• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

腹腔镜与机器人辅助经肛门微创手术(TAMIS)方法的比较。

A Comparison of the Laparoscopic vs Robotic Approaches for Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS).

作者信息

Dobbs Erica, Samanta Damayanti, Richmond Bryan K

机构信息

Department of Surgery, CAMC Institute for Academic Medicine, Charleston Area Medical Center, Charleston, WV, USA.

CAMC Health Education and Research Institute, Charleston Area Medical Center Institute for Academic Medicine, Charleston, WV, USA.

出版信息

Am Surg. 2025 Sep;91(9):1458-1463. doi: 10.1177/00031348251358439. Epub 2025 Jul 2.

DOI:10.1177/00031348251358439
PMID:40601337
Abstract

IntroductionTransanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) is a technique used for the management of low rectal neoplasms in properly selected patients. Transanal minimally invasive surgery may be performed using either laparoscopic or robotic platforms. Little data exists in the literature comparing the two. We hypothesize that the use of the robotic platform will facilitate superior outcomes due the advantages of the robotic platform in terms of its superior maneuverability, ease of suturing, and 3-dimensional visualization.MethodsThis retrospective study included adults who underwent a TAMIS via a robotic or laparoscopic approach in a rural tertiary care hospital between January 2016 and December 2023. Following IRB approval, patients who underwent TAMIS were identified using CPT codes 45171, 45172, 0184T, and S2900. Chart review was performed comparing approaches. Variables included patient demographics, operative time, blood loss, need for reoperation, presence of positive margins, and cost. Outcomes were compared using Fisher's Exact and Mann-Whitney U-tests (SPSS version 22.0, IBM, Armonk NY).ResultsTwenty-seven patients met inclusion criteria (19 laparoscopic and 8 robotic). Both groups did not differ significantly in age (65.47 ± 12.16 vs 54.75 ± 19.09, = 0.26) and sex (male, 73.7% vs 75.0%, = 1.00). Outcomes did not differ statistically across the two groups with respect to operative time (1.54 ± 0.58 vs 1.35 ± 0.22 hours, = 0.33), blood loss (89.5% minimal vs 100.0% minimal, = 1.00), and incidence of positive margins (10.5% vs 12.5%, = 1.00). The cost of the laparoscopic TAMIS was significantly lower ($2271/case vs $15,948/case, < 0.001) compared to the robotic TAMIS approach.ConclusionsLaparoscopic and robotic TAMIS yield comparable results, but the laparoscopic approach is much less costly. Prospective studies comparing surgical outcomes and procedural costs are therefore warranted.

摘要

引言

经肛门微创手术(TAMIS)是一种用于治疗经适当选择的低位直肠肿瘤患者的技术。经肛门微创手术可使用腹腔镜或机器人平台进行。文献中比较这两种方式的数据很少。我们假设,由于机器人平台在操作灵活性、缝合便利性和三维可视化方面具有优势,使用机器人平台将带来更好的治疗效果。

方法

这项回顾性研究纳入了2016年1月至2023年12月期间在一家农村三级护理医院通过机器人或腹腔镜方式接受TAMIS的成年人。经机构审查委员会(IRB)批准后,使用CPT编码45171、45172、0184T和S2900识别接受TAMIS的患者。通过查阅病历对两种方式进行比较。变量包括患者人口统计学特征、手术时间、失血量、再次手术需求、切缘阳性情况和费用。使用Fisher精确检验和Mann-Whitney U检验(SPSS 22.0版,IBM,纽约州阿蒙克)比较结果。

结果

27名患者符合纳入标准(19例腹腔镜手术和8例机器人手术)。两组在年龄(65.47±12.16岁对54.75±19.09岁,P = 0.26)和性别(男性,73.7%对75.0%,P = 1.00)方面无显著差异。两组在手术时间(1.54±0.58小时对1.35±0.22小时,P = 0.33)、失血量(89.5%为少量失血对100.0%为少量失血,P = 1.00)和切缘阳性发生率(10.5%对12.5%,P = 1.00)方面的结果无统计学差异。与机器人TAMIS方式相比,腹腔镜TAMIS的费用显著更低(2271美元/例对15948美元/例,P < 0.001)。

结论

腹腔镜和机器人TAMIS产生的结果相当,但腹腔镜方式成本低得多。因此,有必要进行比较手术结果和手术费用的前瞻性研究。

相似文献

1
A Comparison of the Laparoscopic vs Robotic Approaches for Transanal Minimally Invasive Surgery (TAMIS).腹腔镜与机器人辅助经肛门微创手术(TAMIS)方法的比较。
Am Surg. 2025 Sep;91(9):1458-1463. doi: 10.1177/00031348251358439. Epub 2025 Jul 2.
2
Trans‑anal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) versus rigid platforms for local excision of early rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.经肛门微创外科手术(TAMIS)与刚性平台用于早期直肠癌局部切除:文献的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Surg Endosc. 2024 Aug;38(8):4198-4206. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-11065-6. Epub 2024 Jul 18.
3
Comparing the perioperative, postoperative, and oncological outcomes between robotic and transanal total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies with a subgroup analysis for overweight patients.比较机器人手术与经肛门全直肠系膜切除术治疗直肠癌的围手术期、术后及肿瘤学结局:一项前瞻性研究的更新系统评价和荟萃分析,并对超重患者进行亚组分析。
J Robot Surg. 2025 Jun 8;19(1):276. doi: 10.1007/s11701-025-02460-9.
4
A systematic review of transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS) from 2010 to 2013.2010年至2013年经肛门微创手术(TAMIS)的系统评价。
Tech Coloproctol. 2014 Sep;18(9):775-88. doi: 10.1007/s10151-014-1148-6. Epub 2014 May 7.
5
Minimally invasive approach for retrorectal tumors above and below S3: a multicentric tertiary center retrospective study (MiaRT study).经肛门直肠入路治疗 S3 以上和以下的直肠后肿瘤:一项多中心三级中心回顾性研究(MiaRT 研究)。
Tech Coloproctol. 2024 Jun 11;28(1):67. doi: 10.1007/s10151-024-02938-y.
6
Systematic review and economic modelling of the relative clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery and robotic surgery for removal of the prostate in men with localised prostate cancer.系统评价和经济建模研究腹腔镜手术和机器人手术治疗局限性前列腺癌患者前列腺的相对临床获益和成本效益。
Health Technol Assess. 2012;16(41):1-313. doi: 10.3310/hta16410.
7
Cost-effectiveness of robotic compared with laparoscopic rectal resection. Results from the Spanish prospective national trial ROBOCOSTES.机器人辅助与腹腔镜直肠切除术的成本效益。西班牙前瞻性全国试验ROBOCOSTES的结果。
Surgery. 2025 Apr;180:109134. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2024.109134. Epub 2025 Jan 28.
8
Evaluating robotic and laparoscopic approaches for left and right colon carcinoma: a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.评估机器人手术和腹腔镜手术治疗左、右结肠癌的效果:一项回顾性倾向评分匹配分析。
J Robot Surg. 2025 Jul 25;19(1):419. doi: 10.1007/s11701-025-02600-1.
9
Laparoscopic surgery for inguinal hernia repair: systematic review of effectiveness and economic evaluation.腹腔镜腹股沟疝修补术:有效性的系统评价与经济评估
Health Technol Assess. 2005 Apr;9(14):1-203, iii-iv. doi: 10.3310/hta9140.
10
A systematic review and meta-analysis of robotic-assisted transabdominal total mesorectal excision and transanal total mesorectal excision: which approach offers optimal short-term outcomes for mid-to-low rectal adenocarcinoma?机器人辅助经腹全直肠系膜切除术与经肛门全直肠系膜切除术的系统评价和荟萃分析:哪种方法为中低位直肠腺癌提供最佳的短期疗效?
Tech Coloproctol. 2021 Nov;25(11):1183-1198. doi: 10.1007/s10151-021-02515-7. Epub 2021 Sep 25.