1.3 days vs. 8.7±1.9 days, p=0.04 2 (4.1%) vs. 8 (18.2%) patients, p=0.04 better in the robotically assisted group (p<0.05) less pain in the robotic patients after 0.9±0.1 vs 3.3±0.4 months	Comparison with conventional sternotomy The level of restoration of normal QoL within 30 days after atrial myxoma surgery is excellent with the robotically assisted approach
Kesävuori et al.[10]	Original article/robotic (n=9) versus sternotomy incision (n=18)	CPB time Cross-clamp time Ventilation time Hospitalization time Clinical follow-up time Recurrence HRQoL results	124±30 vs. 54±21 min, <0.001 67±21 vs. 34±15 min, <0.001 14.6±5.0 vs. 9.0±3.0 h, <0.001 5.8±1.0 vs. 7.0±1.6 days, 0.023 8.0±6.9 vs. 18.2±21.1 months No recurrence No significant difference in any of the eight measured RAND-36 scales	Limited comparison with conventional sternotomy Robotic surgery: Short hospital stay, effective, safe technique/quality of life is similar to conventional surgery
Schilling et al.[16]	Original article/retrospective design robotic resection (n=16) versus full sternotomy incision (n=29)	In-hospital mortality Conversion to full sternotomy Bleeding requiring reoperation Postoperative renal failure Blood products administered CPB time ACC time Total hospital length of stay	0/16 (0%) vs 0/29 (0%), P=NA No conversion No exploration 0/16 (0%) vs. 3/29 (10%), p=0.54 2/16 (13%) vs 7/29 (26%), p=0.30 91.3±45.2 vs. 96.8±42.1 min, p= 0.68 49.4±37.6 vs. 52.1±39.6 min, p= 0.82 3.6±0.8 vs 6.2±5.1 days, p=0.05	Comparison with conventional sternotomy Robotic surgery had similar postoperative outcomes and shorter total hospital length of stay
Gao et al.[13]	Original article/19 robotic surgery patients	Operative mortality Stroke Other complications Follow-up Recurrence	No death No stroke None 1-18 months, and 100% complete None	Robotic surgery is safe, feasible and efficacious. Excellent surgical and cosmetic outcomes No comparison with standard approach
Murphy et al. [15]	Case series/3 patients underwent excision of left atrial myxomas	In-hospital mortality Conversion to full sternotomy Mean CPB time Mean ACC time Hospital length of stay Postoperative complication	No mortality No conversion 103±40 min 64±2 min 4 days No complication	Endoscopic excision of atrial myxomas with the da Vinci robotic system is feasible
ICU: Intensive care unit; LOS: Length of stay; CI: Confidence interval; CPB: Cardiopulmonary bypass; QOL: Quality of life; HRQoL: Health-related quality of life; SD: Standard deviation; ACC: Aortic cross-clamp.