Beckmann Jan Henrik, Mehdorn Anne-Sophie, Kersebaum Jan-Niclas, von Schönfels Witigo, Taivankhuu Terbish, Laudes Matthias, Egberts Jan-Hendrik, Becker Thomas
Department of General, Visceral-, Thoracic-, Transplantation-, and Pediatric Surgery, Kurt-Semm Center for Laparoscopic and Robotic Assisted Surgery, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
I. Department of Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Visc Med. 2020 Jun;36(3):238-245. doi: 10.1159/000507742. Epub 2020 May 15.
Revisional procedures in bariatric surgery are regarded as technically more demanding and riskier than primary interventions. While the use of the surgical robot has not yet proven to be advantageous in primary bariatric interventions, the question remains whether its use is justified for more complex revisional procedures.
To show that revisional bariatric surgery can be performed safely using the da Vinci® Xi surgical system.
We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively recorded data for revisional bariatric procedures between January 2016 and November 2019.
Of 78 revision operations, four (5.1%) were performed by open surgery, 30 (38.5%) by laparoscopic surgery, and 44 (56.4%) by robotic surgery. A comparative analysis of robotic ( = 41) versus laparoscopic ( = 18) revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses (rRYGB) revealed significant differences favoring the robotic approach for operative time (130.7 vs. 167.6 min), C-reactive protein values at days 1 (27.9 vs. 49.1 mg/L) and 2 (48.2 vs. 83.6 mg/L) after surgery, and length of stay (4.9 vs. 6.2 days). Lower complication rates (Clavien-Dindo II-V) were found after rRRYGB (7.3 vs. 22.2%, not significant).
Revisional bariatric surgery using a robotic system is safe. The operative time performing rRRYGB is significantly shorter than rLRYGB in our experience. Otherwise, results were largely comparable. Due to different indications, different index operations and a wide range of revisional procedures, further studies are necessary to confirm these results.
减重手术中的翻修手术在技术上被认为比初次手术要求更高且风险更大。虽然手术机器人在初次减重手术中的应用尚未被证明具有优势,但对于更复杂的翻修手术,其使用是否合理仍是个问题。
证明使用达芬奇 Xi 手术系统可安全地进行减重翻修手术。
我们对 2016 年 1 月至 2019 年 11 月期间前瞻性记录的减重翻修手术数据进行了回顾性分析。
在 78 例翻修手术中,4 例(5.1%)通过开放手术进行,30 例(38.5%)通过腹腔镜手术进行,44 例(56.4%)通过机器人手术进行。对机器人辅助(n = 41)与腹腔镜辅助(n = 18)的翻修 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术(rRYGB)进行比较分析,结果显示在手术时间(130.7 分钟对 167.6 分钟)、术后第 1 天(27.9 毫克/升对 49.1 毫克/升)和第 2 天(48.2 毫克/升对 83.6 毫克/升)的 C 反应蛋白值以及住院时间(4.9 天对 6.2 天)方面,机器人手术方法具有显著优势。rRRYGB 术后的并发症发生率(Clavien-Dindo II-V 级)较低(7.3%对 22.2%,无显著差异)。
使用机器人系统进行减重翻修手术是安全的。根据我们的经验,进行 rRRYGB 的手术时间明显短于 rLRYGB。否则,结果在很大程度上是可比的。由于适应症不同、初次手术不同以及翻修手术范围广泛,需要进一步研究来证实这些结果。