Early Experience with the Senhance Surgical System in Bariatric Surgery.

Tuan Tran, Francisco Irizarry, Shreya Gunda, Denise Danos, Michael Cook
{"title":"Early Experience with the Senhance Surgical System in Bariatric Surgery.","authors":"Tuan Tran, Francisco Irizarry, Shreya Gunda, Denise Danos, Michael Cook","doi":"10.4293/JSLS.2023.00031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Robotic-assisted surgery advancements have paralleled growing bariatric surgery demands. The Senhance robotic platform offers an alternative to the da Vinci surgical system but there are limited studies evaluating the Senhance system in bariatric surgery. This study aims to review a single surgeon's experience comparing outcomes between traditional laparoscopic and Senhance-assisted sleeve gastrectomy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>All sleeve gastrectomies performed laparoscopically, Senhance-assisted, or da Vinci-assisted by a single surgeon at an academic center from January 2019 to July 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Primary outcomes and quality measures were 30-day complications, operative times and length of stay.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 268 patients, including 162 laparoscopic, 92 Senhance, and 14 da Vinci cases, were included. Operative times were significantly longer with Senhance (115.7 min) and da Vinci (122.7 min), compared to laparoscopic (94.8 min, <i>P</i> < .0001). Length of stay (measured in days) was significantly longer in the Senhance (1.8) and da Vinci (2.2) groups compared to laparoscopic cases (1.5, <i>P</i> < .0001). These differences remained significant after controlling for age, sex and body mass index. 30-day complication rates were 8.7% (n = 8) in the Senhance group, 7.1% (n = 1) in the da Vinci group and 2.5% (n = 4) in the laparoscopic group (<i>P</i> = .0567).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Senhance-assisted sleeve gastrectomy is safe in bariatric surgery and comparable to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with respect to 30-day complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":17679,"journal":{"name":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10882192/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4293/JSLS.2023.00031","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Robotic-assisted surgery advancements have paralleled growing bariatric surgery demands. The Senhance robotic platform offers an alternative to the da Vinci surgical system but there are limited studies evaluating the Senhance system in bariatric surgery. This study aims to review a single surgeon's experience comparing outcomes between traditional laparoscopic and Senhance-assisted sleeve gastrectomy.

Materials and methods: All sleeve gastrectomies performed laparoscopically, Senhance-assisted, or da Vinci-assisted by a single surgeon at an academic center from January 2019 to July 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Primary outcomes and quality measures were 30-day complications, operative times and length of stay.

Results: A total of 268 patients, including 162 laparoscopic, 92 Senhance, and 14 da Vinci cases, were included. Operative times were significantly longer with Senhance (115.7 min) and da Vinci (122.7 min), compared to laparoscopic (94.8 min, P < .0001). Length of stay (measured in days) was significantly longer in the Senhance (1.8) and da Vinci (2.2) groups compared to laparoscopic cases (1.5, P < .0001). These differences remained significant after controlling for age, sex and body mass index. 30-day complication rates were 8.7% (n = 8) in the Senhance group, 7.1% (n = 1) in the da Vinci group and 2.5% (n = 4) in the laparoscopic group (P = .0567).

Conclusion: Senhance-assisted sleeve gastrectomy is safe in bariatric surgery and comparable to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with respect to 30-day complications.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
减肥手术中使用 Senhance 手术系统的早期经验。
背景和目的:随着减肥手术需求的增长,机器人辅助手术也在不断进步。Senhance 机器人平台提供了达芬奇手术系统的替代方案,但评估 Senhance 系统在减肥手术中应用的研究还很有限。本研究旨在回顾一位外科医生的经验,比较传统腹腔镜和Senhance辅助袖状胃切除术的效果:回顾性审查了一个学术中心的一名外科医生在2019年1月至2021年7月期间通过腹腔镜、Senhance辅助或达芬奇辅助实施的所有袖状胃切除术。主要结果和质量指标为30天并发症、手术时间和住院时间:共纳入268例患者,包括162例腹腔镜手术、92例Senhance手术和14例达芬奇手术。与腹腔镜手术(94.8分钟,P P = .0567)相比,Senhance手术(115.7分钟)和达芬奇手术(122.7分钟)的手术时间明显更长:结论:Senhance辅助袖状胃切除术在减肥手术中是安全的,在30天并发症方面与腹腔镜袖状胃切除术相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoscopic & Robotic Surgeons publishes original scientific articles on basic science and technical topics in all the fields involved with laparoscopic, robotic, and minimally invasive surgery. CRSLS, MIS Case Reports from SLS is dedicated to the publication of Case Reports in the field of minimally invasive surgery. The journals seek to advance our understandings and practice of minimally invasive, image-guided surgery by providing a forum for all relevant disciplines and by promoting the exchange of information and ideas across specialties.
期刊最新文献
Hysterectomy for Large Uterus by Minimally Invasive Surgery (MIS). Surgeons' Approach to Intraoperative Complications in Total Extraperitoneal (TEP) Hernia Repair. Inferior-Medial Approach to Laparoscopic Splenic Vessel-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy. Comparative Analysis of Hemostasis and Staple-Line Integrity between Medtronic Tri-StapleTM with Preloaded Buttress Material and the AEONTM Stapler in Bariatric Surgery. Current Status and Role of Artificial Intelligence in Anorectal Diseases and Pelvic Floor Disorders.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1