Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2011
Robotic-assisted proctectomy for inflammatory bowel disease: a case-matched comparison of laparoscopic and robotic technique.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Miller Aaron T, Berian Julia R, Rubin Michele, Hurst Roger D, Fichera Alessandro, Umanskiy Konstantin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to compare short-term outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic proctectomy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
METHODS: This is an IRB-approved case-matched review. Seventeen robotic proctectomies (RP), 10 with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) and 7 completion (CP), were matched to laparoscopic proctectomies (LP). Short-term and functional outcomes were compared between LP and RP.
RESULTS: In CP cohort, operative times were longer in the RP group (351 RP vs 238 LP min, p = 0.03), mean robotic time 90 min. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was similar between RP-CP and LP-CP groups (p = 0.18). Return of bowel function (RBF) was slower in RP-CP group (3.0 vs 1.7 days, p = 0.04), and length of stay (LOS) was longer (6.4 vs 4.1 days, p = 0.02). In the IPAA group, there were no differences between operative times (p = 0.14), robotic time 86 min; EBL (p = 0.15), and postoperative complications. Return of bowel function (3.6 vs 2.6 days, p = 0.3) and LOS (8.5 vs 6.1 days, p = 0.17) were similar between RP and LP. Bowel and sexual function were equivalent between LP and RP-IPAA groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic proctectomy is a safe and effective technique for patients with IBD. It is comparable to LP with regard to perioperative outcomes, complications, and short-term functional results.
METHODS: This is an IRB-approved case-matched review. Seventeen robotic proctectomies (RP), 10 with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) and 7 completion (CP), were matched to laparoscopic proctectomies (LP). Short-term and functional outcomes were compared between LP and RP.
RESULTS: In CP cohort, operative times were longer in the RP group (351 RP vs 238 LP min, p = 0.03), mean robotic time 90 min. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was similar between RP-CP and LP-CP groups (p = 0.18). Return of bowel function (RBF) was slower in RP-CP group (3.0 vs 1.7 days, p = 0.04), and length of stay (LOS) was longer (6.4 vs 4.1 days, p = 0.02). In the IPAA group, there were no differences between operative times (p = 0.14), robotic time 86 min; EBL (p = 0.15), and postoperative complications. Return of bowel function (3.6 vs 2.6 days, p = 0.3) and LOS (8.5 vs 6.1 days, p = 0.17) were similar between RP and LP. Bowel and sexual function were equivalent between LP and RP-IPAA groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Robotic proctectomy is a safe and effective technique for patients with IBD. It is comparable to LP with regard to perioperative outcomes, complications, and short-term functional results.