{"title":"[The Short-Term Outcome of Robotic Liver Resection-A Single Institutional Experience].","authors":"Yutaka Takeda, Yoshiaki Ohmura, Go Shinke, Mitsuru Kinoshita, Yoshifumi Iwagami, Yoshiro Yukawa, Asami Arita, Kiminori Yanagisawa, Shinsuke Katsuyama, Ryo Ikeshima, Masayuki Hiraki, Keijiro Sugimura, Toru Masuzawa, Taishi Hata, Kohei Murata","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Robotic liver resection(RLR)has been covered by insurance since 2022. We report our short-term outcomes of RLR performed in Kansai Rosai Hospital.</p><p><strong>Patients and method: </strong>Between May 2022 and November 2023, 35 patients underwent RLR. Control 789 patients who received laparoscopic liver resection(LLR)between January 2010 and November 2023 were included for comparison.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No significant differences were noted between non-anatomical RLR and anatomical RLR groups with respect to blood loss, Pringle rate, conversion rate, biliary fistula and hospital stay, respectively. Difficulty score was higher(4.07 vs 7.71 p<0.0001)and console time was longer(212 vs 331 min p=0.0035)in anatomical RLR group than non-anatomical RLR group. No significant differences were noted between RLR and LLR groups with respect to patient age, gender, Child-Pugh, liver damage and diagnosis, respectively. Anatomical LR rate was higher(18/17 vs 534/255, 48.6 vs 32.3%, p=0.0454)and open conversion rate was lower(0 vs 0.5%, p=0.0296)in RLR group than LLR group. No significant differences were noted between RLR and LLR groups with respect to blood loss, postoperative mortality, morbidity and hospital stay, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although further studies are still needed to confirm the benefit of RLR, RLR is safe, minimally invasive, and effective approach to the management of liver tumor.</p>","PeriodicalId":35588,"journal":{"name":"Japanese Journal of Cancer and Chemotherapy","volume":"52 2","pages":"152-154"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Japanese Journal of Cancer and Chemotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Robotic liver resection(RLR)has been covered by insurance since 2022. We report our short-term outcomes of RLR performed in Kansai Rosai Hospital.
Patients and method: Between May 2022 and November 2023, 35 patients underwent RLR. Control 789 patients who received laparoscopic liver resection(LLR)between January 2010 and November 2023 were included for comparison.
Results: No significant differences were noted between non-anatomical RLR and anatomical RLR groups with respect to blood loss, Pringle rate, conversion rate, biliary fistula and hospital stay, respectively. Difficulty score was higher(4.07 vs 7.71 p<0.0001)and console time was longer(212 vs 331 min p=0.0035)in anatomical RLR group than non-anatomical RLR group. No significant differences were noted between RLR and LLR groups with respect to patient age, gender, Child-Pugh, liver damage and diagnosis, respectively. Anatomical LR rate was higher(18/17 vs 534/255, 48.6 vs 32.3%, p=0.0454)and open conversion rate was lower(0 vs 0.5%, p=0.0296)in RLR group than LLR group. No significant differences were noted between RLR and LLR groups with respect to blood loss, postoperative mortality, morbidity and hospital stay, respectively.
Conclusion: Although further studies are still needed to confirm the benefit of RLR, RLR is safe, minimally invasive, and effective approach to the management of liver tumor.
导读:机器人肝脏切除术(RLR)自2022年起被纳入保险范围。我们报告了在关西罗赛医院进行的RLR的短期结果。患者和方法:2022年5月至2023年11月,35例患者接受了RLR。对照组纳入2010年1月至2023年11月期间接受腹腔镜肝切除术(LLR)的789例患者进行比较。结果:非解剖型RLR组与解剖型RLR组在出血量、品格尔率、转化率、胆瘘及住院时间方面均无显著差异。难度评分较高(4.07 vs 7.71)结论:RLR的疗效有待进一步研究证实,但RLR是一种安全、微创、有效的治疗肝脏肿瘤的方法。