单孔和多孔机器人根治性肾切除术的疗效比较。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Kennedy E Okhawere, Shirin Razdan, Jewel Bamby, Indu Saini, Laura Zuluaga, Ruben Calvo Sauer, Nicolas Soputro, Daniel D Eun, Akshay Bhandari, Ashok K Hemal, James Porter, Ronney Abaza, Ahmed Mansour, Mutahar Ahmed, Simone Crivellaro, Phillip M Pierorazio, Nirmish Singla, Jihad Kaouk, Michael D Stifelman, Ketan K Badani
{"title":"单孔和多孔机器人根治性肾切除术的疗效比较。","authors":"Kennedy E Okhawere, Shirin Razdan, Jewel Bamby, Indu Saini, Laura Zuluaga, Ruben Calvo Sauer, Nicolas Soputro, Daniel D Eun, Akshay Bhandari, Ashok K Hemal, James Porter, Ronney Abaza, Ahmed Mansour, Mutahar Ahmed, Simone Crivellaro, Phillip M Pierorazio, Nirmish Singla, Jihad Kaouk, Michael D Stifelman, Ketan K Badani","doi":"10.1007/s11701-024-02127-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Single-port (SP) robotic surgery is a novel technology, and although there is emerging data, it remains limited in assessing single-port (SP) robot-assisted surgery as an alternative to multi-port (MP) platforms. To compare perioperative and postoperative outcomes between SP and MP robotic technologies for radical nephrectomy (RN). This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who have undergone robot-assisted radical nephrectomy using either the SP or MP technology. Baseline demographics, clinical, tumor-specific characteristics, and perioperative and postoperative outcomes were compared using χ<sup>2</sup>, t-test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariable analyses were conducted using robust, Poisson, and logistic regressions. A total of 341 patients underwent robotic RN with 47 patients (14%) in the SP group. The two groups exhibited similar baseline characteristics, with no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidities index, and tumor laterality. However, SP group had a smaller average tumor size (5.1 cm vs 6.4 cm, p = 0.009). The SP had longer operative time (178 ± 84 min vs 142 ± 75 min; p = 0.011) but showed no significant difference in the estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, length of stay, overall 30-day and major complication rates. Controlling for other variables, SP was significantly associated with a longer operative time and shorter length of stay. SP is associated with longer operative time but offers advantages such as smaller incisions and shorter hospital stays with a comparative safety profile to MP for radical nephrectomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"18 1","pages":"407"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of outcomes between single-port and multi-port robotic radical nephrectomy.\",\"authors\":\"Kennedy E Okhawere, Shirin Razdan, Jewel Bamby, Indu Saini, Laura Zuluaga, Ruben Calvo Sauer, Nicolas Soputro, Daniel D Eun, Akshay Bhandari, Ashok K Hemal, James Porter, Ronney Abaza, Ahmed Mansour, Mutahar Ahmed, Simone Crivellaro, Phillip M Pierorazio, Nirmish Singla, Jihad Kaouk, Michael D Stifelman, Ketan K Badani\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11701-024-02127-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Single-port (SP) robotic surgery is a novel technology, and although there is emerging data, it remains limited in assessing single-port (SP) robot-assisted surgery as an alternative to multi-port (MP) platforms. To compare perioperative and postoperative outcomes between SP and MP robotic technologies for radical nephrectomy (RN). This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who have undergone robot-assisted radical nephrectomy using either the SP or MP technology. Baseline demographics, clinical, tumor-specific characteristics, and perioperative and postoperative outcomes were compared using χ<sup>2</sup>, t-test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariable analyses were conducted using robust, Poisson, and logistic regressions. A total of 341 patients underwent robotic RN with 47 patients (14%) in the SP group. The two groups exhibited similar baseline characteristics, with no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidities index, and tumor laterality. However, SP group had a smaller average tumor size (5.1 cm vs 6.4 cm, p = 0.009). The SP had longer operative time (178 ± 84 min vs 142 ± 75 min; p = 0.011) but showed no significant difference in the estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, length of stay, overall 30-day and major complication rates. Controlling for other variables, SP was significantly associated with a longer operative time and shorter length of stay. SP is associated with longer operative time but offers advantages such as smaller incisions and shorter hospital stays with a comparative safety profile to MP for radical nephrectomy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Robotic Surgery\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"407\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Robotic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02127-x\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-024-02127-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

单孔(SP)机器人手术是一项新技术,虽然有新的数据出现,但在评估单孔(SP)机器人辅助手术作为多孔(MP)平台的替代方案方面仍然很有限。目的:比较SP和MP机器人技术在根治性肾切除术(RN)中的围术期和术后效果。这是一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象是使用SP或MP技术进行机器人辅助根治性肾切除术的患者。采用χ2检验、t检验、费舍尔精确检验和曼-惠特尼U检验对基线人口统计学、临床、肿瘤特异性特征以及围手术期和术后结果进行了比较。采用稳健回归、泊松回归和逻辑回归进行多变量分析。共有 341 名患者接受了机器人 RN,其中 SP 组有 47 名患者(14%)。两组患者的基线特征相似,在年龄、性别、体重指数、Charlson合并症指数和肿瘤侧位方面无明显差异。不过,SP 组的肿瘤平均大小较小(5.1 厘米对 6.4 厘米,P = 0.009)。SP组的手术时间更长(178±84分钟 vs 142±75分钟;p = 0.011),但在估计失血量、输血率、住院时间、30天总并发症和主要并发症发生率方面无显著差异。在控制其他变量的情况下,SP 与手术时间更长和住院时间更短明显相关。SP虽然手术时间较长,但具有切口小、住院时间短等优点,其安全性与MP根治性肾切除术相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of outcomes between single-port and multi-port robotic radical nephrectomy.

Single-port (SP) robotic surgery is a novel technology, and although there is emerging data, it remains limited in assessing single-port (SP) robot-assisted surgery as an alternative to multi-port (MP) platforms. To compare perioperative and postoperative outcomes between SP and MP robotic technologies for radical nephrectomy (RN). This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who have undergone robot-assisted radical nephrectomy using either the SP or MP technology. Baseline demographics, clinical, tumor-specific characteristics, and perioperative and postoperative outcomes were compared using χ2, t-test, Fisher exact test, and Mann-Whitney U test. Multivariable analyses were conducted using robust, Poisson, and logistic regressions. A total of 341 patients underwent robotic RN with 47 patients (14%) in the SP group. The two groups exhibited similar baseline characteristics, with no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index, Charlson comorbidities index, and tumor laterality. However, SP group had a smaller average tumor size (5.1 cm vs 6.4 cm, p = 0.009). The SP had longer operative time (178 ± 84 min vs 142 ± 75 min; p = 0.011) but showed no significant difference in the estimated blood loss, blood transfusion rate, length of stay, overall 30-day and major complication rates. Controlling for other variables, SP was significantly associated with a longer operative time and shorter length of stay. SP is associated with longer operative time but offers advantages such as smaller incisions and shorter hospital stays with a comparative safety profile to MP for radical nephrectomy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: The aim of the Journal of Robotic Surgery is to become the leading worldwide journal for publication of articles related to robotic surgery, encompassing surgical simulation and integrated imaging techniques. The journal provides a centralized, focused resource for physicians wishing to publish their experience or those wishing to avail themselves of the most up-to-date findings.The journal reports on advance in a wide range of surgical specialties including adult and pediatric urology, general surgery, cardiac surgery, gynecology, ENT, orthopedics and neurosurgery.The use of robotics in surgery is broad-based and will undoubtedly expand over the next decade as new technical innovations and techniques increase the applicability of its use. The journal intends to capture this trend as it develops.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信