Literature DB >> 27412321

Minimally Invasive vs. Open Hepatectomy: a Comparative Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database.

Fabio Bagante1, Gaya Spolverato1, Steven M Strasberg2, Faiz Gani1, Vanessa Thompson3, Bruce L Hall2, David J Bentrem4, Henry A Pitt5, Timothy M Pawlik6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While minimally invasive surgery (MIS) to treat liver tumors has increased, data on perioperative outcomes of MIS relative to open liver resection (O-LR) are lacking. We sought to compare short-term outcomes among patients undergoing MIS vs. O-LR in a nationally representative database.
METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify patients undergoing hepatectomy between January 1 and December 31, 2014. Propensity score matching algorithm was used to balance differences in baseline characteristics among MIS and O-LR groups.
RESULTS: A total of 3064 patients were included in the study. After propensity matching, the baseline characteristics for O-LR and MIS groups were comparable (minimum p value = 0.12). Incidence of superficial surgical site infections, intraoperative or postoperative blood transfusions, and pulmonary embolism was lower among patients in MIS group compared to O-LR (p < 0.02). Liver failure and biliary leakage were also less frequent among patients undergoing MIS (p < 0.01). Similarly, MIS was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) compared to O-LR (p < 0.001). Of note, 30-day postoperative mortality and readmission were comparable between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing MIS had a lower postoperative morbidity and shorter LOS compared with patients undergoing O-LR. MIS is safe and may be associated with improved short-term outcomes following hepatic surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Laparoscopic surgery; Liver surgery; Minimally invasive surgery; Robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27412321     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-016-3202-3

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


  42 in total

Review 1.  Comparative benefits of laparoscopic vs open hepatic resection: a critical appraisal.

Authors:  Kevin Tri Nguyen; J Wallis Marsh; Allan Tsung; J Jennifer L Steel; T Clark Gamblin; David A Geller
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2010-11-15

Review 2.  Robotic surgery for early stage cervical cancer: Evolution and current trends.

Authors:  Erin E Medlin; David M Kushner; Lisa Barroilhet
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 3.454

Review 3.  Benign solid tumors of the liver: management in the modern era.

Authors:  Georgios Antonios Margonis; Aslam Ejaz; Gaya Spolverato; Neda Rastegar; Robert Anders; Ihab R Kamel; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-01-06       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Complications of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Their Management.

Authors:  Joshua R Kaplan; Ziho Lee; Daniel D Eun; Adam C Reese
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  Central venous pressure and its effect on blood loss during liver resection.

Authors:  R M Jones; C E Moulton; K J Hardy
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 6.939

6.  Worldwide practice in gastric cancer surgery.

Authors:  Hylke J F Brenkman; Leonie Haverkamp; Jelle P Ruurda; Richard van Hillegersberg
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  One thousand fifty-six hepatectomies without mortality in 8 years.

Authors:  Hiroshi Imamura; Yasuji Seyama; Norihiro Kokudo; Atsushi Maema; Yasuhiko Sugawara; Keiji Sano; Tadatoshi Takayama; Masatoshi Makuuchi
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2003-11

8.  Variation in postoperative complication rates after high-risk surgery in the United States.

Authors:  Justin B Dimick; Peter J Pronovost; John A Cowan; Pamela A Lipsett; James C Stanley; Gilbert R Upchurch
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Laparoscopic versus open liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: a metaanalysis of 610 patients.

Authors:  Suzanne C Schiffman; Kevin H Kim; Allan Tsung; J Wallis Marsh; David A Geller
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2014-10-01       Impact factor: 3.982

Review 10.  World review of laparoscopic liver resection-2,804 patients.

Authors:  Kevin Tri Nguyen; T Clark Gamblin; David A Geller
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 12.969

View more
  13 in total

1.  Minimally invasive liver resection in the era of robotics: analysis of 214 cases.

Authors:  Alejandro Mejia; Stephen S Cheng; Elaina Vivian; Jimmy Shah; Hellen Oduor; Priyanka Archarya
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Minimally invasive liver resection: has the time come to consider robotics a valid assistance?

Authors:  Stefano Caruso; Alberto Patriti; Graziano Ceccarelli; Andrea Coratti
Journal:  Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 7.293

3.  Updates and Critical Insights on Glissonian Approach in Liver Surgery.

Authors:  Demetrios Moris; Amir A Rahnemai-Azar; Diamantis I Tsilimigras; Ioannis Ntanasis-Stathopoulos; Hugo P Marques; Eleftherios Spartalis; Evangelos Felekouras; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2017-11-03       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Laparoscopic versus open mesohepatectomy for patients with centrally located hepatocellular carcinoma: a propensity score matched analysis.

Authors:  Wei Li; Jun Han; Guowei Xie; Yang Xiao; Ke Sun; Kefei Yuan; Hong Wu
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Long-Term Oncologic Outcomes Following Robotic Liver Resections for Primary Hepatobiliary Malignancies: A Multicenter Study.

Authors:  Sidrah Khan; Rachel E Beard; Peter T Kingham; Yuman Fong; Thomas Boerner; John B Martinie; Dioneses Vrochides; Joseph F Buell; Eren Berber; Bora Kahramangil; Roberto I Troisi; Aude Vanlander; Michele Molinari; Allan Tsung
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-07-09       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Conventional Approaches for Major or Challenging Hepatectomy.

Authors:  Lucas W Thornblade; Xu Shi; Alex Ruiz; David R Flum; James O Park
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 6.113

7.  Minimally Invasive Liver Resection for Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Inconsistent Outcomes from Matched or Weighted Cohorts.

Authors:  Lu Wu; Diamantis I Tsilimigras; Katiuscha Merath; J Madison Hyer; Anghela Z Paredes; Rittal Mehta; Kota Sahara; Fabio Bagante; Eliza W Beal; Feng Shen; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-04-22       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Caveat Emptor: 2-Year Follow-Up Evaluating Post-Resection Liver Decompensation in Patients with Underlying Cirrhosis and Incident Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

Authors:  Dhavan Shah; Bona Ko; David J Bentrem
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-10-15       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  A Comparison of Open and Minimally Invasive Surgery for Hepatic and Pancreatic Resections Among the Medicare Population.

Authors:  Qinyu Chen; Katiuscha Merath; Fabio Bagante; Ozgur Akgul; Mary Dillhoff; Jordan Cloyd; Timothy M Pawlik
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-07-23       Impact factor: 3.452

10.  Oncological and surgical result of hepatoma after robot surgery.

Authors:  Wen-Hsiuan Wang; Kung-Kai Kuo; Shen-Nien Wang; King-Teh Lee
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.