BACKGROUND: Despite scientific evidence of the safety, efficacy, and in some cases superiority of minimally invasive surgery in hepato-pancreato-biliary procedures, there are scarce publications about bile duct repairs. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery versus laparoscopic surgery on bile duct repair in patients with post-cholecystectomy bile duct injury. METHODS: This is a retrospective comparative study of our prospectively collected database of patients with bile duct injury who underwent robotic or laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy. RESULTS: Seventy-five bile duct repairs (40 by laparoscopic and 35 by robotic-assisted surgery) were treated from 2012 to 2018. Injury types were as follows: E1 (7.5% vs. 14.3%), E2 (22.5% vs. 14.3%), E3 (40% vs. 42.9%), E4 (22.5% vs. 28.6%), and E5 (7.5% vs. 0), for laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy (LHJ) and robotic-assisted hepaticojejunostomy (RHJ) respectively. The overall morbidity rate was similar (LHJ 27.5% vs. RHJ 22.8%, P = 0.644), during an overall median follow-up of 28 (14-50) months. In the LHJ group, the actuarial primary patency rate was 92.5% during a median follow-up of 49 (43.2-56.8) months. While in the RHJ group, the actuarial primary patency rate was 100%, during a median follow-up of 16 (12-22) months. The overall primary patency rate was 96% (LHJ 92.5% vs. RHJ 100%, log-rank P = 0.617). CONCLUSION: Our results showed that the robotic approach is similar to the laparoscopic regarding safety and efficacy in attaining primary patency for bile duct repair.
BACKGROUND: Despite scientific evidence of the safety, efficacy, and in some cases superiority of minimally invasive surgery in hepato-pancreato-biliary procedures, there are scarce publications about bile duct repairs. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted surgery versus laparoscopic surgery on bile duct repair in patients with post-cholecystectomy bile duct injury. METHODS: This is a retrospective comparative study of our prospectively collected database of patients with bile duct injury who underwent robotic or laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy. RESULTS: Seventy-five bile duct repairs (40 by laparoscopic and 35 by robotic-assisted surgery) were treated from 2012 to 2018. Injury types were as follows: E1 (7.5% vs. 14.3%), E2 (22.5% vs. 14.3%), E3 (40% vs. 42.9%), E4 (22.5% vs. 28.6%), and E5 (7.5% vs. 0), for laparoscopic hepaticojejunostomy (LHJ) and robotic-assisted hepaticojejunostomy (RHJ) respectively. The overall morbidity rate was similar (LHJ 27.5% vs. RHJ 22.8%, P = 0.644), during an overall median follow-up of 28 (14-50) months. In the LHJ group, the actuarial primary patency rate was 92.5% during a median follow-up of 49 (43.2-56.8) months. While in the RHJ group, the actuarial primary patency rate was 100%, during a median follow-up of 16 (12-22) months. The overall primary patency rate was 96% (LHJ 92.5% vs. RHJ 100%, log-rank P = 0.617). CONCLUSION: Our results showed that the robotic approach is similar to the laparoscopic regarding safety and efficacy in attaining primary patency for bile duct repair.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bile duct injury; Bile duct repair; Cholecystectomy complication; Laparoscopic surgery; Robotic surgery
Authors: Genevieve B Melton; Keith D Lillemoe; John L Cameron; Patricia A Sauter; JoAnn Coleman; Charles J Yeo Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Jason K Sicklick; Melissa S Camp; Keith D Lillemoe; Genevieve B Melton; Charles J Yeo; Kurtis A Campbell; Mark A Talamini; Henry A Pitt; JoAnn Coleman; Patricia A Sauter; John L Cameron Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: K D Lillemoe; G B Melton; J L Cameron; H A Pitt; K A Campbell; M A Talamini; P A Sauter; J Coleman; C J Yeo Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Marco Milone; Michele Manigrasso; Pietro Anoldo; Anna D'Amore; Ugo Elmore; Mariano Cesare Giglio; Gianluca Rompianesi; Sara Vertaldi; Roberto Ivan Troisi; Nader K Francis; Giovanni Domenico De Palma Journal: J Pers Med Date: 2022-02-18
Authors: Włodzimierz Otto; Janusz Sierdziński; Justyna Smaga; Oskar Kornasiewicz; Krzysztof Dudek; Krzysztof Zieniewicz Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 4.964