Suppr超能文献

比较直肠癌切除术中机器人手术与腹腔镜手术的病理结果:7616 例患者的倾向调整分析。

Comparing pathologic outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic Surgery in rectal cancer resection: a propensity adjusted analysis of 7616 patients.

机构信息

Section of Colon & Rectal Surgery, Division of General Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Vanderbilt University, 1161 21st Ave South, Room D5248 MCN, Nashville, TN, 37232, USA.

Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2020 Jun;34(6):2613-2622. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-07032-1. Epub 2019 Jul 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Margin negative resection of rectal cancer with minimally invasive techniques remains technically challenging. Robotic surgery has potential advantages over traditional laparoscopy. We hypothesize that the difference in the rate of negative margin status will be < 6% between laparoscopic and robotic approach.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (2010-2014) was queried for adults with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation and curative resection to conduct an observational retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database. Patients were grouped by either robotic (ROB) or laparoscopic (LAP) approach in an intent-to-treat analysis. Primary outcome was negative margin status, defined as a composite of circumferential resection margin and distal margin. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), readmission, 90-day mortality, and overall survival.

RESULTS

7616 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who underwent minimally invasive resection were identified. 2472 (32%) underwent attempted robotic approach. The overall conversion rate was 13% and was increased in the laparoscopic group [LAP: 15% vs. ROB: 8%; OR 0.47; 95% CI (0.39, 0.57)]. Differences in margin negative resection rate were within the prespecified range of practical equivalence (LAP: 93% vs.: ROB 94%; 95% CI (0.69, 1.06); [Formula: see text] = 1). For secondary outcomes, there was no difference in 30-day readmission [LAP: 9% vs.: ROB 8%; 95% CI (0.84, 1.24)] and 90-day mortality [LAP: 1% vs.: ROB 1%; 95% CI (0.38, 1.24)]. While the median LOS was 5 days in both groups, the mean LOS was 0.6 (95% CI: 0.24, 0.89) days shorter in the robotic group.

CONCLUSION

This robust analysis supports either robotic or laparoscopic approach for resection of locally advanced rectal cancer from a margin perspective. Both have similar readmission and 5-year overall survival rates. Patients undergoing robotic surgery have a 0.6-day decrease in LOS and decreased conversion rate.

摘要

背景

采用微创技术对直肠癌进行边缘阴性切除术仍然具有一定的技术挑战性。机器人手术相对于传统腹腔镜手术具有潜在的优势。我们假设腹腔镜和机器人方法之间的阴性切缘状态率差异将<6%。

方法

使用国家癌症数据库(2010-2014 年)对接受新辅助放化疗和根治性切除术的局部晚期直肠癌成人进行查询,以对前瞻性维护数据库进行观察性回顾性队列研究。患者根据机器人(ROB)或腹腔镜(LAP)方法分为意向治疗分析组。主要结局为阴性切缘状态,定义为环周切缘和远端切缘的复合指标。次要结局包括住院时间(LOS)、再入院、90 天死亡率和总生存率。

结果

确定了 7616 例接受微创切除术的局部晚期直肠癌患者。2472 例(32%)尝试采用机器人方法。总体转化率为 13%,在腹腔镜组中增加[LAP:15% vs. ROB:8%;OR 0.47;95%CI(0.39,0.57)]。切缘阴性切除率的差异在可接受的实际等效范围内(LAP:93% vs. ROB:94%;95%CI(0.69,1.06);[Formula: see text]=1)。对于次要结局,30 天再入院率无差异[LAP:9% vs. ROB:8%;95%CI(0.84,1.24)]和 90 天死亡率[LAP:1% vs. ROB:1%;95%CI(0.38,1.24)]。尽管两组的中位 LOS 均为 5 天,但机器人组的平均 LOS 短 0.6 天(95%CI:0.24,0.89)。

结论

从切缘角度来看,这项强有力的分析支持局部晚期直肠癌采用机器人或腹腔镜方法进行切除。两者的再入院率和 5 年总生存率相似。接受机器人手术的患者的 LOS 减少了 0.6 天,转化率降低。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

10
Hospital robotic use for colorectal cancer care.医院机器人在结直肠癌治疗中的应用。
J Robot Surg. 2021 Aug;15(4):561-569. doi: 10.1007/s11701-020-01142-y. Epub 2020 Sep 2.

本文引用的文献

10
Totally robotic rectal resection: an experience of the first 100 consecutive cases.全机器人直肠切除术:连续100例的经验
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2016 Apr;31(4):869-76. doi: 10.1007/s00384-016-2503-z. Epub 2016 Feb 1.

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