Suppr超能文献

机器人泌尿外科在临床实践中的发展历程:从起源至今——GRAND研究注册结果

Evolution of Robotic Urology in Clinical Practice from the Beginning to Now: Results from the GRAND Study Register.

作者信息

Pyrgidis Nikolaos, Volz Yannic, Ebner Benedikt, Westhofen Thilo, Staehler Michael, Chaloupka Michael, Apfelbeck Maria, Jokisch Friedrich, Bischoff Robert, Marcon Julian, Weinhold Philipp, Becker Armin, Stief Christian, Schulz Gerald B

机构信息

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Eur Urol Focus. 2025 Jan;11(1):109-117. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2024.08.004. Epub 2024 Aug 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Major urological guidelines do not currently recommend robot-assisted surgery compared with laparoscopic or open surgery due to the lack of high-quality evidence. We aimed to provide real-world data on the evolution of robotic urology and to compare its perioperative outcomes with those of laparoscopic and open surgeries.

METHODS

We used the GeRmAn Nationwide inpatient Data (GRAND), provided by the Research Data Center of the Federal Bureau of Statistics (2005-2021), and performed multiple patient-level analyses. We included patients undergoing major urological surgeries and report the largest study in the field with 993 276 patients.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

An open approach was performed in 733 416 cases, a laparoscopic approach in 109 428, and a robot-assisted approach in 150 432. Overall, 442 811 (45%) patients underwent radical prostatectomy, 129 943 (13%) radical cystectomy, 192 340 (19%) radical nephrectomy, 123 648 (12%) partial nephrectomy, 56 114 (5.6%) nephroureterectomy, and 48 420 (4.9%) pyeloplasty. The number of patients undergoing robot-assisted surgery increased exponentially, while the number of patients undergoing open surgery decreased substantially throughout the past few years. Patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery displayed slightly better, but clinically insignificant, baseline characteristics. After adjusting for the major risk factors in the multivariate regression analysis, robotic versus open surgery was associated with significantly lower odds of mortality for all five major oncological surgeries and with lower odds of intensive care unit admission, transfusion, and length of hospital stay for all six major urological surgeries.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

Robotic surgery is becoming the mainstay in major urological operations.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Patients selected for robotic surgery in Germany presented better perioperative outcomes compared to those operated with an open approach.

摘要

背景与目的

由于缺乏高质量证据,目前主要的泌尿外科指南不推荐机器人辅助手术优于腹腔镜手术或开放手术。我们旨在提供有关机器人泌尿外科发展的真实世界数据,并将其围手术期结果与腹腔镜手术和开放手术的结果进行比较。

方法

我们使用了由联邦统计局研究数据中心提供的德国全国住院患者数据(GRAND,2005 - 2021年),并进行了多项患者层面的分析。我们纳入了接受主要泌尿外科手术的患者,并报告了该领域规模最大的研究,涉及993276名患者。

主要发现与局限性

733416例采用开放手术方式,109428例采用腹腔镜手术方式,150432例采用机器人辅助手术方式。总体而言,442811例(45%)患者接受了根治性前列腺切除术,129943例(13%)接受了根治性膀胱切除术,192340例(19%)接受了根治性肾切除术,123648例(12%)接受了部分肾切除术,56114例(5.6%)接受了肾输尿管切除术,48420例(4.9%)接受了肾盂成形术。在过去几年中,接受机器人辅助手术的患者数量呈指数增长,而接受开放手术的患者数量大幅下降。接受微创手术的患者基线特征略好,但在临床上无显著差异。在多变量回归分析中对主要风险因素进行调整后,对于所有五种主要肿瘤手术,机器人手术与开放手术相比,死亡几率显著降低;对于所有六种主要泌尿外科手术,机器人手术入住重症监护病房、输血和住院时间的几率也较低。

结论与临床意义

机器人手术正成为主要泌尿外科手术的支柱。

患者总结

在德国,选择机器人手术的患者围手术期结果优于接受开放手术的患者。

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