Suppr超能文献

计划外中转行微创肝切除术患者的风险因素和结局:一项当代 NSQIP 分析。

Risk factors and outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive hepatectomy with unplanned conversion: a contemporary NSQIP analysis.

机构信息

Penn State University, Department of Surgery, United States.

University of Texas Southwestern, Department of Surgery, United States.

出版信息

HPB (Oxford). 2023 May;25(5):577-588. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2023.01.018. Epub 2023 Feb 2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive techniques are growing for hepatectomies. Laparoscopic and robotic liver resections have been shown to differ in conversions. We hypothesize that robotic approach will have decreased conversion to open and complications despite being a newer technique than laparoscopy.

METHODS

ACS NSQIP study using the targeted Liver PUF from 2014 to 2020. Patients grouped based on hepatectomy type and approach. Multivariable and propensity scored matching (PSM) was used to analyze the groups.

RESULTS

Of 7767 patients who underwent hepatectomy, 6834 were laparoscopic and 933 were robotic. The rate of conversions was significantly lower in robotic vs laparoscopic (7.8% vs 14.7%; p < 0.001). Robotic hepatectomy was associated with decreased conversion for minor (6.2% vs 13.1%; p < 0.001), but not major, right, or left hepatectomy. Operative factors associated with conversion included Pringle (OR = 2.09 [95% CI 1.05-4.19]; p = 0.0369), and a laparoscopic approach (OR = 1.96 [95% CI 1.53-2.52]; p < 0.001). Undergoing conversion was associated with increases in bile leak (13.7% vs 4.9%; p < 0.001), readmission (11.5% vs 6.1%; p < 0.001), mortality (2.1% vs 0.6%; p < 0.001), length of stay (5 days vs 3 days; p < 0.001), and surgical (30.5% vs 10.1%; p < 0.001), wound (4.9% vs 1.5%; p < 0.001) and medical (17.5% vs 6.7%; p < 0.001) complications.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive hepatectomy with conversion is associated with increased complications, and conversion is increased in the laparoscopic compared to a robotic approach.

摘要

背景

微创手术在肝切除术方面的应用日益增多。腹腔镜和机器人肝切除术在中转开腹方面存在差异。我们假设,尽管机器人技术比腹腔镜技术更新,但它的中转开腹率和并发症发生率会更低。

方法

利用 2014 年至 2020 年 ACS NSQIP 研究中的针对性肝脏 PUF 进行研究。根据肝切除术类型和方法对患者进行分组。采用多变量和倾向评分匹配(PSM)分析两组。

结果

在接受肝切除术的 7767 名患者中,6834 名接受了腹腔镜手术,933 名接受了机器人手术。机器人组的中转开腹率明显低于腹腔镜组(7.8% vs 14.7%;p<0.001)。机器人肝切除术与较小的中转开腹(6.2% vs 13.1%;p<0.001)相关,但与较大的右半肝或左半肝切除术无关。与中转开腹相关的手术因素包括阻断(OR=2.09 [95%CI 1.05-4.19];p=0.0369)和腹腔镜手术(OR=1.96 [95%CI 1.53-2.52];p<0.001)。中转开腹与胆漏(13.7% vs 4.9%;p<0.001)、再入院(11.5% vs 6.1%;p<0.001)、死亡率(2.1% vs 0.6%;p<0.001)、住院时间(5 天 vs 3 天;p<0.001)以及手术(30.5% vs 10.1%;p<0.001)、切口(4.9% vs 1.5%;p<0.001)和医疗(17.5% vs 6.7%;p<0.001)并发症的发生率增加有关。

结论

微创肝切除术中转开腹与并发症增加有关,与机器人手术相比,腹腔镜手术中转开腹的风险更高。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验