Department of Surgery, Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK.
Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Surg Endosc. 2021 Nov;35(11):6139-6149. doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-08109-y. Epub 2020 Nov 2.
Although laparoscopic liver resection has become the standard for minor resections, evidence is lacking for more complex resections such as the right posterior sectionectomy (RPS). We aimed to compare surgical outcomes between laparoscopic (LRPS) and open right posterior sectionectomy (ORPS).
An international multicenter retrospective study comparing patients undergoing LRPS or ORPS (January 2007-December 2018) was performed. Patients were matched based on propensity scores in a 1:1 ratio. Primary endpoint was major complication rate defined as Accordion ≥ 3 grade. Secondary endpoints included blood loss, length of hospital stay (LOS) and resection status. A sensitivity analysis was done excluding the first 10 LRPS patients of each center to correct for the learning curve. Additionally, possible risk factors were explored for operative time, blood loss and LOS.
Overall, 399 patients were included from 9 centers from 6 European countries of which 150 LRPS could be matched to 150 ORPS. LRPS was associated with a shorter operative time [235 (195-285) vs. 247 min (195-315) p = 0.004], less blood loss [260 (188-400) vs. 400 mL (280-550) p = 0.009] and a shorter LOS [5 (4-7) vs. 8 days (6-10), p = 0.002]. Major complication rate [n = 8 (5.3%) vs. n = 9 (6.0%) p = 1.00] and R0 resection rate [144 (96.0%) vs. 141 (94.0%), p = 0.607] did not differ between LRPS and ORPS, respectively. The sensitivity analysis showed similar findings in the previous mentioned outcomes. In multivariable regression analysis blood loss was significantly associated with the open approach, higher ASA classification and malignancy as diagnosis. For LOS this was the open approach and a malignancy.
This international multicenter propensity score-matched study showed an advantage in favor of LRPS in selected patients as compared to ORPS in terms of operative time, blood loss and LOS without differences in major complications and R0 resection rate.
虽然腹腔镜肝切除术已成为小切除的标准,但对于更复杂的切除,如右后叶切除术(RPS),证据仍然缺乏。我们旨在比较腹腔镜(LRPS)和开放式右后叶切除术(ORPS)之间的手术结果。
进行了一项国际多中心回顾性研究,比较了 2007 年 1 月至 2018 年 12 月期间接受 LRPS 或 ORPS 治疗的患者。患者根据倾向评分以 1:1 的比例进行匹配。主要终点是定义为 Accordion≥3 级的主要并发症发生率。次要终点包括出血量、住院时间(LOS)和切除状态。对每个中心的前 10 例 LRPS 患者进行敏感性分析,以纠正学习曲线。此外,还探讨了手术时间、出血量和 LOS 的可能危险因素。
总体而言,来自欧洲 6 个国家的 9 个中心的 399 名患者入组,其中 150 例 LRPS 可与 150 例 ORPS 相匹配。LRPS 与手术时间更短[235(195-285)vs. 247min(195-315),p=0.004]、出血量更少[260(188-400)vs. 400ml(280-550),p=0.009]和 LOS 更短[5(4-7)vs. 8 天(6-10),p=0.002]相关。主要并发症发生率[n=8(5.3%)vs. n=9(6.0%),p=1.00]和 R0 切除率[144(96.0%)vs. 141(94.0%),p=0.607]在 LRPS 和 ORPS 之间无差异。敏感性分析显示在之前提到的结果中也有类似的发现。在多变量回归分析中,出血量与开放手术、较高的 ASA 分级和恶性肿瘤诊断显著相关。对于 LOS,这是开放手术和恶性肿瘤。
这项国际多中心倾向评分匹配研究表明,在选择的患者中,与 ORPS 相比,LRPS 在手术时间、出血量和 LOS 方面具有优势,而主要并发症和 R0 切除率无差异。