Comparison of Short-term Surgical Outcomes between a Robotic Colectomy and a Laparoscopic Colectomy during Early Experience.

Jin Yong Shin
{"title":"Comparison of Short-term Surgical Outcomes between a Robotic Colectomy and a Laparoscopic Colectomy during Early Experience.","authors":"Jin Yong Shin","doi":"10.3393/jksc.2012.28.1.19","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although robotic surgery was invented to overcome the technical limitations of laparoscopic surgery, the role of a robotic (procto)colectomy (RC) for the treatment of colorectal cancer compared to that of a laparoscopic (procto)colectomy (LC) was not well defined during the initial adoption periods of both procedures. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of a RC for the treatment of colorectal cancer by comparing the authors' initial experiences with both a RC and a LC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The first 30 patients treated by using a RC for colorectal cancer from July 2010 to March 2011 were compared with the first 30 patients treated by using a LC for colorectal cancer from December 2006 to June 2007 by the same surgeon. Perioperative variables and short-term outcomes were analyzed. In addition, the 30 RC and the 30 LC cases involved were divided into rectal cancer (n = 17 and n = 12, respectively), left-sided colon cancer (n = 7 and n = 12, respectively) and right-sided colon cancer (n = 6 and n = 6, respectively) for subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean operating times for RC and LC were significantly different at 371.8 and 275.5 minutes, respectively, but other perioperative parameters (rates of open conversion, numbers of retrieved lymph node, estimated blood losses, times to first flatus, maximal pain scores before discharge and postoperative hospital stays) were not significantly different in the two groups. Subgroup analyses showed that the mean operative times for a robotic proctectomy and a laparoscopic proctectomy were 396.5 and 298.8 minutes, respectively (P < 0.000). Postoperative complications occurred in five patients in the RC group and in six patients in the LC group (P = 0.739).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although the short-term outcomes of a RC during its initial use were better than those of a LC (with the exception of operating time), differences were not found to be significantly different. On the other hand, the longer operation time of a robotic proctectomy compared to that of a laparoscopic proctectomy during the early period may be problematic.</p>","PeriodicalId":17346,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/7c/57/jksc-28-19.PMC3296937.pdf","citationCount":"63","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Korean Society of Coloproctology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3393/jksc.2012.28.1.19","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/2/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 63

Abstract

Purpose: Although robotic surgery was invented to overcome the technical limitations of laparoscopic surgery, the role of a robotic (procto)colectomy (RC) for the treatment of colorectal cancer compared to that of a laparoscopic (procto)colectomy (LC) was not well defined during the initial adoption periods of both procedures. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and the safety of a RC for the treatment of colorectal cancer by comparing the authors' initial experiences with both a RC and a LC.

Methods: The first 30 patients treated by using a RC for colorectal cancer from July 2010 to March 2011 were compared with the first 30 patients treated by using a LC for colorectal cancer from December 2006 to June 2007 by the same surgeon. Perioperative variables and short-term outcomes were analyzed. In addition, the 30 RC and the 30 LC cases involved were divided into rectal cancer (n = 17 and n = 12, respectively), left-sided colon cancer (n = 7 and n = 12, respectively) and right-sided colon cancer (n = 6 and n = 6, respectively) for subgroup analyses.

Results: The mean operating times for RC and LC were significantly different at 371.8 and 275.5 minutes, respectively, but other perioperative parameters (rates of open conversion, numbers of retrieved lymph node, estimated blood losses, times to first flatus, maximal pain scores before discharge and postoperative hospital stays) were not significantly different in the two groups. Subgroup analyses showed that the mean operative times for a robotic proctectomy and a laparoscopic proctectomy were 396.5 and 298.8 minutes, respectively (P < 0.000). Postoperative complications occurred in five patients in the RC group and in six patients in the LC group (P = 0.739).

Conclusion: Although the short-term outcomes of a RC during its initial use were better than those of a LC (with the exception of operating time), differences were not found to be significantly different. On the other hand, the longer operation time of a robotic proctectomy compared to that of a laparoscopic proctectomy during the early period may be problematic.

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
早期经验中机器人结肠切除术和腹腔镜结肠切除术短期手术效果的比较。
目的:虽然机器人手术是为了克服腹腔镜手术的技术局限性而发明的,但在两种手术的最初采用阶段,机器人(procto)结肠切除术(RC)与腹腔镜(procto)结肠切除术(LC)相比,在治疗结直肠癌方面的作用并没有很好地界定。本研究旨在通过比较作者使用RC和LC的初步经验来评估RC治疗结直肠癌的疗效和安全性。方法:将2010年7月至2011年3月前30例使用RC治疗的结直肠癌患者与2006年12月至2007年6月同一外科医生前30例使用LC治疗的结直肠癌患者进行比较。分析围手术期变量及近期结果。此外,将30例RC和30例LC分为直肠癌(n = 17, n = 12)、左侧结肠癌(n = 7, n = 12)和右侧结肠癌(n = 6, n = 6)进行亚组分析。结果:RC和LC的平均手术时间分别为371.8分钟和275.5分钟,差异有统计学意义,但两组的其他围手术期参数(开放转换率、淋巴结清扫数、估计出血量、首次放屁时间、出院前最大疼痛评分和术后住院时间)无统计学意义。亚组分析显示,机器人直肠切除术和腹腔镜直肠切除术的平均手术时间分别为396.5分钟和298.8分钟(P < 0.000)。RC组术后并发症5例,LC组术后并发症6例(P = 0.739)。结论:虽然RC在初期的短期疗效优于LC(除手术时间外),但差异无显著性。另一方面,与早期腹腔镜直肠切除术相比,机器人直肠切除术的手术时间较长,这可能是一个问题。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy. Finding a new prognostic biomarker for metastatic colorectal cancer. Pelvic exenteration: surgical approaches. Association of immune status with recurrent anal condylomata in human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients. Analysis of risk factors for the development of incisional and parastomal hernias in patients after colorectal surgery.
×
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