Suppr超能文献

机器人辅助与腹腔镜肠吻合术:随机交叉体内实验研究。

Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic bowel anastomoses: randomized crossover in vivo experimental study.

机构信息

Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Im Neuenheimer Feld 420, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.

Department of Urology, University Hospital Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.

出版信息

Surg Endosc. 2023 Aug;37(8):5894-5901. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-10044-7. Epub 2023 Apr 18.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Initial learning curves are potentially shorter in robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) than in conventional laparoscopic surgery (LS). There is little evidence to support this claim. Furthermore, there is limited evidence how skills from LS transfer to RAS.

METHODS

A randomized controlled, assessor blinded crossover study to compare how RAS naïve surgeons (n = 40) performed linear-stapled side-to-side bowel anastomoses in an in vivo porcine model with LS and RAS. Technique was rated using the validated anastomosis objective structured assessment of skills (A-OSATS) score and the conventional OSATS score. Skill transfer from LS to RAS was measured by comparing the RAS performance of LS novices and LS experienced surgeons. Mental and physical workload was measured with the NASA-task load index (NASA-Tlx) and the Borg-scale.

OUTCOMES

In the overall cohort, there were no differences between RAS and LS for surgical performance (A-OSATS, time, OSATS). Surgeons that were naïve in both LS and RAS had significantly higher A-OSATS scores in RAS (Mean (Standard deviation (SD)): LS: 48.0 ± 12.1; RAS: 52.0 ± 7.5); p = 0.044) mainly deriving from better bowel positioning (LS: 8.7 ± 1.4; RAS: 9.3 ± 1.0; p = 0.045) and closure of enterotomy (LS: 12.8 ± 5.5; RAS: 15.6 ± 4.7; p = 0.010). There was no statistically significant difference in how LS novices and LS experienced surgeons performed in RAS [Mean (SD): novices: 48.9 ± 9.0; experienced surgeons: 55.9 ± 11.0; p = 0.540]. Mental and physical demand was significantly higher after LS.

CONCLUSION

The initial performance was improved for RAS versus LS for linear stapled bowel anastomosis, whereas workload was higher for LS. There was limited transfer of skills from LS to RAS.

摘要

背景

与传统腹腔镜手术(LS)相比,机器人辅助手术(RAS)的初始学习曲线可能更短。但是,目前几乎没有证据支持这一说法。此外,关于 LS 技能如何转移到 RAS 的证据也很有限。

方法

这是一项随机对照、评估者盲法的交叉研究,旨在比较 40 名 RAS 新手外科医生在体内猪模型中进行直线吻合的效果,比较 RAS 和 LS 下的线性吻合。使用经过验证的吻合术客观结构化评估技能(A-OSATS)评分和传统 OSATS 评分来评估技术。通过比较 LS 新手和 LS 经验丰富的外科医生的 RAS 表现来衡量 LS 到 RAS 的技能转移。使用 NASA 任务负荷指数(NASA-Tlx)和 Borg 量表来测量精神和体力工作负荷。

结果

在总体队列中,RAS 和 LS 在手术表现(A-OSATS、时间、OSATS)方面没有差异。在 LS 和 RAS 均为新手的外科医生中,RAS 的 A-OSATS 评分明显更高(平均值(标准差(SD)):LS:48.0±12.1;RAS:52.0±7.5);p=0.044),主要归因于更好的肠定位(LS:8.7±1.4;RAS:9.3±1.0)和关闭肠切开术(LS:12.8±5.5;RAS:15.6±4.7);p=0.010)。LS 新手和 LS 经验丰富的外科医生在 RAS 中的表现没有统计学上的显著差异[平均值(SD):新手:48.9±9.0;经验丰富的外科医生:55.9±11.0;p=0.540]。LS 后的精神和体力需求明显更高。

结论

与 LS 相比,RAS 进行直线吻合的初始表现有所提高,而 LS 的工作量更高。LS 到 RAS 的技能转移有限。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0ff6/10338398/a6be86ea6133/464_2023_10044_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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