Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health System, Charlotte, North Carolina (all authors)..
Levine Cancer Institute, Atrium Health System, Charlotte, North Carolina (all authors).
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2021 Nov;28(11):1898-1902. doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2021.04.022. Epub 2021 May 7.
To compare intraoperative and perioperative narcotic use, recovery room time, and total hospital stay for patients treated with robotic vs laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer.
Retrospective cohort.
Teaching hospital.
All patients having minimally invasive surgery in the division of gynecologic oncology during a 20-month period.
Laparoscopic cases were compared with robot-assisted cases with respect to perioperative outcome.
Hospital billing records were used to identify all patients with endometrial cancer treated from January 1, 2018 through July 31, 2019 undergoing either laparoscopic or robotic surgery. Data were collected including total narcotic use converted to intravenous morphine milligram equivalent (MME), total amount of time in recovery, and length of hospital stay. A total of 139 laparoscopic and 101 robotic surgeries were eligible for analysis. There was no difference between the groups with respect to blood loss, alcohol use, or smoking. Patients undergoing laparoscopy had a significantly lower body mass index compared with patients undergoing robotic surgery (32.9 vs 38.0 kg/m; p <.001). Univariate analysis showed no difference between the 2 groups with respect to narcotic use in surgery (21.7 vs 21.1 MME; p = .64), recovery (4.3 vs 4.5 MME; p = .70), or total dose (26.0 vs 25.6 MME; p = .78). However, patients who underwent a robotic approach had a longer recovery room time (128 minutes vs 163 minutes; p <.001 and a longer surgical time (288 minutes vs 204 minutes; p = .001). Patients in the robotic group were also more likely to undergo full lymphadenectomy than patients in the laparoscopy group (38.0% vs 20.8% p <.001). In a multivariate analysis, the only significant factors for predicting total narcotic dose were age, use of a preoperative enhanced recovery after surgery program, and surgical time. Patients who had laparoscopy were more likely to achieve same-day discharge (39.3% vs 17.8%; p <.001), but in the multivariate analysis, the type of surgery did not predict same-day discharge.
There was no difference in narcotic use in the perioperative period with robotic surgery compared with laparoscopy. Recovery time was longer for robotic surgery, but this was not significant in multivariate analysis. Same-day discharges were less frequent with robotics, which may be more related to the physician's choice rather than the procedure.
比较机器人辅助手术与腹腔镜手术治疗子宫内膜癌患者的术中及围手术期麻醉使用、恢复室时间和总住院时间。
回顾性队列研究。
教学医院。
在 20 个月期间在妇科肿瘤学系接受微创手术的所有子宫内膜癌患者。
比较腹腔镜组和机器人辅助组的围手术期结果。
使用医院计费记录确定所有 2018 年 1 月 1 日至 2019 年 7 月 31 日接受腹腔镜或机器人手术治疗的子宫内膜癌患者。收集的数据包括总麻醉用量(转换为静脉内吗啡毫克当量(MME))、恢复室总时间和住院时间。共有 139 例腹腔镜手术和 101 例机器人手术符合分析条件。两组患者的出血量、饮酒或吸烟情况无差异。与接受机器人手术的患者相比,接受腹腔镜手术的患者的体重指数明显较低(32.9 与 38.0 kg/m;p<.001)。单因素分析显示,两组在手术中麻醉使用(21.7 与 21.1 MME;p=0.64)、恢复(4.3 与 4.5 MME;p=0.70)或总剂量(26.0 与 25.6 MME;p=0.78)方面无差异。然而,接受机器人治疗的患者恢复室时间更长(128 分钟与 163 分钟;p<.001),手术时间更长(288 分钟与 204 分钟;p=0.001)。机器人组患者更有可能接受完整的淋巴结清扫术,而腹腔镜组患者(38.0%比 20.8%;p<.001)。在多因素分析中,预测总麻醉剂量的唯一显著因素是年龄、术前加速康复术后方案的使用和手术时间。接受腹腔镜手术的患者更有可能实现当日出院(39.3%比 17.8%;p<.001),但在多因素分析中,手术类型并未预测当日出院。
与腹腔镜手术相比,机器人手术在围手术期的麻醉使用中没有差异。机器人手术的恢复时间较长,但在多因素分析中并不显著。机器人手术的当日出院率较低,这可能更多地与医生的选择有关,而不是手术本身。