Bhama Anuradha R, Obias Vincent, Welch Kathleen B, Vandewarker James F, Cleary Robert K
Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, St. Joseph Mercy Health System - Ann Arbor, 5325 Elliott Dr, MHVI Suite #104, Ann Arbor, MI, 48106, USA.
Division Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, George Washington University, Washington, DC, 20037, USA.
Surg Endosc. 2016 Apr;30(4):1576-84. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4381-9. Epub 2015 Jul 14.
Until randomized trials mature, large database analyses assist in determining the role of robotics in colorectal surgery. ACS NSQIP database coding now allows differentiation between laparoscopic (LC) and robotic (RC) colorectal procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare LC and RC outcomes by analyzing the ACS NSQIP database.
The ACS NSQIP database was queried to identify patients who had undergone RC and LC during 2013. Demographic characteristics, intraoperative data, and postoperative outcomes were identified. Using propensity score matching, abdominal and pelvic colorectal operative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed.
A total of 11,477 cases were identified. In the abdomen, 7790 LC and 299 RC cases were identified, and 2057 LC and 331 RC cases were identified in the pelvis. There were significant differences in operative time, conversion to an open procedure in the pelvis, and hospital length of stay. RC operative times were significantly longer in both abdominal and pelvic cases. Conversion rates in the pelvis were less for RC when compared to LC--10.0 and 13.7%, respectively (p = 0.01). Hospital length of stay was significantly shorter for RC abdominal cases than for LC abdominal cases (4.3 vs. 5.3 days, p < 0.001) and for RC pelvic cases when compared to LC pelvic cases (4.5 vs. 5.3 days, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in surgical site infection (SSI), organ/space SSI, wound complications, anastomotic leak, sepsis/shock, or need for reoperation within 30 days.
As the robotic platform continues to grow in colorectal surgery and as technical upgrades continue to advance, comparison of outcomes requires continuous reevaluation. This study demonstrated that robotic operations have longer operative times, decreased hospital length of stay, and decreased rates of conversion to open in the pelvis. These findings warrant continued evaluation of the role of minimally invasive technical upgrades in colorectal surgery.
在随机试验成熟之前,大型数据库分析有助于确定机器人技术在结直肠手术中的作用。美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划(ACS NSQIP)数据库编码现在能够区分腹腔镜(LC)和机器人辅助(RC)结直肠手术。本研究的目的是通过分析ACS NSQIP数据库来比较LC和RC的手术结果。
查询ACS NSQIP数据库,以确定2013年期间接受RC和LC手术的患者。记录人口统计学特征、术中数据和术后结果。采用倾向评分匹配法,分析腹部和盆腔结直肠手术及术后结果。
共识别出11477例病例。在腹部,识别出7790例LC病例和299例RC病例;在盆腔,识别出2057例LC病例和331例RC病例。手术时间、盆腔手术中转开腹以及住院时间存在显著差异。腹部和盆腔病例中,RC的手术时间均显著更长。与LC相比,盆腔手术中RC的中转率更低,分别为10.0%和13.7%(p = 0.01)。RC腹部病例的住院时间显著短于LC腹部病例(4.3天对5.3天,p < 0.001),RC盆腔病例的住院时间也短于LC盆腔病例(4.5天对5.3天,p < 0.001)。手术部位感染(SSI)、器官/腔隙SSI、伤口并发症、吻合口漏、脓毒症/休克或30天内再次手术的需求方面无显著差异。
随着机器人平台在结直肠手术中的不断发展以及技术升级的持续推进,对手术结果的比较需要持续重新评估。本研究表明,机器人手术的手术时间更长,住院时间缩短,盆腔中转开腹率降低。这些发现值得继续评估微创技术升级在结直肠手术中的作用。