Short-term outcomes of totally robotic versus robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a single-center retrospective study.

IF 2.5 3区医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY

World Journal of Surgical Oncology Pub Date : 2024-09-04 DOI:10.1186/s12957-024-03484-5

Shan-Ping Ye, Can Wu, Rui-Xiang Zou, Dong-Ning Liu, Hong-Xin Yu, Jin-Yuan Duan, Tai-Yuan Li

{"title":"Short-term outcomes of totally robotic versus robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a single-center retrospective study.","authors":"Shan-Ping Ye, Can Wu, Rui-Xiang Zou, Dong-Ning Liu, Hong-Xin Yu, Jin-Yuan Duan, Tai-Yuan Li","doi":"10.1186/s12957-024-03484-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Totally robotic distal gastrectomy (TRDG) is being used more and more in gastric cancer (GC) patients. The study aims to evaluate the short-term efficacy of TRDG and robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) in the treatment of GC.Methods: We retrospectively collected the clinical data of patients who underwent TRDG or RADG, of which 60 patients were included in the study: 30 cases of totally robotic and 30 cases of robotic-assisted. The short-term efficacy of the two groups was compared.Results: There was no significant difference in the clinicopathological data between the two groups. Compared to RADG, TRDG had less intraoperative blood loss(P = 0.019), less postoperative abdominal drainage(P = 0.031), shorter time of exhaust( P = 0.001) and liquid diet(P = 0.001), shorter length of incision(P<0.01), shorter postoperative hospital stays(P = 0.033), lower postoperative C-reactive protein(CRP)(P = 0.024) and lower postoperative Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) scores(P = 0.048). However, no significant statistical differences were found in terms of total operation time(P = 0.108), number of lymph nodes retrieved(P = 0.307), time for anastomosis(P = 0.450), proximal resection margin(P = 0.210), distal resection margin(P = 0.202), postoperative complication(P = 0.506), total hospital cost(P = 0.286) and postoperative white blood cell(WBC)(P = 0.113).Conclusions: In terms of security and technology, TRDG could serve as a better treatment method for GC.","PeriodicalId":23856,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Surgical Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11373196/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Surgical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-024-03484-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Totally robotic distal gastrectomy (TRDG) is being used more and more in gastric cancer (GC) patients. The study aims to evaluate the short-term efficacy of TRDG and robotic-assisted distal gastrectomy (RADG) in the treatment of GC.

Methods: We retrospectively collected the clinical data of patients who underwent TRDG or RADG, of which 60 patients were included in the study: 30 cases of totally robotic and 30 cases of robotic-assisted. The short-term efficacy of the two groups was compared.

Results: There was no significant difference in the clinicopathological data between the two groups. Compared to RADG, TRDG had less intraoperative blood loss(P = 0.019), less postoperative abdominal drainage(P = 0.031), shorter time of exhaust( P = 0.001) and liquid diet(P = 0.001), shorter length of incision(P<0.01), shorter postoperative hospital stays(P = 0.033), lower postoperative C-reactive protein(CRP)(P = 0.024) and lower postoperative Visual Analogue Scale(VAS) scores(P = 0.048). However, no significant statistical differences were found in terms of total operation time(P = 0.108), number of lymph nodes retrieved(P = 0.307), time for anastomosis(P = 0.450), proximal resection margin(P = 0.210), distal resection margin(P = 0.202), postoperative complication(P = 0.506), total hospital cost(P = 0.286) and postoperative white blood cell(WBC)(P = 0.113).

Conclusions: In terms of security and technology, TRDG could serve as a better treatment method for GC.

查看原文本刊更多论文

全机器人与机器人辅助远端胃切除术治疗胃癌的短期疗效：一项单中心回顾性研究。

背景：全机器人远端胃切除术（TRDG）越来越多地用于胃癌（GC）患者。本研究旨在评估全机器人远端胃切除术（TRDG）和机器人辅助远端胃切除术（RADG）治疗胃癌的短期疗效：我们回顾性地收集了接受TRDG或RADG的患者的临床资料，其中60例患者被纳入研究：完全机器人手术和机器人辅助手术各30例。比较了两组患者的短期疗效：结果：两组患者的临床病理数据无明显差异。与RADG相比，TRDG术中失血少（P = 0.019），术后腹腔引流少（P = 0.031），排气时间（P = 0.001）和流质饮食（P = 0.001）短，切口长度（PConclusions）短：从安全性和技术角度来看，TRDG 可以作为一种更好的治疗 GC 的方法。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

World Journal of Surgical Oncology ONCOLOGY-SURGERY

CiteScore

4.70

自引率

15.60%

发文量

362

审稿时长

3 months

期刊介绍： World Journal of Surgical Oncology publishes articles related to surgical oncology and its allied subjects, such as epidemiology, cancer research, biomarkers, prevention, pathology, radiology, cancer treatment, clinical trials, multimodality treatment and molecular biology. Emphasis is placed on original research articles. The journal also publishes significant clinical case reports, as well as balanced and timely reviews on selected topics. Oncology is a multidisciplinary super-speciality of which surgical oncology forms an integral component, especially with solid tumors. Surgical oncologists around the world are involved in research extending from detecting the mechanisms underlying the causation of cancer, to its treatment and prevention. The role of a surgical oncologist extends across the whole continuum of care. With continued developments in diagnosis and treatment, the role of a surgical oncologist is ever-changing. Hence, World Journal of Surgical Oncology aims to keep readers abreast with latest developments that will ultimately influence the work of surgical oncologists.