Surgical endoscopy · 2020
Outcomes after 3D laparoscopic and robotic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a multicenter comparative study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое 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.
Lim Chetana, Goumard Claire, Salloum Chady, Tudisco Antonella, Napoli Niccolo, Boggi Ugo, Azoulay Daniel, Scatton Olivier
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The recent development of 3D vision in laparoscopic and robotic surgical systems raises the question of whether these two procedures are equivalent. The aim of this study was to evaluate the surgical and long-term oncological outcomes of 3D laparoscopic (3D-LLR) and robotic liver resection (RLR) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
METHODS: The data for operative time, morbidity, margins, and survival were reviewed for 3D-LLR and compared with RLR.
RESULTS: From 2011 to 2017, 93 patients with HCC, including 58 (62%) with cirrhosis, underwent 3D-LLR [49 (53%)] or RLR [44 (47%)]. No difference was observed in operative time (269 vs. 252 min; p = 0.52), overall (27% vs. RLR: 16%; p = 0.49) and severe morbidity (4% vs. 2%; p = 0.77) or in the surgical margin width (9 vs. 11 mm; p = 0.30) between the 3D-LLR and RLR groups. The 3-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates after 3D-LLR and RLR were 82% and 24% and 91% (p = 0.16) and 48% (p = 0.18), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The 3D-LLR and RLR systems provide comparable surgical margins with similar short- and long-term oncological outcomes.
METHODS: The data for operative time, morbidity, margins, and survival were reviewed for 3D-LLR and compared with RLR.
RESULTS: From 2011 to 2017, 93 patients with HCC, including 58 (62%) with cirrhosis, underwent 3D-LLR [49 (53%)] or RLR [44 (47%)]. No difference was observed in operative time (269 vs. 252 min; p = 0.52), overall (27% vs. RLR: 16%; p = 0.49) and severe morbidity (4% vs. 2%; p = 0.77) or in the surgical margin width (9 vs. 11 mm; p = 0.30) between the 3D-LLR and RLR groups. The 3-year overall and recurrence-free survival rates after 3D-LLR and RLR were 82% and 24% and 91% (p = 0.16) and 48% (p = 0.18), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The 3D-LLR and RLR systems provide comparable surgical margins with similar short- and long-term oncological outcomes.