Lee Jaeim, Kim Kee-Hwan, Lee Tae Yoon, Ahn Joseph, Kim Say-June
Department of Surgery, Uijeongbu St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Department of Surgery, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
J Minim Access Surg. 2022 Jan-Mar;18(1):65-71. doi: 10.4103/jmas.JMAS_274_19.
Although single-incision robotic cholecystectomy (SIRC) overcomes various limitations of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC), it is associated with high cost. In this study, we intended to investigate if SIRC is recommendable and advantageous to patients despite its high cost.
We prospectively collected and analysed data of patients who had undergone either SILC (n = 25) or SIRC (n = 50) for benign gallbladder diseases, with identical inclusion criteria, between November 2017 and February 2019.
SILC and SIRC showed similar operative outcomes in terms of intra- and post-operative complications and verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) for pain. However, the SIRC group exhibited significantly longer operation time than the SILC group (83.2 ± 32.6 vs. 66.4 ± 32.8, P = 0.002). The SIRC group also showed longer hospital stay (2.4 ± 0.7 vs. 2.2 ± 0.6, P = 0.053). Although the SILC and SIRC groups showed no significant difference in VNRS, the SIRC group required a higher amount (126.0 ± 88.8 mg vs. 87.5 ± 79.7 mg, P = 0.063) and frequency (3.0 ± 2.1 vs. 2.0 ± 1.8, P = 0.033) of intravenous opioid analgesic administration. During surgery, the critical view of safety (CVS), the prerequisite for safe cholecystectomy, was identified in only 24% (n = 6) of patients undergoing SILC and in 100% (n = 50) of patients undergoing SIRC (P < 0.05).
We conclude that although SILC and SIRC have similar operative outcomes, SIRC is advantageous over SILC because of its potential to markedly enhance the safety of patients by proficiently acquiring CVS.
尽管单孔机器人胆囊切除术(SIRC)克服了单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术(SILC)的各种局限性,但它成本高昂。在本研究中,我们旨在调查尽管SIRC成本高昂,但对患者而言是否值得推荐且具有优势。
我们前瞻性收集并分析了2017年11月至2019年2月期间因良性胆囊疾病接受SILC(n = 25)或SIRC(n = 50)治疗的患者数据,纳入标准相同。
SILC和SIRC在手术中和术后并发症以及疼痛的言语数字评定量表(VNRS)方面显示出相似的手术结果。然而,SIRC组的手术时间明显长于SILC组(83.2 ± 32.6对66.4 ± 32.8,P = 0.002)。SIRC组的住院时间也更长(2.4 ± 0.7对2.2 ± 0.6,P = 0.053)。尽管SILC组和SIRC组在VNRS方面无显著差异,但SIRC组静脉注射阿片类镇痛药的用量(126.0 ± 88.8毫克对87.5 ± 79.7毫克,P = 0.063)和频率(3.0 ± 2.1对2.0 ± 1.8,P = 0.033)更高。手术期间,安全关键视野(CVS)是安全胆囊切除术的前提条件,仅24%(n = 6)接受SILC的患者和100%(n = 50)接受SIRC的患者中识别出了CVS(P < 0.05)。
我们得出结论,尽管SILC和SIRC具有相似的手术结果,但SIRC优于SILC,因为它有可能通过熟练获取CVS显著提高患者的安全性。