Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques · 2024
Superiority of Robotic Over Laparoscopic Spleen-Preserving Distal Pancreatectomy With Warshaw Procedure for Reducing the Incidence of Postoperative Splenic Infarction.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Murata Yasuhiro, Noguchi Daisuke, Ito Takahiro, Hayasaki Aoi, Iizawa Yusuke, Fujii Takehiro, Tanemura Akihiro, Kuriyama Naohisa, Kishiwada Masashi, Mizuno Shugo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive spleen-preserving distal pancreatectomy with Warshaw procedure (MI-WP), has gained widespread recognition for the treatment of benign and low-grade malignant tumors of the pancreatic body and tail. However, the comparative advantages of the robotic Warshaw procedure (R-WP) over the laparoscopic Warshaw procedure (L-WP) remain uncertain. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes between R-WP and L-WP.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among the 146 cases of MI-DP conducted between October 2020 and December 2023 (L-DP:115, R-DP:31), 33 cases of MI-WP were subjected to analysis, comprising the R-WP group (n=10) and the L-WP group (n=23).
RESULTS: R-WP successfully completed all procedures under a purely laparoscopic approach, whereas L-WP necessitated conversion to open surgery in 2 cases (8.7%). Despite the significantly prolonged operative time in R-WP compared with L-WP (R-WP vs. L-WP: 421vs. 300 min), there was no significant difference in estimated blood loss between the 2 groups (R-WP vs. L-WP: 19 vs. 20 mL). Although the rate of major complications did not significantly differ between the 2 groups, 2 cases (8.7%) of L-WP required reoperation, including splenectomy in 1 instance. Furthermore, the incidence of postoperative splenic infarction was significantly higher in L-WP than in R-WP (R- vs. L-WP:0 vs. 43.5%, P =0.015). The length of hospital stay after surgery did not exhibit a significant difference between the 2 groups (R-WP vs. L-WP: 11 vs. 12 d).
DISCUSSION: R-WP demonstrated superiority to L-WP for reducing the incidence of postoperative splenic infarction, potentially contributing to enhancing the spleen preservation rate.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among the 146 cases of MI-DP conducted between October 2020 and December 2023 (L-DP:115, R-DP:31), 33 cases of MI-WP were subjected to analysis, comprising the R-WP group (n=10) and the L-WP group (n=23).
RESULTS: R-WP successfully completed all procedures under a purely laparoscopic approach, whereas L-WP necessitated conversion to open surgery in 2 cases (8.7%). Despite the significantly prolonged operative time in R-WP compared with L-WP (R-WP vs. L-WP: 421vs. 300 min), there was no significant difference in estimated blood loss between the 2 groups (R-WP vs. L-WP: 19 vs. 20 mL). Although the rate of major complications did not significantly differ between the 2 groups, 2 cases (8.7%) of L-WP required reoperation, including splenectomy in 1 instance. Furthermore, the incidence of postoperative splenic infarction was significantly higher in L-WP than in R-WP (R- vs. L-WP:0 vs. 43.5%, P =0.015). The length of hospital stay after surgery did not exhibit a significant difference between the 2 groups (R-WP vs. L-WP: 11 vs. 12 d).
DISCUSSION: R-WP demonstrated superiority to L-WP for reducing the incidence of postoperative splenic infarction, potentially contributing to enhancing the spleen preservation rate.