Rogers Travis, Parra-Davila Eduardo, Malcher Flavio, Hartmann Carlos, Mastella Bernardo, de Araújo Guiherme, Ogaya-Pinies Gabriel, Ortiz-Ortiz Carlos, Hernandez-Cardona Eduardo, Patel Vipul, Cavazzola Leandro Totti
Global Robotics Institute, Florida Hospital Celebration Health, Celebration, FL, USA.
Celebration Center for Surgery, Florida Hospital Celebration Health, Celebration, FL, USA.
J Robot Surg. 2018 Jun;12(2):325-330. doi: 10.1007/s11701-017-0737-6. Epub 2017 Aug 22.
Robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is well established as a safe and effective treatment for prostate cancer. According to published studies, patients undergoing RARP are at increased risk of being diagnosed with an inguinal hernia after RARP and are four times more likely to have an inguinal hernia repair (IHR) following RARP. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of IHR during RARP. Overall, it has been observed that IHR adds on average, 12-15 min in total surgical time and there were no significant differences between RARP with or without IHR with respect to postoperative complications. This study analyzes a large series of patients undergoing RARP (1100) and compares them to a group that underwent RARP with IHR (39). Between December 2008 and January 2015, 1139 patients underwent RARP at Florida Hospital in Celebration, FL. Of the total patients, 39 underwent concomitant IHR. All procedures were performed by the same surgeons (urologist and general surgeon), using the same techniques of RARP and TAPP inguinal hernia repair. After 30 days, the differences were evaluated between groups regarding surgical time, EBL and postoperative complications. The average age of patients undergoing the procedure was 61.65 years. The mean procedure time was approximately 120 min (min), with an additional period of 68 min for IHR (mean = 188; p = 0.0001). There was a significant difference in BMI between the groups, 28.3 kg/m for patients undergoing RARP and 26.8 kg/m for those who underwent RARP and IHR (p = 0.028). The EBL averaged 110.87 mL, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0371). There was no significant association between clinical stage of the patient and the type of procedure performed (p = 12:35). There was no significant difference in the presence of comorbidities and the operation preformed. There were 61 events recorded postoperatively, 57 (5.2%) among patients who underwent only RARP and 4 (10.26%) among those who had both. Taken together, the small amounts of complications in both groups prevent statistical significance. This study compared two groups of patients undergoing RARP: those with IHR and those without. Our study demonstrated an increase in surgical time; however, there was no increase in postoperative complications. From the data presented, we suggest that the performance of both procedures concomitantly is feasible and safe.
机器人根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)已被公认为是一种治疗前列腺癌的安全有效的方法。根据已发表的研究,接受RARP的患者在术后被诊断为腹股沟疝的风险增加,并且在RARP后进行腹股沟疝修补术(IHR)的可能性是未接受该手术患者的四倍。多项研究已证明IHR在RARP期间的有效性和安全性。总体而言,据观察,IHR平均使总手术时间增加12 - 15分钟,并且在术后并发症方面,接受或未接受IHR的RARP患者之间没有显著差异。本研究分析了一大组接受RARP的患者(1100例),并将他们与一组接受RARP联合IHR的患者(39例)进行比较。在2008年12月至2015年1月期间,1139例患者在佛罗里达州庆祝市的佛罗里达医院接受了RARP。在所有患者中,39例同时接受了IHR。所有手术均由相同的外科医生(泌尿科医生和普通外科医生)进行,采用相同的RARP技术和经腹腹膜前腹股沟疝修补术(TAPP)技术。30天后,评估两组在手术时间、估计失血量(EBL)和术后并发症方面的差异。接受该手术患者的平均年龄为61.65岁。平均手术时间约为120分钟,IHR额外增加了约68分钟(平均 = 188分钟;p = 0.0001)。两组之间的体重指数(BMI)存在显著差异,接受RARP的患者为28.3kg/m²,接受RARP联合IHR的患者为26.8kg/m²(p = 0.028)。EBL平均为110.87mL,两组之间无显著差异(p = 0.371)。患者的临床分期与所进行的手术类型之间没有显著关联(p = 12.35)。合并症的存在与所进行的手术之间没有显著差异。术后记录了61例事件,仅接受RARP的患者中有57例(5.2%),同时接受两种手术的患者中有4例(10.26%)。总体而言,两组中少量的并发症使得无法得出统计学上的显著差异。本研究比较了两组接受RARP的患者:接受IHR的患者和未接受IHR的患者。我们的研究表明手术时间有所增加;然而,术后并发症并未增加。根据所呈现的数据,我们认为同时进行这两种手术是可行且安全的。