Cargando…

Clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study

Third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (TS-RECS) is a novel minimally invasive surgery for resecting gastric submucosal tumours (GSMTs), which could accomplish the completely oncological curability and maximal functional preservation. This study investigated the clinical outcomes and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shi, Feiyu, Liu, Gaixia, Sun, Qi, zhang, Haowei, Wu, Hongtao, Xue, Xiaobin, Li, Yingchao, She, Junjun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8995283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33709243
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13304-021-01014-6
_version_ 1784684276232486912
author Shi, Feiyu
Liu, Gaixia
Sun, Qi
zhang, Haowei
Wu, Hongtao
Xue, Xiaobin
Li, Yingchao
She, Junjun
author_facet Shi, Feiyu
Liu, Gaixia
Sun, Qi
zhang, Haowei
Wu, Hongtao
Xue, Xiaobin
Li, Yingchao
She, Junjun
author_sort Shi, Feiyu
collection PubMed
description Third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (TS-RECS) is a novel minimally invasive surgery for resecting gastric submucosal tumours (GSMTs), which could accomplish the completely oncological curability and maximal functional preservation. This study investigated the clinical outcomes and gastrointestinal function after TS-RECS versus laparoscopic wedge resection (LWR) for GSMTs. This was a single-centre retrospective study that included 130 patients with GSMTs who underwent LWR or TS-RECS from 2013 to 2019. To overcome selection biases, we performed propensity score matching (1:1) using seven covariates that could impact the group assignment and outcomes. Then, the clinical outcomes and gastrointestinal function in the LWR and TS-RECS groups were compared in a matched cohort. Among the 130 enrolled patients, 96 patients underwent LWR, and 34 underwent TS-RECS and were matched into 30 patients for each group. There was no significant difference in the operation time between the two groups (P = 0.543). However, the TS-RECS group had significantly less blood loss (20,5–100 vs 95,10–310 ml, P < 0.0001) and better postoperative recovery in terms of time to oral intake (2,2–4 vs 3,2–6 days, P < 0.0001) and postoperative hospital stay (5,4–10 vs 8.5,5–16 days, P < 0.0001) than the LWR group. The severity and frequency scores of postoperative gastrointestinal symptoms in the TS-RECS group were significantly lower than those in the LWR group. The median follow-up period was 24 months (10–60 months) in the LWR group and 18 months (10–27 months) in the TS-RECS group, and there was in total a single recurrence in the LWR group. TS-RECS appears to be a technically safe and effective surgery with preservation of gastrointestinal function for resection of GSMT resection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8995283
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89952832022-04-27 Clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study Shi, Feiyu Liu, Gaixia Sun, Qi zhang, Haowei Wu, Hongtao Xue, Xiaobin Li, Yingchao She, Junjun Updates Surg Original Article Third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery (TS-RECS) is a novel minimally invasive surgery for resecting gastric submucosal tumours (GSMTs), which could accomplish the completely oncological curability and maximal functional preservation. This study investigated the clinical outcomes and gastrointestinal function after TS-RECS versus laparoscopic wedge resection (LWR) for GSMTs. This was a single-centre retrospective study that included 130 patients with GSMTs who underwent LWR or TS-RECS from 2013 to 2019. To overcome selection biases, we performed propensity score matching (1:1) using seven covariates that could impact the group assignment and outcomes. Then, the clinical outcomes and gastrointestinal function in the LWR and TS-RECS groups were compared in a matched cohort. Among the 130 enrolled patients, 96 patients underwent LWR, and 34 underwent TS-RECS and were matched into 30 patients for each group. There was no significant difference in the operation time between the two groups (P = 0.543). However, the TS-RECS group had significantly less blood loss (20,5–100 vs 95,10–310 ml, P < 0.0001) and better postoperative recovery in terms of time to oral intake (2,2–4 vs 3,2–6 days, P < 0.0001) and postoperative hospital stay (5,4–10 vs 8.5,5–16 days, P < 0.0001) than the LWR group. The severity and frequency scores of postoperative gastrointestinal symptoms in the TS-RECS group were significantly lower than those in the LWR group. The median follow-up period was 24 months (10–60 months) in the LWR group and 18 months (10–27 months) in the TS-RECS group, and there was in total a single recurrence in the LWR group. TS-RECS appears to be a technically safe and effective surgery with preservation of gastrointestinal function for resection of GSMT resection. Springer International Publishing 2021-03-11 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8995283/ /pubmed/33709243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13304-021-01014-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 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
Shi, Feiyu
Liu, Gaixia
Sun, Qi
zhang, Haowei
Wu, Hongtao
Xue, Xiaobin
Li, Yingchao
She, Junjun
Clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study
title Clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study
title_full Clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study
title_fullStr Clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study
title_full_unstemmed Clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study
title_short Clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study
title_sort clinical outcomes and functional analysis of third space robotic and endoscopic cooperative surgery versus laparoscopic wedge resection for gastric submucosal tumours: a propensity score-matched study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8995283/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33709243
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13304-021-01014-6
work_keys_str_mv AT shifeiyu clinicaloutcomesandfunctionalanalysisofthirdspaceroboticandendoscopiccooperativesurgeryversuslaparoscopicwedgeresectionforgastricsubmucosaltumoursapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT liugaixia clinicaloutcomesandfunctionalanalysisofthirdspaceroboticandendoscopiccooperativesurgeryversuslaparoscopicwedgeresectionforgastricsubmucosaltumoursapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT sunqi clinicaloutcomesandfunctionalanalysisofthirdspaceroboticandendoscopiccooperativesurgeryversuslaparoscopicwedgeresectionforgastricsubmucosaltumoursapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT zhanghaowei clinicaloutcomesandfunctionalanalysisofthirdspaceroboticandendoscopiccooperativesurgeryversuslaparoscopicwedgeresectionforgastricsubmucosaltumoursapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT wuhongtao clinicaloutcomesandfunctionalanalysisofthirdspaceroboticandendoscopiccooperativesurgeryversuslaparoscopicwedgeresectionforgastricsubmucosaltumoursapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT xuexiaobin clinicaloutcomesandfunctionalanalysisofthirdspaceroboticandendoscopiccooperativesurgeryversuslaparoscopicwedgeresectionforgastricsubmucosaltumoursapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT liyingchao clinicaloutcomesandfunctionalanalysisofthirdspaceroboticandendoscopiccooperativesurgeryversuslaparoscopicwedgeresectionforgastricsubmucosaltumoursapropensityscorematchedstudy
AT shejunjun clinicaloutcomesandfunctionalanalysisofthirdspaceroboticandendoscopiccooperativesurgeryversuslaparoscopicwedgeresectionforgastricsubmucosaltumoursapropensityscorematchedstudy