Department of HBP Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea; Pancreaticobiliary Cancer Clinic, Yonsei Cancer Center, Severance Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.
Department of Surgery, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA, Seongnam, South Korea.
Int J Surg. 2020 Jun;78:138-142. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.042. Epub 2020 Apr 22.
Although the single-site robotic cholecystectomy(SSRC) has been performed with expectation of overcoming the limitation of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy(SILC), there exists a lack of comparison studies involving SILC and SSRC. This study aimed to analyze surgical outcomes of single-site robotic cholecystectomy and single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy by propensity score-matching analysis.
From March 2009 to August 2015, 290 consecutive patients underwent SSRC or SILC at Severance Hospital, Seoul, Korea. Potential confounding factors for operative outcomes were adjusted by propensity score-matching analysis. One hundred four patients from each group were evaluated for perioperative outcomes and compared for a retrospective cohort study.
There was no difference in potential cofounders such as gender, age, body mass index (BMI), and perioperative cholecystitis-related symptoms between two groups after propensity score-matching. However, mean operation time was shorter (56.69 ± 13.65 vs. 101.57 ± 27.05 min; p < 0.001) and median bleeding amount during surgery was less (0 (0-50) vs. 0 (0-100) mL; p < 0.001) in the SILC group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding conversion to conventional multiport cholecystectomy. Bile leakage due to perforation of the gallbladder during surgery was more common in the SILC group (6.7% vs. 17.3%; p = 0.019). Moreover, bile spillage rate was significantly increased in conjunction with a higher BMI in the SILC group, whereas BMI did not affect the bile leakage rate in the SSRC group.
SSRC is not superior to SILC except regarding bile spillage incidence. However, the technical stability and clinically undetected advantages of SSRC are expected to prompt surgeons to perform this more reliable procedure.
虽然单部位机器人胆囊切除术(SSRC)的开展有望克服单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SILC)的局限性,但目前仍缺乏 SILC 与 SSRC 对比研究。本研究旨在通过倾向评分匹配分析,比较单部位机器人胆囊切除术和单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术的手术结果。
2009 年 3 月至 2015 年 8 月,韩国首尔 Severance 医院连续 290 例患者接受 SSRC 或 SILC。通过倾向评分匹配分析调整手术结果的潜在混杂因素。每组各 104 例患者进行围手术期结果评估,并进行回顾性队列研究比较。
在倾向评分匹配后,两组患者的潜在混杂因素(如性别、年龄、体重指数(BMI)和围手术期胆囊炎相关症状)无差异。然而,SILC 组的平均手术时间更短(56.69±13.65 分钟比 101.57±27.05 分钟;p<0.001),术中出血量中位数更少(0(0-50)毫升比 0(0-100)毫升;p<0.001)。两组患者中转行传统多孔胆囊切除术的比例无显著差异。SILC 组术中胆囊穿孔导致胆汁漏的发生率更高(6.7%比 17.3%;p=0.019)。此外,SILC 组胆汁外溢率随着 BMI 的升高而显著增加,而 SSRC 组 BMI 对胆汁漏发生率无影响。
SSRC 除了胆汁外溢发生率外,并不优于 SILC。然而,SSRC 的技术稳定性和临床上未检测到的优势有望促使外科医生进行更可靠的手术。