Cargando…

Efficacy of using Maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection

BACKGROUND: To compare the difference of short-term curative effect between the use of Maryland forceps (MF) and electrocoagulation hooks (EH) in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection. METHODS: Retrospectively analyze 84 patients with mediastinal tumors who underwent robo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hong, Ziqiang, Bai, Xiangdou, Sheng, Yannan, Cui, Baiqiang, Lu, Yingjie, Cheng, Tao, Wu, Xusheng, Jin, Dacheng, Gou, Yunjiu, Zhao, Jing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10280858/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37337217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03065-y
_version_ 1785060889684082688
author Hong, Ziqiang
Bai, Xiangdou
Sheng, Yannan
Cui, Baiqiang
Lu, Yingjie
Cheng, Tao
Wu, Xusheng
Jin, Dacheng
Gou, Yunjiu
Zhao, Jing
author_facet Hong, Ziqiang
Bai, Xiangdou
Sheng, Yannan
Cui, Baiqiang
Lu, Yingjie
Cheng, Tao
Wu, Xusheng
Jin, Dacheng
Gou, Yunjiu
Zhao, Jing
author_sort Hong, Ziqiang
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To compare the difference of short-term curative effect between the use of Maryland forceps (MF) and electrocoagulation hooks (EH) in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection. METHODS: Retrospectively analyze 84 patients with mediastinal tumors who underwent robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) at the Department of Thoracic Surgery in Gansu Provincial Hospital from February 2019 to February 2023. Two groups were divided according to the intraoperative use of energy devices, including 41 cases in the MF group and 43 cases in the EH group. Perioperative clinical data was gathered to compare the short-term efficacy of patients in both groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics such as sex (P = 0.685), age (P = 0.165), and tumor size (P = 0.339) between the two groups. Compared with the EH group, patients in the MF group have shorter operative time (P = 0.030), less intraoperative bleeding (P = 0.010), less total postoperative drainage volume (P = 0.001), shorter postoperative drainage time (P = 0.022), shorter hospital stay (P = 0.019), and lower levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), and cortisol. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of total hospitalization costs (P = 0.123), postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores (P = 0.064), and postoperative complications (P = 0.431). CONCLUSION: Using MF in RATS for mediastinal tumor is safe and effective, which can reduce the amount of bleeding, reduce the degree of inflammatory reaction, and conducive to the quick recovery of patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10280858
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102808582023-06-21 Efficacy of using Maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection Hong, Ziqiang Bai, Xiangdou Sheng, Yannan Cui, Baiqiang Lu, Yingjie Cheng, Tao Wu, Xusheng Jin, Dacheng Gou, Yunjiu Zhao, Jing World J Surg Oncol Research BACKGROUND: To compare the difference of short-term curative effect between the use of Maryland forceps (MF) and electrocoagulation hooks (EH) in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection. METHODS: Retrospectively analyze 84 patients with mediastinal tumors who underwent robot-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (RATS) at the Department of Thoracic Surgery in Gansu Provincial Hospital from February 2019 to February 2023. Two groups were divided according to the intraoperative use of energy devices, including 41 cases in the MF group and 43 cases in the EH group. Perioperative clinical data was gathered to compare the short-term efficacy of patients in both groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics such as sex (P = 0.685), age (P = 0.165), and tumor size (P = 0.339) between the two groups. Compared with the EH group, patients in the MF group have shorter operative time (P = 0.030), less intraoperative bleeding (P = 0.010), less total postoperative drainage volume (P = 0.001), shorter postoperative drainage time (P = 0.022), shorter hospital stay (P = 0.019), and lower levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α), and cortisol. No statistically significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of total hospitalization costs (P = 0.123), postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores (P = 0.064), and postoperative complications (P = 0.431). CONCLUSION: Using MF in RATS for mediastinal tumor is safe and effective, which can reduce the amount of bleeding, reduce the degree of inflammatory reaction, and conducive to the quick recovery of patients. BioMed Central 2023-06-19 /pmc/articles/PMC10280858/ /pubmed/37337217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03065-y Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This 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/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Hong, Ziqiang
Bai, Xiangdou
Sheng, Yannan
Cui, Baiqiang
Lu, Yingjie
Cheng, Tao
Wu, Xusheng
Jin, Dacheng
Gou, Yunjiu
Zhao, Jing
Efficacy of using Maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection
title Efficacy of using Maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection
title_full Efficacy of using Maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection
title_fullStr Efficacy of using Maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of using Maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection
title_short Efficacy of using Maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da Vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection
title_sort efficacy of using maryland forceps versus electrocoagulation hooks in da vinci robot-assisted thoracoscopic mediastinal tumor resection
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10280858/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37337217
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03065-y
work_keys_str_mv AT hongziqiang efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT baixiangdou efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT shengyannan efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT cuibaiqiang efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT luyingjie efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT chengtao efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT wuxusheng efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT jindacheng efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT gouyunjiu efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection
AT zhaojing efficacyofusingmarylandforcepsversuselectrocoagulationhooksindavincirobotassistedthoracoscopicmediastinaltumorresection