Suppr超能文献

机器人辅助、腹腔镜或开腹子宫切除术:子宫内膜癌手术方式的手术结局。

Robotic, Laparoscopic, or Open Hysterectomy: Surgical Outcomes by Approach in Endometrial Cancer.

机构信息

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gynecologic Oncology Division, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.

出版信息

J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Sep-Oct;25(6):986-993. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2018.01.010. Epub 2018 Jan 31.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To compare patient outcomes by surgical approach in the management of endometrial cancer (EC) in Washington State from 2008 to 2013.

DESIGN

Population-based retrospective cohort study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).

SETTING

Washington State.

PATIENTS

EC patients treated with robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), laparoscopy (LS), or laparotomy (XLAP).

INTERVENTIONS

Comprehensive Hospital Abstract Reporting System to identify patients and assess the association of surgical approach with length of stay, readmissions, and perioperative complications.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

We identified 3712 cases of EC managed with either RAS, LS, or XLAP. Mean length of stay was not clinically different for RAS (1.5 days) and LS (1.6 days) but was 2.31 days longer for XLAP compared with LS (p < .001). Odds of any readmission did not differ for either RAS or XLAP compared with LS; however, early readmissions were half as likely for RAS compared with LS (p = .014). Complications were more than 2.5 times as likely for XLAP versus LS (p < .001), whereas complications did not differ for RAS versus LS (p = .931).

CONCLUSIONS

RAS is as an alternative to LS in the treatment of EC and is preferable to XLAP. The use of RAS resulted in fewer early readmissions compared with LS and resulted in an increased proportion of cases via minimally invasive surgery.

摘要

研究目的

比较 2008 年至 2013 年华盛顿州子宫内膜癌(EC)患者的手术治疗效果。

设计

基于人群的回顾性队列研究(加拿大任务组分类 II-2)。

地点

华盛顿州。

患者

接受机器人辅助手术(RAS)、腹腔镜(LS)或剖腹手术(XLAP)治疗的 EC 患者。

干预措施

综合医院摘要报告系统用于识别患者,并评估手术方法与住院时间、再入院率和围手术期并发症之间的关联。

测量和结果

我们确定了 3712 例接受 RAS、LS 或 XLAP 治疗的 EC 患者。RAS(1.5 天)和 LS(1.6 天)的平均住院时间无明显差异,但与 LS 相比,XLAP 的住院时间长 2.31 天(p < .001)。与 LS 相比,RAS 或 XLAP 的任何再入院率无差异;然而,RAS 的早期再入院率比 LS 低一半(p = .014)。与 LS 相比,XLAP 的并发症发生率高出 2.5 倍以上(p < .001),而 RAS 与 LS 的并发症发生率无差异(p = .931)。

结论

RAS 是治疗 EC 的 LS 的替代方法,优于 XLAP。与 LS 相比,RAS 可减少早期再入院,且通过微创手术治疗的病例比例增加。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验