Journal of laparoendoscopic & advanced surgical techniques. Part A · 2025
Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: Outcome Comparison from a Single-Center Experience.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tsenteradze Tamar, Pontecorvo Agustina A, Asbun Horacio J, Elli Enrique F
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic adrenalectomy (RALA) became a useful tool for the treatment of adrenal lesions. This study aims to identify areas where RALA may offer better outcomes than laparoscopic techniques.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study between August 2014 and November 2024. We involved 321 patients who underwent adrenalectomy during this time. Among these patients, 170 had laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA), and 151 underwent RALA. We grouped these patients according to the surgical approach, collected, and analyzed preoperative data, and compared their perioperative and postoperative outcomes.
RESULTS: In this study, we compared two groups, showing the robotic approach was associated with a significantly shorter operative time compared with the laparoscopic group, 100.5 (±51.7) minutes versus 117.9 (±67.4) minutes, P = .02. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss (P = .97) or conversion to open (P = .6) between the two groups. But robotic patients did exhibit a shorter duration of hospital stay, a median of 1 versus 2 days in the case of the laparoscopic approach, P value <0.01, and statistically lower 30-day complication rates in the robotic approach, 7.3% versus 14.7%, P = .035. Other short- and long-term complications were comparable between the two groups. Subanalysis of large tumor mass (>5 cm) showed comparable outcomes, with robotic cases showing statistically lower early complication rates (P = .05).
CONCLUSION: The study shows that RALA offers some advantages compared to the traditional LA, particularly with shorter operative time, lesser hospital stay, and fewer early complications. More randomized trials will help to confirm the findings and reach a more definitive conclusion.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study between August 2014 and November 2024. We involved 321 patients who underwent adrenalectomy during this time. Among these patients, 170 had laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA), and 151 underwent RALA. We grouped these patients according to the surgical approach, collected, and analyzed preoperative data, and compared their perioperative and postoperative outcomes.
RESULTS: In this study, we compared two groups, showing the robotic approach was associated with a significantly shorter operative time compared with the laparoscopic group, 100.5 (±51.7) minutes versus 117.9 (±67.4) minutes, P = .02. There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss (P = .97) or conversion to open (P = .6) between the two groups. But robotic patients did exhibit a shorter duration of hospital stay, a median of 1 versus 2 days in the case of the laparoscopic approach, P value <0.01, and statistically lower 30-day complication rates in the robotic approach, 7.3% versus 14.7%, P = .035. Other short- and long-term complications were comparable between the two groups. Subanalysis of large tumor mass (>5 cm) showed comparable outcomes, with robotic cases showing statistically lower early complication rates (P = .05).
CONCLUSION: The study shows that RALA offers some advantages compared to the traditional LA, particularly with shorter operative time, lesser hospital stay, and fewer early complications. More randomized trials will help to confirm the findings and reach a more definitive conclusion.