Cargando…

Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive techniques have increasingly been adopted for liver resection. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection (RALR) with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for liver cavernous hemangioma and to evaluate the treatment feasibili...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Wei, Liu, Junjie, Zhang, Zunyi, Wang, Yuwei, Xiang, Shuai, Chen, Lin, Zhu, Peng, Zhang, Wanguang, Shu, Chang, Lau, Wan Yee, Zhang, Bixiang, Chen, Xiaoping
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10234931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36810688
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09834-2
_version_ 1785052607595675648
author Zhang, Wei
Liu, Junjie
Zhang, Zunyi
Wang, Yuwei
Xiang, Shuai
Chen, Lin
Zhu, Peng
Zhang, Wanguang
Shu, Chang
Lau, Wan Yee
Zhang, Bixiang
Chen, Xiaoping
author_facet Zhang, Wei
Liu, Junjie
Zhang, Zunyi
Wang, Yuwei
Xiang, Shuai
Chen, Lin
Zhu, Peng
Zhang, Wanguang
Shu, Chang
Lau, Wan Yee
Zhang, Bixiang
Chen, Xiaoping
author_sort Zhang, Wei
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive techniques have increasingly been adopted for liver resection. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection (RALR) with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for liver cavernous hemangioma and to evaluate the treatment feasibility and safety. METHODS: A retrospective study of prospectively collected data was conducted on consecutive patients who underwent RALR (n = 43) and LLR (n = 244) for liver cavernous hemangioma between February 2015 and June 2021 at our institution. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed and compared using propensity score matching. RESULTS: The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (P = 0.016) in the RALR group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in overall operative time, intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion rates, conversion to open surgery or complication rates. There was no perioperative mortality. Multivariate analysis showed that hemangiomas located in posterosuperior liver segments and those in close proximity to major vascular structures were independent predictors of increased intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.013 and P = 0.001, respectively). For patients with hemangioma in close proximity to major vascular structures, there were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes between the two groups, with the exception that intraoperative blood loss in the RALR group was significantly less than that in the LLR group (350 ml vs. 450 ml, P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Both RALR and LLR were safe and feasible for treating liver hemangioma in well-selected patients. For patients with liver hemangioma in close proximity to major vascular structures, RALR was better than conventional laparoscopic surgery in reducing intraoperative blood loss.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10234931
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102349312023-06-03 Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study Zhang, Wei Liu, Junjie Zhang, Zunyi Wang, Yuwei Xiang, Shuai Chen, Lin Zhu, Peng Zhang, Wanguang Shu, Chang Lau, Wan Yee Zhang, Bixiang Chen, Xiaoping Surg Endosc Original Article BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive techniques have increasingly been adopted for liver resection. This study aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted liver resection (RALR) with laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) for liver cavernous hemangioma and to evaluate the treatment feasibility and safety. METHODS: A retrospective study of prospectively collected data was conducted on consecutive patients who underwent RALR (n = 43) and LLR (n = 244) for liver cavernous hemangioma between February 2015 and June 2021 at our institution. Patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed and compared using propensity score matching. RESULTS: The postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter (P = 0.016) in the RALR group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in overall operative time, intraoperative blood loss, blood transfusion rates, conversion to open surgery or complication rates. There was no perioperative mortality. Multivariate analysis showed that hemangiomas located in posterosuperior liver segments and those in close proximity to major vascular structures were independent predictors of increased intraoperative blood loss (P = 0.013 and P = 0.001, respectively). For patients with hemangioma in close proximity to major vascular structures, there were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes between the two groups, with the exception that intraoperative blood loss in the RALR group was significantly less than that in the LLR group (350 ml vs. 450 ml, P = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: Both RALR and LLR were safe and feasible for treating liver hemangioma in well-selected patients. For patients with liver hemangioma in close proximity to major vascular structures, RALR was better than conventional laparoscopic surgery in reducing intraoperative blood loss. Springer US 2023-02-21 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10234931/ /pubmed/36810688 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09834-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Zhang, Wei
Liu, Junjie
Zhang, Zunyi
Wang, Yuwei
Xiang, Shuai
Chen, Lin
Zhu, Peng
Zhang, Wanguang
Shu, Chang
Lau, Wan Yee
Zhang, Bixiang
Chen, Xiaoping
Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study
title Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study
title_full Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study
title_fullStr Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study
title_full_unstemmed Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study
title_short Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study
title_sort perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic liver resection for cavernous hemangioma: a propensity score matching study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10234931/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36810688
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-022-09834-2
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangwei perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT liujunjie perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT zhangzunyi perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT wangyuwei perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT xiangshuai perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT chenlin perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT zhupeng perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT zhangwanguang perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT shuchang perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT lauwanyee perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT zhangbixiang perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy
AT chenxiaoping perioperativeoutcomesofrobotassistedversuslaparoscopicliverresectionforcavernoushemangiomaapropensityscorematchingstudy