使用机器人方法进行尾状叶和后上段肝切除术。疑难部位肝切除术的结果分析。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q1 SURGERY American journal of surgery Pub Date : 2024-10-04 DOI:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2024.115996
Trevor Jones, Maria Christodoulou, Sharona Ross, Tara M. Pattilachan, Alexander Rosemurgy, Iswanto Sucandy
{"title":"使用机器人方法进行尾状叶和后上段肝切除术。疑难部位肝切除术的结果分析。","authors":"Trevor Jones,&nbsp;Maria Christodoulou,&nbsp;Sharona Ross,&nbsp;Tara M. Pattilachan,&nbsp;Alexander Rosemurgy,&nbsp;Iswanto Sucandy","doi":"10.1016/j.amjsurg.2024.115996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Caudate and posterosuperior hepatectomy are technically challenging resections, especially in a minimally invasive approach. We aimed to analyze the outcomes of isolated caudate resection (ICR), en-bloc caudate resection with right/left hepatic lobectomy (ECR), and posterosuperior segment resection (PSR) using our institutional database.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following IRB approval, we prospectively followed 500 consecutive patients between 2013 and 2023 who underwent robotic hepatectomy. Posterosuperior segments include segment 4 ​A, 7, and 8. The data are presented as median (mean ​± ​standard deviation).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 500 patients included in this study, 19 (4 ​%) underwent ICR, 65 (13 ​%) underwent ECR, and 131 (26 ​%) patients underwent PSR. ECR was associated with significantly longer operative time, increased EBL, and longer LOS when compared with those of ICR and PSR. The patients who underwent ICR had the shortest operation duration, lowest EBL, and shortest LOS compared to ECR and PSR.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Robotic resection of liver tumors located in difficult segments is safe and feasible with excellent clinical and oncological outcomes. With appropriate expertise, a minimally invasive approach to those operations should not be avoided.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7771,"journal":{"name":"American journal of surgery","volume":"239 ","pages":"Article 115996"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Caudate lobe and posterosuperior segment hepatectomy using the robotic approach. Outcome analysis of liver resection in difficult locations\",\"authors\":\"Trevor Jones,&nbsp;Maria Christodoulou,&nbsp;Sharona Ross,&nbsp;Tara M. Pattilachan,&nbsp;Alexander Rosemurgy,&nbsp;Iswanto Sucandy\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.amjsurg.2024.115996\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Caudate and posterosuperior hepatectomy are technically challenging resections, especially in a minimally invasive approach. We aimed to analyze the outcomes of isolated caudate resection (ICR), en-bloc caudate resection with right/left hepatic lobectomy (ECR), and posterosuperior segment resection (PSR) using our institutional database.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Following IRB approval, we prospectively followed 500 consecutive patients between 2013 and 2023 who underwent robotic hepatectomy. Posterosuperior segments include segment 4 ​A, 7, and 8. The data are presented as median (mean ​± ​standard deviation).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 500 patients included in this study, 19 (4 ​%) underwent ICR, 65 (13 ​%) underwent ECR, and 131 (26 ​%) patients underwent PSR. ECR was associated with significantly longer operative time, increased EBL, and longer LOS when compared with those of ICR and PSR. The patients who underwent ICR had the shortest operation duration, lowest EBL, and shortest LOS compared to ECR and PSR.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Robotic resection of liver tumors located in difficult segments is safe and feasible with excellent clinical and oncological outcomes. With appropriate expertise, a minimally invasive approach to those operations should not be avoided.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7771,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of surgery\",\"volume\":\"239 \",\"pages\":\"Article 115996\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002961024005488\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002961024005488","RegionNum":3,"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

摘要

背景:尾段和后上段肝切除术是技术上具有挑战性的切除术,尤其是在微创方法中。我们旨在利用本机构的数据库分析孤立尾状切除术(ICR)、右/左肝叶切除术(ECR)和后上段切除术(PSR)的疗效:在获得 IRB 批准后,我们对 2013 年至 2023 年间接受机器人肝切除术的 500 例连续患者进行了前瞻性随访。后上段包括 4 A、7 和 8 段。数据以中位数(平均值±标准差)表示:结果:在纳入本研究的 500 例患者中,19 例(4%)接受了 ICR,65 例(13%)接受了 ECR,131 例(26%)接受了 PSR。与 ICR 和 PSR 相比,ECR 的手术时间明显更长、EBL 增加、LOS 延长。与ECR和PSR相比,接受ICR的患者手术时间最短、EBL最低、LOS最短:结论:机器人切除位于难切区段的肝脏肿瘤安全可行,临床和肿瘤学效果极佳。只要具备适当的专业知识,就不应避免采用微创方法进行这些手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Caudate lobe and posterosuperior segment hepatectomy using the robotic approach. Outcome analysis of liver resection in difficult locations

Background

Caudate and posterosuperior hepatectomy are technically challenging resections, especially in a minimally invasive approach. We aimed to analyze the outcomes of isolated caudate resection (ICR), en-bloc caudate resection with right/left hepatic lobectomy (ECR), and posterosuperior segment resection (PSR) using our institutional database.

Methods

Following IRB approval, we prospectively followed 500 consecutive patients between 2013 and 2023 who underwent robotic hepatectomy. Posterosuperior segments include segment 4 ​A, 7, and 8. The data are presented as median (mean ​± ​standard deviation).

Results

Of the 500 patients included in this study, 19 (4 ​%) underwent ICR, 65 (13 ​%) underwent ECR, and 131 (26 ​%) patients underwent PSR. ECR was associated with significantly longer operative time, increased EBL, and longer LOS when compared with those of ICR and PSR. The patients who underwent ICR had the shortest operation duration, lowest EBL, and shortest LOS compared to ECR and PSR.

Conclusions

Robotic resection of liver tumors located in difficult segments is safe and feasible with excellent clinical and oncological outcomes. With appropriate expertise, a minimally invasive approach to those operations should not be avoided.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
6.70%
发文量
570
审稿时长
56 days
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Surgery® is a peer-reviewed journal designed for the general surgeon who performs abdominal, cancer, vascular, head and neck, breast, colorectal, and other forms of surgery. AJS is the official journal of 7 major surgical societies* and publishes their official papers as well as independently submitted clinical studies, editorials, reviews, brief reports, correspondence and book reviews.
期刊最新文献
The multidisciplinary Landscape of gender affirmation surgical training. Are there any benefits to hospital consolidation? Global health experience among general surgery residents': Experiences, attitudes, and barriers. An organized approach to attract a diverse pool of applicants within a surgery residency program. Cricopharyngomyotomy: Outcomes of flexible endoscopic management of small and medium sized Zenker's diverticulum.
×
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