Department of Surgery, Whittington Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.
National Centre for Bowel Research and Surgical Innovation, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Tech Coloproctol. 2018 Mar;22(3):161-177. doi: 10.1007/s10151-018-1766-5. Epub 2018 Mar 15.
The purpose of this study was to assess outcome measures and cost-effectiveness of robotic colorectal resections in adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease. The Cochrane Library, PubMed/Medline and Embase databases were reviewed, using the text "robotic(s)" AND ("inflammatory bowel disease" OR "Crohn's" OR "Ulcerative Colitis"). Two investigators screened abstracts for eligibility. All English language full-text articles were reviewed for specified outcomes. Data were presented in a summarised and aggregate form, since the lack of higher-level evidence studies precluded meta-analysis. Primary outcomes included mortality and postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included readmission rate, length of stay, conversion rate, procedure time, estimated blood loss and functional outcome. The tertiary outcome was cost-effectiveness. Eight studies (3 case-matched observational studies, 4 case series and 1 case report) met the inclusion criteria. There was no reported mortality. Overall, complications occurred in 81 patients (54%) including 30 (20%) Clavien-Dindo III-IV complications. Mean length of stay was 8.6 days. Eleven cases (7.3%) were converted to open. The mean robotic operating time was 99 min out of a mean total operating time of 298.6 min. Thirty-two patients (24.7%) were readmitted. Functional outcomes were comparable among robotic, laparoscopic and open approaches. Case-matched observational studies comparing robotic to laparoscopic surgery revealed a significantly longer procedure time; however, conversion, complication, length of stay and readmission rates were similar. The case-matched observational study comparing robotic to open surgery also revealed a longer procedure time and a higher readmission rate; postoperative complication rates and length of stay were similar. No studies compared cost-effectiveness between robotic and traditional approaches. Although robotic resections for inflammatory bowel disease are technically feasible, outcomes must be interpreted with caution due to low-quality studies.
本研究旨在评估机器人结直肠切除术在成人炎症性肠病患者中的疗效评估指标和成本效益。我们检索了 Cochrane 图书馆、PubMed/Medline 和 Embase 数据库,检索词为“robotic(s)”和“Inflammatory Bowel Disease”或“Crohn's”或“Ulcerative Colitis”。两位研究者筛选了摘要的纳入标准。所有符合指定疗效的英文全文文章都进行了评估。由于缺乏更高水平证据的研究,数据以总结和汇总的形式呈现,无法进行荟萃分析。主要结局包括死亡率和术后并发症。次要结局包括再入院率、住院时间、中转率、手术时间、估计失血量和功能结局。三级结局是成本效益。8 项研究(3 项病例匹配的观察性研究、4 项病例系列研究和 1 项病例报告)符合纳入标准。无死亡病例报告。总体而言,81 例患者(54%)发生了并发症,包括 30 例(20%)Clavien-Dindo III-IV 级并发症。平均住院时间为 8.6 天。11 例(7.3%)中转开腹。机器人手术的平均操作时间为 99 分钟,总操作时间为 298.6 分钟。32 例(24.7%)患者再入院。机器人、腹腔镜和开腹手术的功能结局相似。比较机器人与腹腔镜手术的病例匹配观察性研究显示,机器人手术的操作时间明显更长;然而,中转、并发症、住院时间和再入院率相似。比较机器人与开腹手术的病例匹配观察性研究也显示,机器人手术的操作时间更长,再入院率更高;术后并发症发生率和住院时间相似。没有研究比较机器人和传统方法的成本效益。尽管机器人结直肠切除术在技术上是可行的,但由于研究质量较低,结果必须谨慎解释。