Literature DB >> 26966028

Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Colectomy Results in Increased Operative Time Without Improved Perioperative Outcomes.

Brian Ezekian1, Zhifei Sun2, Mohamed A Adam2, Jina Kim2, Megan C Turner2, Brian F Gilmore2, Cecilia T Ong2, Christopher R Mantyh2, John Migaly2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Interest in robotic technology is burgeoning within the field of colorectal surgery. However, benefits of robotic-assisted colectomy (RAC) compared with laparoscopic colectomy (LC) remain ambiguous. STUDY
DESIGN: Patients who underwent minimally invasive colectomy during 2012-2013 were identified from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Short-term perioperative outcomes were compared between 1:1 propensity-matched groups. A subset analysis was performed among patients who underwent segmental resections.
RESULTS: Among the 15,976 patients included, 498 (3.1 %) colectomies were performed with robotic assistance. After matching for demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics, there were no differences between RAC and LC in complications such as wound infection, urinary tract infection, cardiopulmonary or thromboembolic events, renal insufficiency, anastomotic leaks, transfusions, readmissions, or 30-day mortality (all p > 0.05). However, operative time was markedly higher for RAC (196 vs. 166 min, p < 0.001). Among segmental resections, operative time remained significantly longer for RAC (190 vs. 153 min, p < 0.001) without differences in perioperative outcomes (all p > 0.05).
CONCLUSION: In this early experience, RAC resulted in similar perioperative outcomes when compared to LC but was associated with longer operative time. Given the focus on value-based healthcare, utilizing RAC in straightforward colectomies may not be financially justifiable at this stage of adoption.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colectomy; Laparoscopic; Outcomes; Robotic-assisted

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26966028     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-016-3124-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  38 in total

Review 1.  Laparoscopic Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Is It an Effective Procedure for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma?

Authors:  May C Tee; Michael L Kendrick; Michael B Farnell
Journal:  Adv Surg       Date:  2015-06-25

2.  Robotic-assisted surgery for low rectal dissection: from better views to better outcome.

Authors:  K H Ng; Y K Lim; K S Ho; B S Ooi; K W Eu
Journal:  Singapore Med J       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.858

3.  Laparoscopic surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes of a randomised trial.

Authors:  Ruben Veldkamp; Esther Kuhry; Wim C J Hop; J Jeekel; G Kazemier; H Jaap Bonjer; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio M Lacy
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 41.316

Review 4.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic hiatal hernia and antireflux surgery.

Authors:  R C Tolboom; I A M J Broeders; W A Draaisma
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 3.454

5.  Comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches for total abdominal colectomy.

Authors:  Zhobin Moghadamyeghaneh; Mark H Hanna; Joseph C Carmichael; Alessio Pigazzi; Michael J Stamos; Steven Mills
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-10-20       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Over 250 Laparoendoscopic Single Site (LESS) Fundoplications: Lessons Learned.

Authors:  Prashant Sukharamwala; Anthony Teta; Sharona Ross; Franka Co; Giannina Alvarez-Calderon; Kenneth Luberice; Alexander Rosemurgy
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 0.688

7.  Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group trial.

Authors:  James Fleshman; Daniel J Sargent; Erin Green; Mehran Anvari; Steven J Stryker; Robert W Beart; Michael Hellinger; Richard Flanagan; Walter Peters; Heidi Nelson
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  Surgical site infection rates: open versus hand-assisted colorectal resections.

Authors:  M Bishawi; M Fakhoury; P I Denoya; S Stein; R Bergamaschi
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2013-09-06       Impact factor: 3.781

9.  Tubal anastomosis by robotic compared with outpatient minilaparotomy.

Authors:  Allison K Rodgers; Jeffrey M Goldberg; Jeffrey P Hammel; Tommaso Falcone
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Huirong Xu; Jianning Li; Yanlai Sun; Zengjun Li; Yanan Zhen; Bin Wang; Zhongfa Xu
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 2.754

View more
  10 in total

1.  Robotic versus laparoscopic elective colectomy for left side diverticulitis: a propensity score-matched analysis of the NSQIP database.

Authors:  Mohammed H Al-Temimi; Bindupriya Chandrasekaran; Johan Agapian; Walter R Peters; Katrina O Wells
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2019-06-23       Impact factor: 2.571

2.  Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of Clinical and Financial Outcomes After Robotic and Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection.

Authors:  Ahmed M Al-Mazrou; Onur Baser; Ravi P Kiran
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-02-05       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 3.  What have we learned in minimally invasive colorectal surgery from NSQIP and NIS large databases? A systematic review.

Authors:  Gabriela Batista Rodríguez; Andrea Balla; Santiago Corradetti; Carmen Martinez; Pilar Hernández; Jesús Bollo; Eduard M Targarona
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-04-06       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 4.  Robotic surgery in colorectal cancer: the way forward or a passing fad.

Authors:  James Chi-Yong Ngu; Seon-Hahn Kim
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2019-12

5.  The robotic approach significantly reduces length of stay after colectomy: a propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Ahmed M Al-Mazrou; Codruta Chiuzan; Ravi P Kiran
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 2.571

Review 6.  Berberine as a Potential Agent for the Treatment of Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Xi Jiang; Zhongxiu Jiang; Min Jiang; Yan Sun
Journal:  Front Med (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-04-28

7.  Laparoscopic versus robotic colectomy: a national surgical quality improvement project analysis.

Authors:  Scott C Dolejs; Joshua A Waters; Eugene P Ceppa; Ben L Zarzaur
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Does robotic rectal cancer surgery improve the results of experienced laparoscopic surgeons? An observational single institution study comparing 168 robotic assisted with 184 laparoscopic rectal resections.

Authors:  Rogier M P H Crolla; Paul G Mulder; George P van der Schelling
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 9.  Robotics in Colorectal Surgery.

Authors:  Allison Weaver; Scott Steele
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2016-09-26

Review 10.  Re-appraisal and consideration of minimally invasive surgery in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Mahmoud Abu Gazala; Steven D Wexner
Journal:  Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf)       Date:  2017-02-06
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.