Literature DB >> 22142558

Comparison of intraoperative time use and perioperative outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy.

Koray Karabulut1, Orhan Agcaoglu, Shamil Aliyev, Allan Siperstein, Eren Berber.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recently, robotic techniques have been described for adrenalectomy. However, scant data exist in the literature regarding the comparison of robotic with the conventional laparoscopic approach. We aimed to analyze intraoperative time use and perioperative outcomes in robotic vs laparoscopic adrenalectomy for both lateral transabdominal (LT) and posterior retroperitoneal (PR) approaches.
METHODS: A robotic adrenalectomy program was started in September 2008, and techniques for both the LT (n = 32) and PR (n = 18) approaches were established. Data of robotic cases were compared with those of 50 consecutive laparoscopic cases (LT = 32, PR = 18) before the onset of the program from a prospective, institutional review board-approved database. Operative times for individual steps of the procedures were captured from operative video recordings, including docking, exposure, dissection, and hemostasis.
RESULTS: For both LT and PR approaches, there was no difference when we compared the robotic with the laparoscopic groups regarding demographics, tumor type, and body mass index. For the LT approach, despite larger tumor size (x ± SEM) in the robotic vs the laparoscopic group (4.7 ± 0.4 vs 3.8 ± 0.4 cm, P = .05), the operative times were similar (168 ± 10 minutes vs 159 ± 8 minutes, P = .5). There was no difference between the two approaches regarding the time spent for the individual steps of the operation. In the PR approach, with similar tumor sizes (2.7 ± 0.3 cm vs 2.3 ± 0.3 cm, P = .4), operative time (minutes) was equivalent (166 ± 9 vs 170 ± 15; P = .8). Time spent intra-operatively for each step was similar, except for shorter hemostasis time in the robotic group (23 ± 4 minutes vs 42 ± 9 minutes, P = .03). The robotic docking time (21 vs 25 minutes) decreased by 50% in the second year of the study for both approaches. The presence of two staff surgeons vs a staff and a fellow decreased operative time for the robotic LT (P < .02) but not the robotic PR approach. For laparoscopic and robotic procedures, the morbidity was 10% and 2%, respectively. Overall, hospital stay was 1.5 ± 0.9 days (range, 1-4 vs 1.1 ± 0.3 days) (range, 1-2; P = .006). The percentage of patients requiring more than 1 day of hospital stay was 28% vs 14% (P = .09).
CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting an intraoperative time analysis for robotic adrenalectomy. Intraoperative time use was similar between the laparoscopic and robotic groups for both LT and PR approaches. However, the morbidity was less and hospital stay was shorter after the robotic procedures. Copyright Â
© 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22142558     DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2011.09.047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surgery        ISSN: 0039-6060            Impact factor:   3.982


  26 in total

1.  Robotic adrenalectomy: the jury is still out.

Authors:  Mark W Ball; Mohamad E Allaf
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-08

2.  Robot assisted adrenalectomy: a handy tool or glorified obsession?

Authors:  Mrinal Pahwa
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-08

Review 3.  Laparoscopic and robotic adrenal surgery: transperitoneal approach.

Authors:  Alexis K Okoh; Eren Berber
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-10

Review 4.  Review of robotic versus conventional laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Fred Brody; Nathan G Richards
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-12-20       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 5.  Robotic endocrine surgery: state of the art.

Authors:  Halit Eren Taskin; Naciye Cigdem Arslan; Shamil Aliyev; Eren Berber
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 6.  Evaluation of Open and Minimally Invasive Adrenalectomy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Patrick Heger; Pascal Probst; Felix J Hüttner; Käthe Gooßen; Tanja Proctor; Beat P Müller-Stich; Oliver Strobel; Markus W Büchler; Markus K Diener
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Robotic retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy: useful modifications of the described posterior approach.

Authors:  Zuliang Feng; Michael P Feng; Jessica W Levine; Carmen C Solórzano
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2017-01-02

8.  Evaluating tactile feedback in robotic surgery for potential clinical application using an animal model.

Authors:  Christopher R Wottawa; Bradley Genovese; Bryan N Nowroozi; Steven D Hart; James W Bisley; Warren S Grundfest; Erik P Dutson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Robotic single-site adrenalectomy.

Authors:  Grace S Lee; Arman Arghami; Benzon M Dy; Travis J McKenzie; Geoffrey B Thompson; Melanie L Richards
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Comparison of posterior retroperitoneal and transabdominal lateral approaches in robotic adrenalectomy: an analysis of 200 cases.

Authors:  Bora Kahramangil; Eren Berber
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-10-19       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.