Identification and Categorization of Technical Errors and Hazard-zones of Robotic versus Laparoscopic total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Single Center Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.
{"title":"Identification and Categorization of Technical Errors and Hazard-zones of Robotic versus Laparoscopic total Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: A Single Center Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.","authors":"Zhuoyu Jia, Shougen Cao, Daosheng Wang, Changshi Tang, Xiaojie Tan, Shanglong Liu, Xiaodong Liu, Zequn Li, Yulong Tian, Zhaojian Niu, Benjie Tang, Yanbing Zhou","doi":"10.1097/SLA.0000000000006585","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>The current research aimed to conduct a detailed analysis of intraoperative surgical performance, short-term outcomes, identify and categorize technical errors, and hazard-zones enacted during total gastrectomy performed robotically and laparoscopically by surgeons. Prospective research is needed to determine whether the technical advantages of robotic surgery translate to patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Identify and process risk areas in robot-assisted total gastrectomy (RTG) and laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) to get the best patient results.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Patients undergoing RTG and LTG were recruited and randomized into the study. Six consultant/attending surgeons participated in this study and all surgical procedures were recorded. The unedited surgical video-recordings were handed over to third-party experts for granular analysis of the procedures using objective clinical human reliability analysis (OC-HRA) for the quality of intraoperative performance, technical errors, intraoperative complications.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>This study is a single center prospective randomized controlled trial.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>82 patients were recruited and participated in this study with 40 cases undergoing RTG and 42 cases for LTG.</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>RTG vs LTG.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Determine whether RTG or LTG can provide the better intraoperative technical performance and identify the most hazardous zone (area) during total gastrectomy (TG).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The technical errors enacted and identified in the RTG and the LTG were (46.11±5.63 VS 58.79±8.45, P＜0.001) respectively. The highest number of technical errors was identified during the dissection of the supra-pancreatic lymph nodes (Task Zones3, TZ3), including No.5, 7, 8a, 9, 11p, and 12a to complete the nodal clearance around the celiac artery and its trifurcation (7.29±1.88 VS 9.43±2.24, P <0.001) in both RTG and LTG. The number of lymph nodes harvested with RTG was higher than LTG (35.36±7.51 VS 30.54±6.95, P=0.016), especially in the upper margin of the pancreas (13.32±4.17 VS 9.36±3.81, P＜0.001). The total cost of hospitalization in the RTG group cost 3% more than LTG group ($15953.41±3533.91 VS $12198.26±2761.27, P＜0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study offers compelling OC-HRA evidence demonstrating that RTG facilitates significantly superior technical performance compared to LTG. Whether examining short-term clinical outcomes or intraoperative operations, the robotic surgery system consistently outperforms laparoscopic surgery. Lymph node dissection in the supra-pancreatic region emerged as a major hazard zone in both procedures.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>chictr.org.cn: ChiCTR2000039193.</p>","PeriodicalId":8017,"journal":{"name":"Annals of surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006585","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Importance: The current research aimed to conduct a detailed analysis of intraoperative surgical performance, short-term outcomes, identify and categorize technical errors, and hazard-zones enacted during total gastrectomy performed robotically and laparoscopically by surgeons. Prospective research is needed to determine whether the technical advantages of robotic surgery translate to patient outcomes.
Objective: Identify and process risk areas in robot-assisted total gastrectomy (RTG) and laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) to get the best patient results.
Design: Patients undergoing RTG and LTG were recruited and randomized into the study. Six consultant/attending surgeons participated in this study and all surgical procedures were recorded. The unedited surgical video-recordings were handed over to third-party experts for granular analysis of the procedures using objective clinical human reliability analysis (OC-HRA) for the quality of intraoperative performance, technical errors, intraoperative complications.
Setting: This study is a single center prospective randomized controlled trial.
Participants: 82 patients were recruited and participated in this study with 40 cases undergoing RTG and 42 cases for LTG.
Interventions: RTG vs LTG.
Main outcomes and measures: Determine whether RTG or LTG can provide the better intraoperative technical performance and identify the most hazardous zone (area) during total gastrectomy (TG).
Results: The technical errors enacted and identified in the RTG and the LTG were (46.11±5.63 VS 58.79±8.45, P＜0.001) respectively. The highest number of technical errors was identified during the dissection of the supra-pancreatic lymph nodes (Task Zones3, TZ3), including No.5, 7, 8a, 9, 11p, and 12a to complete the nodal clearance around the celiac artery and its trifurcation (7.29±1.88 VS 9.43±2.24, P <0.001) in both RTG and LTG. The number of lymph nodes harvested with RTG was higher than LTG (35.36±7.51 VS 30.54±6.95, P=0.016), especially in the upper margin of the pancreas (13.32±4.17 VS 9.36±3.81, P＜0.001). The total cost of hospitalization in the RTG group cost 3% more than LTG group ($15953.41±3533.91 VS $12198.26±2761.27, P＜0.001).
Conclusions: This study offers compelling OC-HRA evidence demonstrating that RTG facilitates significantly superior technical performance compared to LTG. Whether examining short-term clinical outcomes or intraoperative operations, the robotic surgery system consistently outperforms laparoscopic surgery. Lymph node dissection in the supra-pancreatic region emerged as a major hazard zone in both procedures.
期刊介绍：
The Annals of Surgery is a renowned surgery journal, recognized globally for its extensive scholarly references. It serves as a valuable resource for the international medical community by disseminating knowledge regarding important developments in surgical science and practice. Surgeons regularly turn to the Annals of Surgery to stay updated on innovative practices and techniques. The journal also offers special editorial features such as "Advances in Surgical Technique," offering timely coverage of ongoing clinical issues. Additionally, the journal publishes monthly review articles that address the latest concerns in surgical practice.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
