[The Short-Term Outcome of Robotic Liver Resection-A Single Institutional Experience].

Q4 Medicine Japanese Journal of Cancer and Chemotherapy Pub Date : 2025-02-01

Yutaka Takeda, Yoshiaki Ohmura, Go Shinke, Mitsuru Kinoshita, Yoshifumi Iwagami, Yoshiro Yukawa, Asami Arita, Kiminori Yanagisawa, Shinsuke Katsuyama, Ryo Ikeshima, Masayuki Hiraki, Keijiro Sugimura, Toru Masuzawa, Taishi Hata, Kohei Murata

{"title":"[The Short-Term Outcome of Robotic Liver Resection-A Single Institutional Experience].","authors":"Yutaka Takeda, Yoshiaki Ohmura, Go Shinke, Mitsuru Kinoshita, Yoshifumi Iwagami, Yoshiro Yukawa, Asami Arita, Kiminori Yanagisawa, Shinsuke Katsuyama, Ryo Ikeshima, Masayuki Hiraki, Keijiro Sugimura, Toru Masuzawa, Taishi Hata, Kohei Murata","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Robotic liver resection(RLR)has been covered by insurance since 2022. We report our short-term outcomes of RLR performed in Kansai Rosai Hospital.Patients and method: Between May 2022 and November 2023, 35 patients underwent RLR. Control 789 patients who received laparoscopic liver resection(LLR)between January 2010 and November 2023 were included for comparison.Results: No significant differences were noted between non-anatomical RLR and anatomical RLR groups with respect to blood loss, Pringle rate, conversion rate, biliary fistula and hospital stay, respectively. Difficulty score was higher(4.07 vs 7.71 p<0.0001)and console time was longer(212 vs 331 min p=0.0035)in anatomical RLR group than non-anatomical RLR group. No significant differences were noted between RLR and LLR groups with respect to patient age, gender, Child-Pugh, liver damage and diagnosis, respectively. Anatomical LR rate was higher(18/17 vs 534/255, 48.6 vs 32.3%, p=0.0454)and open conversion rate was lower(0 vs 0.5%, p=0.0296)in RLR group than LLR group. No significant differences were noted between RLR and LLR groups with respect to blood loss, postoperative mortality, morbidity and hospital stay, respectively.Conclusion: Although further studies are still needed to confirm the benefit of RLR, RLR is safe, minimally invasive, and effective approach to the management of liver tumor.","PeriodicalId":35588,"journal":{"name":"Japanese Journal of Cancer and Chemotherapy","volume":"52 2","pages":"152-154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese Journal of Cancer and Chemotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Robotic liver resection(RLR)has been covered by insurance since 2022. We report our short-term outcomes of RLR performed in Kansai Rosai Hospital.

Patients and method: Between May 2022 and November 2023, 35 patients underwent RLR. Control 789 patients who received laparoscopic liver resection(LLR)between January 2010 and November 2023 were included for comparison.

Results: No significant differences were noted between non-anatomical RLR and anatomical RLR groups with respect to blood loss, Pringle rate, conversion rate, biliary fistula and hospital stay, respectively. Difficulty score was higher(4.07 vs 7.71 p<0.0001)and console time was longer(212 vs 331 min p=0.0035)in anatomical RLR group than non-anatomical RLR group. No significant differences were noted between RLR and LLR groups with respect to patient age, gender, Child-Pugh, liver damage and diagnosis, respectively. Anatomical LR rate was higher(18/17 vs 534/255, 48.6 vs 32.3%, p=0.0454)and open conversion rate was lower(0 vs 0.5%, p=0.0296)in RLR group than LLR group. No significant differences were noted between RLR and LLR groups with respect to blood loss, postoperative mortality, morbidity and hospital stay, respectively.

Conclusion: Although further studies are still needed to confirm the benefit of RLR, RLR is safe, minimally invasive, and effective approach to the management of liver tumor.