[Morphological, functional and cytochemical studies of the changes in citrated blood during storage].

G. Menghini,F. Orlandi,N. Benda

Haematologica

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Laparoscopic Splenectomy Performed in 41 Cases

王先法,蔡秀军,虞洪,王跃东,梁宵,李伟

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/j.issn:1007-631x.2003.10.010

2003-01-01

Abstract:Objective To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of laparoscopic splenectomy(LS). Methods In this study 41 cases were enrolled including 10 cirrhotic splenomegaly cases and 17 idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura cases. The clinical data of 41 cases undergoing LS was retrospectively reviewed. KG2Result Two cases were shifted to open surgery, LS was successful in 39 cases with average operating time of 238 min, the average spleen weight was 389 g, blood loss 318 ml, postoperative GI movement started from 12 to 24 hrs. The average postoperative hospital stay was 4 days. Postoperative complications occurred in 3 cases including intraabdominal bleeding, subcutaneous emphysema, and stabbing-caused abdominal wall bleeding in one each. Conclusion LS is safe and less traumatic in selected patients indicated for splenectomy, especially for those suffering from haemotologic diseases.
Total laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Yuhua Zhang,Defei Hong,Chengwu Zhang,Zhiming Hu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5582/bst.2018.01236

2018-01-01

BioScience Trends

Abstract:In this study, the clinical effectiveness of the robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy LPD were retrospectively reviewed. From December 2013 to September 2017, 20 patients underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and 80 patients underwent Total laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy. The clinical data of the RPDs and the first 20 LPDs were reviewed retrospectively. There is no difference in operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, and rates of complications and mortality between the LPD and RPD group. The next 10 cases in the RPD group had shorter operative times (p = 0.03) than the first 10 cases. The estimated blood loss and length of stay were also lower in the next 10 cases; however, these results did not reach statistical significance. Our results show that LPD and RPD are technically safe and feasible. Comparable results were demonstrated between the two groups, while the robotic system seemed to shorten the learning curve of minimally invasive pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).
Robot-Assisted Resection of Mesenteric Cysts in Pediatric Patients: a single-centered Retrospective study

Yi Chen,Qingjiang Chen,Duote Cai,Yunzhong Qian,Sai Chen,Shuhao Zhang,Yi Jin,Linyan Wang,Qiang Shu,Zhigang Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4093184/v1

2024-01-01

Abstract:Abstract Background Mesenteric cysts (MCs) are rare intra-abdominal masses in childhood. Laparoscopic-assisted surgery has become the main procedure for their resection, but robot-assisted surgery has rarely been reported. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively analyze and present our experience with robot-assisted resection of MCs using the da Vinci Xi surgical system and to discuss the technical points. Methods Children diagnosed with abdominal MCs who underwent surgical treatment at the Children's Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine between January 2020 and November 2023 were retrospectively analyzed, and clinical data, surgical details, and prognosis of the patients were systematically collected. Results Among 40 patients, a total of 18 underwent robot-assisted surgery and 22 underwent laparoscopic-assisted surgery. In the robot-assisted surgery group, the entire procedure was performed endoscopically, whereas in the laparoscopic surgery group, eight procedures were converted to laparotomy. The operation time of 134.5 minutes for the robot-assisted group was not significantly longer than the 104 minutes for the laparoscopic-assisted surgery group (P > 0.05), but the average length of postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (P < 0.05). Conclusions Robotic-assisted resection of MCs is safe and feasible and the refinement of the Da Vinci Xi surgical system was much better than that of the conventional laparoscopic equipment, resulting in significantly improved intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.
Comparison of efficacy and safety of robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery for choledochal cyst in children: a systematic review and proportional meta-analysis

Meng-xin Zhang,Shui-qing Chi,Guo-qing Cao,Jing-feng Tang,Shao-tao Tang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09442-0

2022-08-03

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:Most commonly, cyst excision and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy reconstruction are the optimal treatment for choledochal cysts (CC). Robotic surgery (RS) is being conducted with increasing frequency to treat CC. It is unclear whether RS can overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery (LS) and improve the prognosis of patients. In terms of efficacy, evidence concerning which minimally invasive surgery is preferred is, however, sparse. Our objective is to further compare the efficacy of RS and LS in children with CC and draw a useful clinical conclusion.
Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy shows better short-term advantages: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery

Zu-Kai Wang,Jian-Xian Lin,Fu-Hai Wang,Jian-Wei Xie,Jia-Bin Wang,Jun Lu,Qi-Yue Chen,Long-Long Cao,Mi Lin,Ru-Hong Tu,Ze-Ning Huang,Ju-Li Lin,Hua-Long Zheng,Ping Li,Chao-Hui Zheng,Chang-Ming Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09352-1

2022-01-01

Abstract:Background Robotic surgery may be advantageous for complex surgery. We aimed to compare the intraoperative and postoperative short-term outcomes of spleen-preserving splenic hilar lymphadenectomy (SPSHL) during robotic and laparoscopic total gastrectomy. Methods From July 2016 to December 2020, the clinicopathological data of 115 patients who underwent robotic total gastrectomy combined with robotic SPSHL (RSPSHL) and 697 patients who underwent laparoscopic total gastrectomy combined with laparoscopic SPSHL (LSPSHL) were retrospectively analyzed. A 1:2 ratio propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the differences between the two groups to compare their outcomes. The Generic Error Rating Tool was used to evaluate the technical performance. Results After PSM, the baseline preoperative characteristics of the 115 patients in the RSPSHL and 230 patients in the LSPSHL groups were balanced. The dissection time of the region of the splenic artery trunk (5.4 ± 1.9 min vs. 7.8 ± 3.6 min, P < 0.001), the estimated blood loss during SPSHL (9.6 ± 4.8 ml vs. 14.9 ± 7.8 ml, P < 0.001), and the average number of intraoperative technical errors during SPSHL (15.1 ± 3.4 times/case vs. 20.7 ± 4.3 times/case, P < 0.001) were significantly lower in the RSPSHL group than in the LSPSHL group. The RSPSHL group showed higher dissection rates of No. 10 (78.3% vs. 70.0%, P = 0.104) and No. 11d (54.8% vs. 40.4%, P = 0.012) lymph nodes and significantly improved postoperative recovery results in terms of times to ambulation, first flatus, and first intake ( P < 0.05). The splenectomy rates of the two groups were similar (1.7% vs. 0.4%, P = 0.539), and there was no significant difference in morbidity and mortality within postoperative 30 days (13.0% vs. 15.2%, P = 0.589). Conclusion Compared to LSPSHL, RSPSHL has more advantages in terms of surgical qualities and postoperative recovery process with similar morbidity and mortality. For complex SPSHL, robotic surgery may be a better choice.
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy: A Meta-Analysis Of Short-Term Outcomes

Jiayu Zhou,Chang Xin,Yi-Ping Mou,Xiao-Wu Xu,Miao-Zun Zhang,Yu-Cheng Zhou,Chao Lu,Rong-Gao Chen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0151189

IF: 3.7

2016-01-01

PLoS ONE

Abstract:AIMTo compare the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RADP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).METHODSA literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library database up to June 30, 2015 was performed. The following key words were used: pancreas, distal pancreatectomy, pancreatic, laparoscopic, laparoscopy, robotic, and robotic-assisted. Fixed and random effects models were applied. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.RESULTSSeven non-randomized controlled trials involving 568 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with LDP, RADP was associated with longer operating time, lower estimated blood loss, a higher spleen-preservation rate, and shorter hospital stay. There was no significant difference in transfusion, conversion to open surgery, R0 resection rate, lymph nodes harvested, overall complications, severe complications, pancreatic fistula, severe pancreatic fistula, ICU stay, total cost, and 30-day mortality between the two groups.CONCLUSIONRADP is a safe and feasible alternative to LDP with regard to short-term outcomes. Further studies on the long-term outcomes of these surgical techniques are required.Core tipTo date, there is no consensus on whether laparoscopic or robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy is more beneficial to the patient. This is the first meta-analysis to compare laparoscopic and robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy. We found that robotic-assisted distal pancreatectomy was associated with longer operating time, lower estimated blood loss, a higher spleen-preservation rate, and shorter hospital stay. There was no significant difference in transfusion, conversion to open surgery, overall complications, severe complications, pancreatic fistula, severe pancreatic fistula, ICU stay, total cost, and 30-day mortality between the two groups.
Patient compliance: in search of the real question in diabetes care.

C. Chaufan

2000-02-01

American family physician

Abstract:
Robotic approach improves spleen-preserving rate and shortens postoperative hospital stay of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a matched cohort study

Shi Chen,Qian Zhan,Jiang-zhi Chen,Jia-bin Jin,Xia-xing Deng,Hao Chen,Bai-yong Shen,Cheng-hong Peng,Hong-wei Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4101-5

2015-03-20

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:BackgroundSpleen preservation (SP) is beneficial for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy of benign and borderline tumors; however, the conventional laparoscopy approach (C-LDP) is less effective in controlling splenic vessel bleeding. The benefits of the robotic-assisted approach (RA-LDP) in SP have not been clearly described. This study aimed to evaluate whether a robotic approach could improve SP rate and effectiveness/safety profile of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP).MethodsMatched for scheduled SP, age, sex, ASA classification, tumor size, tumor location, and pathological type, 69 patients undergoing RA-LDP and 50 undergoing C-LDP between January 2005 and May 2014 were included. Main outcome measures included SP rate, operative time (OT), blood loss, transfusion frequency, morbidity, postoperative hospital stay (PHS), and oncologic safety.ResultsAmong matched patients scheduled for SP, RA-LDP was associated with significantly higher overall (95.7 vs. 39.4 %) and Kimura SP rates (72.3 vs. 21.2 %), shorter OT (median 120 vs. 200 min), less blood loss (median 100 vs. 300 mL), lower transfusion frequency (2.1 vs. 18.2 %), and shorter mean PHS (10.2 vs. 14.5 days). Among matched patients scheduled for splenectomy, RA-LDP was associated with similar OT, blood loss, transfusion frequency, and PHS. The two approaches were similar in overall morbidity, frequency of pancreatic fistula, and oncologic outcome among patients undergoing splenectomy for malignant tumors.ConclusionsRA-LDP was associated with a significantly better SP rate and reduced OT, blood loss, transfusion requirement, and PHS for patients undergoing SP compared to C-LDP, but offered less benefits for patients undergoing splenectomy.
Outcomes and comparations of pediatric surgery about choledochal cyst with robot-assisted procedures, laparoscopic procedures, and open procedures: A meta-analysis

Siqi Xie,Yanbing Huang,Yuanbin He,Mingkun Liu,Dianming Wu,Yifan Fang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.968960

IF: 3.569

2022-08-12

Frontiers in Pediatrics

Abstract:Background: Choledochal cysts (CC) are rare disorders characterized by congenital biliary dilatation of the intrahepatic or extrahepatic bile ducts and always relate to pancreaticobiliary maljunction. Robot-assisted surgery has been able to complete almost all pediatric endoscopic surgery nowadays. But evidence of the post-operative outcomes of robotic-assisted operation is limited, comparing with the laparoscopic operation and traditional open operation. The aim of this meta-analysis was to identify the advantages and deficiencies about robotic-assisted operation for CC. Methods: A meta-analysis of retrospective studies published in PUBMED, MEDLINE, Web of Science and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI). No date limit was used, with the last search on April 30, 2022. No publication restrictions or study design filters were applied. Results: Nine retrospective cohort studies with 1,395 patients [366 in the robotic-assisted operation group (RG), 532 in the laparoscopic operation group (LG) and 497 in the open operation group (OG)] were enrolled in our study. Subgroup analysis demonstrated the RG had significant longer operative time [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.59, 95% CI = (0.02, 3.16), P < 0.05], less blood loss [SMD = −1.52, 95% CI = (−2.71, −0.32), P < 0.05], shorter enteral feeding time [SMD = −0.83, 95% CI = (−1.22, −0.44), P < 0.001], shorter time to stay in the hospital [SMD = −0.81, 95% CI = (−1.23, −0.38), P < 0.001], fewer post-operative complications [Relative risk (RR) =1.09, 95% CI = (1.04, 1.13), P < 0.001] but higher expenses [SMD = 8.58, 95% CI = (5.27, 11.89), P < 0.001] than LG. While a significant older age [SMD = 0.46, 95% CI = (0.26, 0.66), P < 0.001], longer operative time [SMD = 3.96, 95% CI = (2.38, 5.55), P < 0.001] and shorter time to stay in the hospital [SMD = −0.93, 95% CI = (−1.62, −0.25), P < 0.05] than OG. Conclusions: Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted procedure are both safe and minimal invasive operational strategies. Robotic-assisted procedure may slowly surpass and has a trend to replace laparoscopy for its advantages. More experiences in robotic-assisted operation should be accumulated for the unexpected complexities, so as to be more stable in the younger age of children.

pediatrics
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings: An International Multicenter Propensity Score Matched Study of 10.075 Patients

T. Hoogteijling,F. Rottelar,D. Geller,R. Robles Campos,R. Croner,E. Jovine,S. Lopez Ben,M. Efanov,A. Alseidi,R. Memeo,I. Dagher,F. Giuliante,E. Sparrelid,J. Ahmad,T. Gallagher,M. Schmelzle,R.-J. Swijnenburg,S. White,M. Vivarelli,P. Serrano,I. Sucandy,B. Goh,M. Besselink,B. Edwin,M. Abu Hilal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2024.03.054

IF: 13.787

2024-06-08

Annals of Surgery

Abstract:Objective: To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic liver surgery (RLS) and laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) in various settings. Background: Clear advantages of RLS over LLS have rarely been demonstrated, and the associated costs of robotic surgery are generally higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, the exact role of the robotic approach in minimally invasive liver surgery remains to be defined. Methods: In this international retrospective cohort study, the outcomes of patients who underwent RLS and LLS for all indications between 2009 and 2021 in 34 hepatobiliary referral centers were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare both approaches across several types of procedures: (1) minor resections in the anterolateral (2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6) or (2) posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8), and (3) major resections (≥3 contiguous segments). Propensity score matching was used to mitigate the influence of selection bias. The primary outcome was textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS), previously defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥grade 2, postoperative bile leak ≥grade B, severe morbidity, readmission, and 90-day or in-hospital mortality with the presence of an R0 resection margin in case of malignancy. The absence of a prolonged length of stay was added to define TOLS+. Results: Among the 10.075 included patients, 1.507 underwent RLS and 8.568 LLS. After propensity score matching, both groups constituted 1.505 patients. RLS was associated with higher rates of TOLS (78.3% vs 71.8%, P < 0.001) and TOLS+ (55% vs 50.4%, P = 0.026), less Pringle usage (39.1% vs 47.1%, P < 0.001), blood loss (100 vs 200 milliliters, P < 0.001), transfusions (4.9% vs 7.9%, P = 0.003), conversions (2.7% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), overall morbidity (19.3% vs 25.7%, P < 0.001), and microscopically irradical resection margins (10.1% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.015), and shorter operative times (190 vs 210 minutes, P = 0.015). In the subgroups, RLS tended to have higher TOLS rates, compared with LLS, for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments (n = 431 per group, 75.9% vs 71.2%, P = 0.184) and major resections (n = 321 per group, 72.9% vs 67.5%, P = 0.086), although these differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: While both produce excellent outcomes, RLS might facilitate slightly higher TOLS rates than LLS.

surgery
Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection: a comparative study from a single center

Young-Dong Yu,Ki-Hun Kim,Dong-Hwan Jung,Jung-Man Namkoong,Sam-Youl Yoon,Sung-Won Jung,Sang-Kyung Lee,Sung-Gyu Lee

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-014-1238-y

2014-11-04

Abstract:PurposeThe significant advantages of robotic surgery have expanded the scope of surgical procedures that can be performed through minimally invasive techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic liver surgeries at a single center.MethodsFrom July 2007 to October 2011, a total of 206 patients underwent laparoscopic or robotic liver surgery at the Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea. We compared the surgical outcomes between robotic liver surgery and laparoscopic liver surgery during the same period. Only patients who underwent left hemihepatectomy or left lateral sectionectomy were included in this study.ResultsThe robotic group consisted of 13 patients who underwent robotic liver resection including 10 left lateral sectionectomies and three left hemihepatectomies. The laparoscopic group consisted of 17 patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection during the same period including six left lateral sectionectomies and 11 left hemihepatectomies. The groups were similar with regard to age, gender, tumor type, and tumor size. There were no significant differences in perioperative outcome such as operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative liver function tests, complication rate, and hospital stay between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. However, the medical cost was higher in the robotic group.ConclusionsRobotic liver resection is a safe and feasible option for liver resection in experienced hands. The authors suggest that since the robotic surgical system provides sophisticated advantages, the retrenchment of medical cost for the robotic system in addition to refining its liver transection tool may substantially increase its application in clinical practice in the near future.

surgery
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: A Single Surgeon Experience of 629 Consecutive Minimally Invasive Liver Resections

Thomas Winckelmans,Dennis A Wicherts,Isabelle Parmentier,Celine De Meyere,Chris Verslype,Mathieu D'Hondt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-023-07060-y

Abstract:Background: Robotic surgery has the potential to broaden the indications for minimally invasive liver surgery owing to its technical advantages. This paper compares our experience with robotic liver surgery (RLS) with conventional laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS). Methods: All consecutive liver resections between October 2011 and October 2022 were selected from our prospective database to be included in this cohort study. Patients who underwent RLS were compared with a LLS group for operative and postoperative outcomes. Results: In total, 629 patients were selected from our database, including 177 patients who underwent a RLS and 452 patients who had LLS. Colorectal liver metastasis was the main indication for surgery in both groups. With the introduction of RLS, the percentage of open resections decreased significantly (32.6% from 2011 to 2020 vs. 11.5% from 2020 onward, P < 0.001). In the robotic group, redo liver surgery was more frequent (24.3% vs. 16.8%, P = 0.031) and the Southampton difficulty score was higher (4 [IQR 4 to 7] vs. 4 [IQR 3 to 6], P = 0.02). Median blood loss was lower (30 vs. 100 ml, P < 0.001), and postoperative length of stay (LOS) was shorter in the robotic group (median 3 vs. 4 days, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications. Cost related to the used instruments and LOS was significantly lower in the RLS group (median €1483 vs. €1796, P < 0.001 and €1218 vs. €1624, P < 0.001, respectively), while cost related to operative time was higher (median €2755 vs. €2470, P < 0.001). Conclusions: RLS may allow for a higher percentage of liver resections to be completed in a minimally invasive way with lower blood loss and a shorter LOS.
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Posterosuperior Region: a Retrospective Study of Consecutive Cases

Wei Chen,Xiaoyu Zhang,Jincai Jiang,Yufu Ye,Zhenglong Zhai,Wendi Hu,Xiang Li,Yiwen Chen,Yan Chen,Yifan Hong,Lan Jia,Xueli Bai,Tingbo Liang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-023-09952-5

2023-01-01

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:BackgroundMinimally invasive liver resection of the posterosuperior region is considered a challenging procedure due to poor exposure and difficult bleeding control. A robotic approach is supposed to be advantageous in posterosuperior segmentectomy. Its benefits over laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) remain undetermined. This study compared robotic liver resection (RLR) and LLR in the posterosuperior region performed by a single surgeon.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively analyzed consecutive RLR and LLR performed by a single surgeon between December 2020 and March 2022. Patient characteristics and perioperative variables were compared. A 1:1 propensity score matched (PSM) analysis was performed between both groups.ResultsThe analysis included 48 RLR and 57 LLR procedures in the posterosuperior region. After PSM analysis, 41 cases of both groups were retained. In pre-PSM cohort, the operative time in the RLR group was significantly shorter than in the LLR group (160 vs. 208 min, P = 0.001), especially in radical resection of malignant tumors (176 vs. 231 min, P = 0.004). The total Pringle maneuver duration was also markedly shorter (40 vs. 51 min, P = 0.047), and the estimated blood loss in the RLR group was lower (92 vs. 150 mL, P = 0.005). The postoperative hospital stay (POHS) in the RLR group was significantly shorter (5.4 vs. 7.5 days, P = 0.048). In PSM cohort, operative time in the RLR group was also significantly shorter (163 vs. 193 min, P = 0.036), and the estimated blood loss was lower (92 vs. 144 mL, P = 0.024). However, the total Pringle maneuver duration and POHS showed no significant difference. The complications were similar between two groups in both pre-PSM and PSM cohorts.ConclusionRLR in the posterosuperior region was as safe and feasible as LLR. RLR was associated with reduced operative time and blood loss than LLR.
Robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy of liver

Jae Keun Kim,Joon Seong Park,Dai Hoon Han,Gi Hong Choi,Kyung Sik Kim,Jin Sub Choi,Dong Sup Yoon

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4803-3

2016-02-22

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:BackgroundA few studies have reported only short-term outcomes of various robotic and laparoscopic liver resection types; however, published data in left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) have been limited. The aim of this study was to compare the long- and short-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic LLS.MethodsWe retrospectively compared demographic and perioperative data as well as postoperative outcomes of robotic (n = 12) and laparoscopic (n = 31) LLS performed between May 2007 and July 2013. Resection indications included malignant tumors (n = 31) and benign lesions (n = 12) including intrahepatic duct (IHD) stones (n = 9).ResultsThere were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes of estimated blood loss, major complications, or lengths of stay, but operating time was longer in robotic than in laparoscopic LLS (391 vs. 196 min, respectively) and the operation time for IHD stones did not differ between groups (435 vs. 405 min, respectively; p = 0.190). Disease-free (p = 0.463) and overall (p = 0.484) survival of patients with malignancy did not differ between groups. The 2- and 5-year disease-free survival rates were 63.2 and 36.5 %, respectively. However, robotic LLS costs were significantly higher than laparoscopic LLS costs ($8183 vs. $5190, respectively; p = 0.009).ConclusionsRobotic LLS was comparable to laparoscopic LLS in surgical outcomes and oncologic integrity during the learning curve. Although robotic LLS was more expensive and time intensive, it might be a good option for difficult indications such as IHD stones.
Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic liver resection in ordinary cases of left lateral sectionectomy

Lin Zhu,Yanzhe Liu,Minggen Hu,Zhiming Zhao,Chenggang Li,Xuan Zhang,Xianglong Tan,Fei Wang,Rong Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08846-8

2021-11-08

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:BackgroundLaparoscopy was considered the standard method of left lateral sectionectomy. The robotic approach showed advantages in complex cases of left lateral sectionectomy. However, the impact of the robotic system on ordinary cases is still unknown.MethodsRetrospective review of consecutive robotic left lateral sectionectomy (R-LLS) and laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy (L-LLS) from January 2015 to December 2019. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the effects of surgical method and surgical complexity on postoperative length of stay, surgical and overall cost.Results258 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive left lateral sectionectomy were analyzed. L-LLS had comparable outcomes and decreased surgery (USD 2416.3 vs 4624.5; p < 0.001) and overall costs (USD 8004.5 vs 11897.1; p < 0.001) compared with R-LLS in the ordinary—case group, whereas R-LLS was associated with shorter postoperative LOS (5.0 vs 3.5 days; p = 0.004) in the complex—case group. On multivariable analysis, R-LLS was predictive of shorter postoperative LOS [odds ratio (OR) 0.388, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.198–0.760, p = 0.006], whereas R-LLS was predictive of higher surgery (OR 65.640, 95% CI 17.406–247.535, p < 0.001) and overall costs (OR 102.233, 95% CI 22.241–469.931, p < 0.001).ConclusionResults of this study showed no clinical benefit to the R-LLS compared with L-LLS in ordinary cases. R-LLS had potential advantages in selected complex cases.
Robotic vs. laparoscopic liver surgery: a single-center analysis of 600 consecutive patients in 6 years

Moritz Schmelzle,Linda Feldbrügge,Santiago Andres Ortiz Galindo,Simon Moosburner,Anika Kästner,Felix Krenzien,Christian Benzing,Matthias Biebl,Robert Öllinger,Thomas Malinka,Wenzel Schöning,Johann Pratschke

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08770-x

2022-05-31

Surgical Endoscopy

Abstract:Abstract Background While laparoscopic liver surgery has become a standard procedure, experience with robotic liver surgery is still limited. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate safety and feasibility of robotic liver surgery and compare outcomes with conventional laparoscopy. Methods We here report the results of a single-center, prospective, post-marketing observational study (DRKS00017229) investigating the safety and feasibility of robotic liver surgery. Baseline characteristics, surgical complexity (using the IWATE score), and postoperative outcomes were then compared to laparoscopic liver resections performed at our center between January 2015 and December 2020. A propensity score-based matching (PSM) was applied to control for selection bias. Results One hundred twenty nine robotic liver resections were performed using the da Vinci Xi surgical system (Intuitive) in this prospective study and were compared to 471 consecutive laparoscopic liver resections. After PSM, both groups comprised 129 cases with similar baseline characteristics and surgical complexity. There were no significant differences in intraoperative variables, such as need for red blood cell transfusion, duration of surgery, or conversion to open surgery. Postoperative complications were comparable after robotic and laparoscopic surgery (Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3a: 23% vs. 19%, p = 0.625); however, there were more bile leakages grade B–C in the robotic group (17% vs. 7%, p = 0.006). Length of stay and oncological short-term outcomes were comparable. Conclusions We propose robotic liver resection as a safe and feasible alternative to established laparoscopic techniques. The object of future studies must be to define interventions where robotic techniques are superior to conventional laparoscopy.

surgery
Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings

David Geller,R. Swijnenburg,Tom K. Gallagher,E. Sparrelid,R. Memeo,S. Lopez Ben,Pablo E Serrano,J. Martinie,D. Fuks,B. Goh,A. Benedetti Cacciaguerra,Y. Koh,U. Cillo,V. Morrison-Jones,D. Aghayan,F. Cipriani,B. Edwin,G. Zimmitti,A. Ruzzenente,Daniel Osei Bordom,Shafiq Rehman,Rong Liu,S. Conci,Kongyuan Wei,F. Ratti,D. Vrochides,E. Jovine,G. Zozaya,Roland S Croner,Robert P. Sutcliffe,S. Tzedakis,A. Alseidi,J. Primrose,Å. Fretland,K. Crespo,Fabrizio Di Benedetto,M. Efanov,C. Caula,M. Schmelzle,L. Aldrighetti,S. White,M. Besselink,T. Hoogteijling,R. Robles Campos,F. Giuliante,F. Rotellar,Jacopo Lanari,P. Magistri,M. D'Hondt,I. Dagher,I. Sucandy,Louis Haentjens,Jawad Ahmad,Jasper P. Sijberden,M. Abu Hilal,N. Russolillo,B. Görgec,D. D’Souza,M. Vivarelli,E. Tan,A. Ferrero

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006267

IF: 13.787

2024-03-14

Annals of Surgery

Abstract:Objective: To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic liver surgery (RLS) and laparoscopic liver surgery (LLS) in various settings. Background: Clear advantages of RLS over LLS have rarely been demonstrated, and the associated costs of robotic surgery are generally higher than those of laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, the exact role of the robotic approach in minimally invasive liver surgery remains to be defined. Methods: In this international retrospective cohort study, the outcomes of patients who underwent RLS and LLS for all indications between 2009 and 2021 in 34 hepatobiliary referral centers were compared. Subgroup analyses were performed to compare both approaches across several types of procedures: (1) minor resections in the anterolateral (2, 3, 4b, 5, and 6) or (2) posterosuperior segments (1, 4a, 7, 8), and (3) major resections (≥3 contiguous segments). Propensity score matching was used to mitigate the influence of selection bias. The primary outcome was textbook outcome in liver surgery (TOLS), previously defined as the absence of intraoperative incidents ≥grade 2, postoperative bile leak ≥grade B, severe morbidity, readmission, and 90-day or in-hospital mortality with the presence of an R0 resection margin in case of malignancy. The absence of a prolonged length of stay was added to define TOLS+. Results: Among the 10.075 included patients, 1.507 underwent RLS and 8.568 LLS. After propensity score matching, both groups constituted 1.505 patients. RLS was associated with higher rates of TOLS (78.3% vs 71.8%, P < 0.001) and TOLS+ (55% vs 50.4%, P = 0.026), less Pringle usage (39.1% vs 47.1%, P < 0.001), blood loss (100 vs 200 milliliters, P < 0.001), transfusions (4.9% vs 7.9%, P = 0.003), conversions (2.7% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), overall morbidity (19.3% vs 25.7%, P < 0.001), and microscopically irradical resection margins (10.1% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.015), and shorter operative times (190 vs 210 minutes, P = 0.015). In the subgroups, RLS tended to have higher TOLS rates, compared with LLS, for minor resections in the posterosuperior segments (n = 431 per group, 75.9% vs 71.2%, P = 0.184) and major resections (n = 321 per group, 72.9% vs 67.5%, P = 0.086), although these differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: While both produce excellent outcomes, RLS might facilitate slightly higher TOLS rates than LLS.

Engineering,Medicine
Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic liver resections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Sivesh Kathir Kamarajah,James Bundred,Derek Manas,Long Jiao,Mohammad Abu Hilal,S. A. White

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1457496920925637

2020-08-07

Scandinavian Journal of Surgery

Abstract:Background: Theoretical advantages of robotic surgery compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery include improved instrument dexterity, 3D visualization, and better ergonomics. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine advantages of robotic surgery over laparoscopic surgery in patients undergoing liver resections. Method: A systematic literature search was conducted for studies comparing robotic assisted or totally laparoscopic liver resection. Meta-analysis of intraoperative (operative time, blood loss, transfusion rate, conversion rate), oncological (R0 resection rates), and postoperative (bile leak, surgical site infection, pulmonary complications, 30-day and 90-day mortality, length of stay, 90-day readmission and reoperation rates) outcomes was performed using a random effects model. Result: Twenty-six non-randomized studies including 2630 patients (950 robotic and 1680 laparoscopic) were included, of which 20% had major robotic liver resection and 14% had major laparoscopic liver resection. Intraoperatively, robotic liver resection was associated with significantly less blood loss (mean: 286 vs 301 mL, p < 0.001) but longer operating time (mean: 281 vs 221 min, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in conversion rates or transfusion rates between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. Postoperatively, there were no significant differences in overall complications, bile leaks, and length of hospital stay between robotic liver resection and laparoscopic liver resection. However, robotic liver resection was associated with significantly lower readmission rates than laparoscopic liver resection (odds ratio: 0.43, p = 0.005). Conclusions: Robotic liver resection appears to offer some advantages compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, although both techniques appear equivalent. Importantly, the quality of evidence is generally limited to cohort studies and a high-quality randomized trial comparing both techniques is needed.

surgery
Laparoscopic Versus Open Pediatric Splenectomy for Massive Splenomegaly

Jinhui Zhu,Huan Ye,Yuedong Wang,Ting Zhao,Yangwen Zhu,Zhijie Xie,Jinming Liu,Kewei Wang,Xiaoli Zhan,Zaiyuan Ye

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350611400758

2011-01-01

Surgical Innovation

Abstract:Laparoscopic splenectomy (LS) has rapidly evolved into the technique of choice compared with open splenectomy (OS) because of the advantages of the minimally invasive approach. Splenomegaly increases the technical difficulties of LS. LS for massive splenomegaly has generally been found to fail in adults and children. With improvements in laparoscopic technique and accumulation of laparoscopic experience, however, concerns about completing the procedure in pediatric cases with even massive splenomegaly have been lowered. A retrospective review (April 1997-October 2009) of databases at 2 institutions identified 145 children undergoing splenectomy, 79 laparoscopic and 66 open. We defined splenic margin below the umbilicus or anteriorly extending over the midline as massive splenomegaly. By this definition, 22 cases of pediatric laparoscopic and 17 cases of open splenectomies for massive splenomegaly were performed. Perioperative and follow-up data of laparoscopic pediatric splenectomies were compared with those of open splenectomies, including operative time, bleeding, spleen size, complications, and hospital stay. There were no deaths, wound infections, or instances of pancreatitis. No accessory spleen was missed by laparoscopic; accessory spleens were missed in 2 patients in open splenectomies. The complication rate of laparoscopic versus open was 13.6% versus 41.2%. No subsequent surgery was necessary for dealing with complications both in laparoscopic and open series. Laparoscopic pediatric splenectomy for massive splenomegaly is a feasible, effective, and safe procedure and is associated with low morbidity and a short hospital stay.
A trans-umbilical single-site plus one robotic-assisted surgery for choledochal cyst resection in children

Yucan Lin,Shan Chen,Yang Lin,Ling Zhang,Jianbin Wang,Xinyi Qiu,Di Xu,Lizhi Li

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2024.1418991

IF: 3.569

2024-06-19

Frontiers in Pediatrics

Abstract:Objective: The purpose of this study is to compare the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of a trans-umbilical single-site plus one robot-assisted surgery and a trans-umbilical single-site laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of choledochal cysts. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data from 49 children diagnosed with choledochal cysts who were admitted to our hospital between June 2020 and December 2023. Among these patients, 24 underwent a trans-umbilical single-site plus one Da Vinci robot-assisted surgery (the robot group) and 25 underwent a trans-umbilical single-site laparoscopic-assisted surgery (the laparoscopic group). We compared differences in intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups of patients in terms of gender, age, weight, clinical symptoms, maximum cyst diameter, type, postoperative complications, and facial expression, leg movement, activity, crying, and comfortability (FLACC) scoring ( p > 0.05). Compared with the patients in the laparoscopic group, those in the robot group had less intraoperative bleeding [10 (8–12) vs. 15 (11.5–18) ml, p < 0.001] and required less postoperative drainage tube indwelling time [5 (4–6) vs. 7 (5.5–8) day, p < 0.001], less postoperative fasting time [4 (3–4) vs. 6 (5–7) days, p < 0.001], and less postoperative hospitalization time [6 (6–7) vs. 8 (6–10) days, p < 0.001], but they required more operative time [385.5 (317.0–413.3) vs. 346.0 (287.0–376.5) min, p = 0.050] and consumed more hospitalization expenses (79,323 ± 3,124 vs. 31,121 ± 2,918 yuan, p < 0.001). Conclusion: The results of this study showed a shorter hospitalization time, quicker postoperative recovery, and less tissue damage but a higher cost and a longer operation time in patients who chose robotic surgery rather than laparoscopic surgery. With the continuous expansion of the scale of installed robot-assisted surgical systems and the gradual accumulation of the technical experience of surgeons, robot-assisted surgery may slowly surpass, and shows a trend to replace, laparoscopy because of its advantages.

pediatrics

[Morphological, functional and cytochemical studies of the changes in citrated blood during storage].

Laparoscopic Splenectomy Performed in 41 Cases

Total laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Robot-Assisted Resection of Mesenteric Cysts in Pediatric Patients: a single-centered Retrospective study

Comparison of efficacy and safety of robotic surgery and laparoscopic surgery for choledochal cyst in children: a systematic review and proportional meta-analysis

Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy shows better short-term advantages: a comparative study with laparoscopic surgery

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Distal Pancreatectomy: A Meta-Analysis Of Short-Term Outcomes

Patient compliance: in search of the real question in diabetes care.

Robotic approach improves spleen-preserving rate and shortens postoperative hospital stay of laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: a matched cohort study

Outcomes and comparations of pediatric surgery about choledochal cyst with robot-assisted procedures, laparoscopic procedures, and open procedures: A meta-analysis

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings: An International Multicenter Propensity Score Matched Study of 10.075 Patients

Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection: a comparative study from a single center

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Hepatectomy: A Single Surgeon Experience of 629 Consecutive Minimally Invasive Liver Resections

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Posterosuperior Region: a Retrospective Study of Consecutive Cases

Robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy of liver

Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic liver resection in ordinary cases of left lateral sectionectomy

Robotic vs. laparoscopic liver surgery: a single-center analysis of 600 consecutive patients in 6 years

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection in Various Settings

Robotic versus conventional laparoscopic liver resections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic Versus Open Pediatric Splenectomy for Massive Splenomegaly

A trans-umbilical single-site plus one robotic-assisted surgery for choledochal cyst resection in children