Cargando…
Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy
BACKGROUND: Recently, no relevant research has focused on the relationship between the clinical efficacy of da Vinci robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and the number of mechanical arms and assistants used for RDP. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and advantages of RDP wi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6675730/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31210421 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2353 |
_version_ | 1783440655632039936 |
---|---|
author | Zhan, Weipeng Hu, Ming Han, Caiwen Tian, Hongwei Jing, Wutang Li, Xiaofei Shi, Hao Yang, Xiaojun Guo, Tiankang Su, He Ma, Yuntao |
author_facet | Zhan, Weipeng Hu, Ming Han, Caiwen Tian, Hongwei Jing, Wutang Li, Xiaofei Shi, Hao Yang, Xiaojun Guo, Tiankang Su, He Ma, Yuntao |
author_sort | Zhan, Weipeng |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Recently, no relevant research has focused on the relationship between the clinical efficacy of da Vinci robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and the number of mechanical arms and assistants used for RDP. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and advantages of RDP with the “3 + 2” mode. METHODS: Clinical data from 53 patients (observation group) who received RDP using the “3 + 2” mode in our department, from March 2016 to September 2018, were reviewed. An additional 53 patients who received RDP using the classical mode were chosen at random for the control group. Short‐term outcomes for the two groups were compared. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups for estimated blood loss, postoperative day of flatus passage, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complication (P > 0.05). Compared with the control group, the observation group had a significantly shorter operative time (166.9 ± 13.3 vs 192.6 ± 11.1 minutes, P < 0.001), lower surgical costs ($2827.79 ± $173.02 vs $3900.63 ± $317.29, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The RDP using the “3 + 2” mode can increase the exposure of surgical field, improve cooperation between assistants, lower the surgical costs, and shorten the operative time and learning curve. Moreover, the clinical effect is equal to that of RDP using the classical mode. These findings indicate that RDP using the “3 + 2” mode is safe and feasible for institutions that are equipped for robot‐assisted surgery. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6675730 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66757302019-08-06 Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy Zhan, Weipeng Hu, Ming Han, Caiwen Tian, Hongwei Jing, Wutang Li, Xiaofei Shi, Hao Yang, Xiaojun Guo, Tiankang Su, He Ma, Yuntao Cancer Med Clinical Cancer Research BACKGROUND: Recently, no relevant research has focused on the relationship between the clinical efficacy of da Vinci robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and the number of mechanical arms and assistants used for RDP. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and advantages of RDP with the “3 + 2” mode. METHODS: Clinical data from 53 patients (observation group) who received RDP using the “3 + 2” mode in our department, from March 2016 to September 2018, were reviewed. An additional 53 patients who received RDP using the classical mode were chosen at random for the control group. Short‐term outcomes for the two groups were compared. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups for estimated blood loss, postoperative day of flatus passage, postoperative hospital stay, and postoperative complication (P > 0.05). Compared with the control group, the observation group had a significantly shorter operative time (166.9 ± 13.3 vs 192.6 ± 11.1 minutes, P < 0.001), lower surgical costs ($2827.79 ± $173.02 vs $3900.63 ± $317.29, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The RDP using the “3 + 2” mode can increase the exposure of surgical field, improve cooperation between assistants, lower the surgical costs, and shorten the operative time and learning curve. Moreover, the clinical effect is equal to that of RDP using the classical mode. These findings indicate that RDP using the “3 + 2” mode is safe and feasible for institutions that are equipped for robot‐assisted surgery. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-06-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6675730/ /pubmed/31210421 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2353 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Cancer Research Zhan, Weipeng Hu, Ming Han, Caiwen Tian, Hongwei Jing, Wutang Li, Xiaofei Shi, Hao Yang, Xiaojun Guo, Tiankang Su, He Ma, Yuntao Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy |
title | Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy |
title_full | Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy |
title_fullStr | Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy |
title_full_unstemmed | Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy |
title_short | Safety and effectiveness of the da Vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy |
title_sort | safety and effectiveness of the da vinci robot with the "3+2" mode for distal pancreatectomy |
topic | Clinical Cancer Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6675730/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31210421 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cam4.2353 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhanweipeng safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT huming safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT hancaiwen safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT tianhongwei safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT jingwutang safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT lixiaofei safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT shihao safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT yangxiaojun safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT guotiankang safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT suhe safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy AT mayuntao safetyandeffectivenessofthedavincirobotwiththe32modefordistalpancreatectomy |