Center for Advanced Minimally Invasive Liver Surgery, Digestive Health Institute, AdventHealth Tampaa, Tampa, FL, USA.
Am Surg. 2023 Jun;89(6):2399-2412. doi: 10.1177/00031348221093933. Epub 2022 May 5.
Concerns regarding minimally invasive liver resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHCC) include inadequate resection margins and inferior long-term overall survival (OS) when compared to an "open" approach. Limited data exists to address these issues. We aimed to compare perioperative variables, tumor distance to margin, and long-term outcomes after IHCC resection based on surgical approach (robotic vs open) in our hepatobiliary center to address these concerns.
With IRB approval, 34 patients who underwent robotic or open hepatectomy for IHCC were prospectively followed. Patients were stratified by tumor distance to resection margin (≤1 mm, 1.1-9.9 mm, ≥10 mm) for illustrative purposes and by approach (robotic vs open). Where appropriate, regression analysis and cox model of proportional hazards were utilized. Survival was stratified by margin distance and approach utilizing Kaplan-Meier curves. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD).
Patients undergoing robotic vs open hepatectomy had similar demographics. Patients undergoing the robotic approach had significantly lower estimated blood loss (EBL). Tumor distance to margin between the two approaches were similar ( = .428). Median OS between the two approaches was similar in patients of any margin distance.In the subgroup analysis by margin distance, the robotic approach yielded less EBL for patients in the 1.1-9.9 mm and ≥10 mm margin groups, and a shorter ICU length of stay for patients with ≥10 mm margin.
Similar margins were attained via either approach, translating into oncological non-inferiority of robotic IHCC resection. Robotic approach for the treatment of IHCC should be considered an alternative to an open approach.
与开腹手术相比,微创肝切除术治疗肝内胆管细胞癌(IHCC)存在切缘不足和长期总体生存率(OS)较差的问题。目前关于这些问题的数据有限。我们旨在比较我们肝胆中心的 IHCC 切除术后的围手术期变量、肿瘤与切缘的距离以及长期结果,以解决这些问题。
经机构审查委员会批准,前瞻性地随访了 34 例因 IHCC 接受机器人或开腹肝切除术的患者。为了说明问题,根据肿瘤与切缘的距离(≤1mm、1.1-9.9mm、≥10mm)对患者进行分层,并根据手术方式(机器人与开腹)进行分层。在适当的情况下,采用回归分析和比例风险 Cox 模型。利用 Kaplan-Meier 曲线对生存情况进行分层,根据切缘距离和手术方式进行分层。数据以中位数(平均值±标准差)表示。
机器人与开腹肝切除术的患者具有相似的人口统计学特征。机器人组患者的估计失血量(EBL)明显较低。两种手术方式的肿瘤与切缘的距离相似( =.428)。在任何切缘距离的患者中,两种手术方式的中位 OS 相似。在切缘距离的亚组分析中,对于 1.1-9.9mm 和≥10mm 切缘组的患者,机器人组的 EBL 更少,对于≥10mm 切缘的患者,ICU 住院时间更短。
两种手术方式均可获得相似的切缘,从而证明机器人 IHCC 切除术在肿瘤学上非劣效于开腹手术。机器人治疗 IHCC 应被视为开腹手术的替代方法。