Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Left and Extended Left Hepatectomy: An International Multicenter Study Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
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.
Sucandy Iswanto, Rayman Shlomi, Lai Eric C, Tang Chung-Ngai, Chong Yvette, Efanov Mikhail, Fuks David, Choi Gi-Hong, Chong Charing C, Chiow Adrian K H, Marino Marco V, Prieto Mikel, Lee Jae-Hoon, Kingham T Peter, D'Hondt Mathieu, Troisi Roberto I, Choi Sung Hoon, Sutcliffe Robert P, Cheung Tan-To, Rotellar Fernando, Park James O, Scatton Olivier, Han Ho-Seong, Pratschke Johann, Wang Xiaoying, Liu Rong, Goh Brian K P, International Robotic, Laparoscopic Liver Resection Study Group Investigators
Аннотация
METHODS: An international multicenter retrospective analysis of 580 patients undergoing L-LH/L-ELH or R-LH/R-ELH at 25 specialized hepatobiliary centers worldwide was undertaken. Propensity score-matching (PSM) was used at a 1:1 nearest-neighbor ratio according to 15 perioperative variables, including demographics, tumor characteristics, Child-Pugh score, presence of portal hypertension, multiple resections, histologic diagnosis, and Iwate difficulty grade.
RESULTS: Before the PSM, 190 (32 %) patients underwent R-LH/R-ELH, and 390 (68 %) patients underwent L-LH/L-ELH. After the matching, 164 patients were identified in each arm without significant differences in demographics, preoperative variables, medical history, tumor pathology, tumor characteristics, or Iwate score. Regarding intra- and postoperative outcomes, the rebotic approach had significantly less estimated blood loss (EBL) (100 ml [IQR 200 ml] vs 200 ml [IQR 235 ml]; p = 0.029), fewer conversions to open operations (n = 4 [2.4 %] vs n = 13, [7.9 %]; p = 0.043), and a shorter hospital stay (6 days [IQR 3 days] vs 7 days [IQR 3.3 days]; p = 0.009).
CONCLUSION: Both techniques are safe and feasible in major hepatic resections. Compared with L-LH/L-ELH, R-LH/R-ELH is associated with less EBL, fewer conversions to open operations, and a shorter hospital stay.