We retrospectively collected data on 130 minimally invasive colon resection cases performed by the same surgeon from April 2005 to February 2017, of which 35 were completed laparoscopically and 95 were completed robot...We retrospectively collected data on 130 minimally invasive colon resection cases performed by the same surgeon from April 2005 to February 2017, of which 35 were completed laparoscopically and 95 were completed robotically. The first 30 robotic cases were allocated to a Training group to account for the learning needed to stabilize operative ability. The 35 laparoscopic cases and 65 of the 95 robotic cases, starting with the 31st case, were compared. Robotic partial colon resection was significantly more capable than the laparoscopic approach in limiting blood loss (p < 0.05) during the procedure, lessening conversion to a traditional open approach (p < 0.05), and produced a quantitatively larger lymph node harvest (p < 0.05). Patients of robotic cases also had overall shorter hospital stay (p < 0.05). Laparoscopic cases were significantly shorter in terms of operation time (p < 0.05). Laparoscopic and robotic approaches had similar rates of several aspects of morbidity and mortality. The robotic approach to partial colon resection is a technically capable modality of operation intraoperatively, as shown by increased lymph node harvest and less blood loss, and may provide some benefits to patients postoperatively, evidenced by shorter hospital stays, and potentially an oncologic benefit by obtaining higher lymph node harvest in cancer cases. Another benefit of the implementation of a robotic approach is the increased number of patients that are eligible for and ultimately undergo a safe and successful minimally invasive surgery as compared to a more traditional surgical approach.展开更多
Minimal access surgery has revolutionised colorectal surgery by offering reduced morbidity and mortality over open surgery,while maintaining oncological and functional outcomes with the disadvantage of additional prac...Minimal access surgery has revolutionised colorectal surgery by offering reduced morbidity and mortality over open surgery,while maintaining oncological and functional outcomes with the disadvantage of additional practical challenges. Robotic surgery aids the surgeon in overcoming these challenges. Uptake of robotic assistance has been relatively slow,mainly because of the high initial and ongoing costs of equipment but also because of limited evidence of improved patient outcomes. Advances in robotic colorectal surgery will aim to widen the scope of minimal access surgery to allow larger and more complex surgery through smaller access and natural orifices and also to make the technology more economical,allowing wider dispersal and uptake of robotic technology. Advances in robotic endoscopy will yield self-advancing endoscopes and a widening role for capsule endoscopy including the development of motile and steerable capsules able to deliver localised drug therapy and insufflation as well as being recharged from an extracorporeal power source to allow great longevity. Ultimately robotic technology may advance to the point where many conventional surgical interventions are no longer required. With respect to nanotechnology,surgery may eventually become obsolete.展开更多
目的探讨达芬奇机器人与腹腔镜手术在右半结肠切除术中的安全性及有效性。方法检索Embase、Medline、Web of Science、中国知网及万方等数据库中2009年12月至今发表的有关右半结肠切除术的相关文献,使用Jadad评分及NOS评分评价文献质量...目的探讨达芬奇机器人与腹腔镜手术在右半结肠切除术中的安全性及有效性。方法检索Embase、Medline、Web of Science、中国知网及万方等数据库中2009年12月至今发表的有关右半结肠切除术的相关文献,使用Jadad评分及NOS评分评价文献质量,并使用Revman(5.3版)软件进行Meta分析。结果经过筛选纳入21篇文献,共计样本11648例,其中机器人组1523例,腹腔镜组10125例。Meta分析显示:在手术相关指标上,机器人组相比腹腔镜组手术时间更长[WMD=40.37,95%CI(28.88,51.86),P<0.01],但淋巴结清扫数更多[WMD=2.01,95%CI(0.59,3.44),P<0.01],中转开腹率更低[OR=0.31,95%CI(0.11,0.86),P=0.02],二者术中出血量无显著差异。在围手术期相关指标上,机器人组住院时间更短[WMD=-0.80,95%CI(-1.21,-0.39),P<0.01],肠道恢复更快[WMD=-0.43,95%CI(-0.70,-0.15),P<0.01],但费用比腹腔镜组显著提高。二者术后死亡率及并发症发生率差异无统计学意义。但机器人组伤口感染率[OR=0.66,95%CI(0.45,0.97),P=0.03]及吻合口瘘发生率[OR=0.37,95%CI(0.19,0.71),P<0.01]更低。结论达芬奇机器人行右半结肠切除术尽管手术时间较长,但术后恢复更快,淋巴清扫更彻底,伤口感染及吻合口瘘发生率更低。术后生活质量及预后资料较少,仍需开展高质量、大样本、多中心随机对照研究进行评价。展开更多
文摘We retrospectively collected data on 130 minimally invasive colon resection cases performed by the same surgeon from April 2005 to February 2017, of which 35 were completed laparoscopically and 95 were completed robotically. The first 30 robotic cases were allocated to a Training group to account for the learning needed to stabilize operative ability. The 35 laparoscopic cases and 65 of the 95 robotic cases, starting with the 31st case, were compared. Robotic partial colon resection was significantly more capable than the laparoscopic approach in limiting blood loss (p < 0.05) during the procedure, lessening conversion to a traditional open approach (p < 0.05), and produced a quantitatively larger lymph node harvest (p < 0.05). Patients of robotic cases also had overall shorter hospital stay (p < 0.05). Laparoscopic cases were significantly shorter in terms of operation time (p < 0.05). Laparoscopic and robotic approaches had similar rates of several aspects of morbidity and mortality. The robotic approach to partial colon resection is a technically capable modality of operation intraoperatively, as shown by increased lymph node harvest and less blood loss, and may provide some benefits to patients postoperatively, evidenced by shorter hospital stays, and potentially an oncologic benefit by obtaining higher lymph node harvest in cancer cases. Another benefit of the implementation of a robotic approach is the increased number of patients that are eligible for and ultimately undergo a safe and successful minimally invasive surgery as compared to a more traditional surgical approach.
文摘Minimal access surgery has revolutionised colorectal surgery by offering reduced morbidity and mortality over open surgery,while maintaining oncological and functional outcomes with the disadvantage of additional practical challenges. Robotic surgery aids the surgeon in overcoming these challenges. Uptake of robotic assistance has been relatively slow,mainly because of the high initial and ongoing costs of equipment but also because of limited evidence of improved patient outcomes. Advances in robotic colorectal surgery will aim to widen the scope of minimal access surgery to allow larger and more complex surgery through smaller access and natural orifices and also to make the technology more economical,allowing wider dispersal and uptake of robotic technology. Advances in robotic endoscopy will yield self-advancing endoscopes and a widening role for capsule endoscopy including the development of motile and steerable capsules able to deliver localised drug therapy and insufflation as well as being recharged from an extracorporeal power source to allow great longevity. Ultimately robotic technology may advance to the point where many conventional surgical interventions are no longer required. With respect to nanotechnology,surgery may eventually become obsolete.
文摘目的探讨达芬奇机器人与腹腔镜手术在右半结肠切除术中的安全性及有效性。方法检索Embase、Medline、Web of Science、中国知网及万方等数据库中2009年12月至今发表的有关右半结肠切除术的相关文献,使用Jadad评分及NOS评分评价文献质量,并使用Revman(5.3版)软件进行Meta分析。结果经过筛选纳入21篇文献,共计样本11648例,其中机器人组1523例,腹腔镜组10125例。Meta分析显示:在手术相关指标上,机器人组相比腹腔镜组手术时间更长[WMD=40.37,95%CI(28.88,51.86),P<0.01],但淋巴结清扫数更多[WMD=2.01,95%CI(0.59,3.44),P<0.01],中转开腹率更低[OR=0.31,95%CI(0.11,0.86),P=0.02],二者术中出血量无显著差异。在围手术期相关指标上,机器人组住院时间更短[WMD=-0.80,95%CI(-1.21,-0.39),P<0.01],肠道恢复更快[WMD=-0.43,95%CI(-0.70,-0.15),P<0.01],但费用比腹腔镜组显著提高。二者术后死亡率及并发症发生率差异无统计学意义。但机器人组伤口感染率[OR=0.66,95%CI(0.45,0.97),P=0.03]及吻合口瘘发生率[OR=0.37,95%CI(0.19,0.71),P<0.01]更低。结论达芬奇机器人行右半结肠切除术尽管手术时间较长,但术后恢复更快,淋巴清扫更彻底,伤口感染及吻合口瘘发生率更低。术后生活质量及预后资料较少,仍需开展高质量、大样本、多中心随机对照研究进行评价。
