Elettra Ugliono, Fabrizio Rebecchi, Sara Salomone, Caterina Franco, Felice Borghi, Mario Morino
{"title":"完全 RAMIE 与混合 RAMIE:关于疗效评估和成本考虑的回顾性研究。","authors":"Elettra Ugliono, Fabrizio Rebecchi, Sara Salomone, Caterina Franco, Felice Borghi, Mario Morino","doi":"10.1007/s13304-025-02180-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To compare the results of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy performed with a Fully Robot-Assisted technique (F-RAMIE) and a Hybrid approach with laparoscopic abdominal phase (H-RAMIE). Multicentric retrospective analysis of patients who underwent F-RAMIE and H-RAMIE between 2018 and 2023. The primary endpoint was the rate of postoperative complications, secondary endpoints were clinical outcomes, oncological results and costs. Survival analyses were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. The economic evaluation included costs related to operating room time, length of stay, surgical tools, and robotic system maintenance. A total of 100 patients from two experienced surgical centers were included: 64 H-RAMIE and 36 F-RAMIE. The two groups were comparable in baseline clinical conditions and staging. F-RAMIE was associated with longer operative time (434.7 ± 46.4 Vs. 477.3 ± 47.5 min, p < 0.001) and shorter length of Intensive Care Unit stay (1.1 ± 1.1 Vs. 2.3 ± 2.3 days, p = 0.002) than H-RAMIE. There were no significant differences in conversion rate, postoperative complications and length of stay. F-RAMIE demonstrated superior lymph node retrieval (43.8 ± 15.2 Vs. 22.4 ± 10.3, p < 0.001), but no differences in R0 resection rates. Overall survival and recurrences were comparable. Cost analysis revealed a slight economic advantage for F-RAMIE (20,556.3 ± 3,601.2 € Vs. 23,302.4 ± 5,894.5 € p = 0.012), mainly due to hospital stay-related cost (11,267.6 ± 5,912.8 € for H-RAMIE Vs. 8,360.3 ± 3,550.6 €, p = 0.007). F-RAMIE and H-RAMIE proved to be equally safe and effective in terms of postoperative complications and oncological outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Full RAMIE vs Hybrid RAMIE: a retrospective study on outcomes evaluation and cost considerations.\",\"authors\":\"Elettra Ugliono, Fabrizio Rebecchi, Sara Salomone, Caterina Franco, Felice Borghi, Mario Morino\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13304-025-02180-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To compare the results of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy performed with a Fully Robot-Assisted technique (F-RAMIE) and a Hybrid approach with laparoscopic abdominal phase (H-RAMIE). Multicentric retrospective analysis of patients who underwent F-RAMIE and H-RAMIE between 2018 and 2023. The primary endpoint was the rate of postoperative complications, secondary endpoints were clinical outcomes, oncological results and costs. Survival analyses were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. The economic evaluation included costs related to operating room time, length of stay, surgical tools, and robotic system maintenance. A total of 100 patients from two experienced surgical centers were included: 64 H-RAMIE and 36 F-RAMIE. The two groups were comparable in baseline clinical conditions and staging. F-RAMIE was associated with longer operative time (434.7 ± 46.4 Vs. 477.3 ± 47.5 min, p < 0.001) and shorter length of Intensive Care Unit stay (1.1 ± 1.1 Vs. 2.3 ± 2.3 days, p = 0.002) than H-RAMIE. There were no significant differences in conversion rate, postoperative complications and length of stay. F-RAMIE demonstrated superior lymph node retrieval (43.8 ± 15.2 Vs. 22.4 ± 10.3, p < 0.001), but no differences in R0 resection rates. Overall survival and recurrences were comparable. Cost analysis revealed a slight economic advantage for F-RAMIE (20,556.3 ± 3,601.2 € Vs. 23,302.4 ± 5,894.5 € p = 0.012), mainly due to hospital stay-related cost (11,267.6 ± 5,912.8 € for H-RAMIE Vs. 8,360.3 ± 3,550.6 €, p = 0.007). F-RAMIE and H-RAMIE proved to be equally safe and effective in terms of postoperative complications and oncological outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02180-7\",\"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":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02180-7","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
目的:比较全机器人辅助技术(F-RAMIE)和腹腔镜腹部相混合入路(H-RAMIE)微创食管切除术的结果。2018年至2023年间接受F-RAMIE和H-RAMIE治疗的患者的多中心回顾性分析。主要终点是术后并发症发生率,次要终点是临床结果、肿瘤结果和费用。生存分析采用Kaplan-Meier法计算。经济评估包括与手术室时间、住院时间、手术工具和机器人系统维护相关的费用。来自两个经验丰富的外科中心的100名患者被纳入研究:64名H-RAMIE和36名F-RAMIE。两组在基线临床条件和分期方面具有可比性。F-RAMIE与较长的手术时间相关(434.7±46.4 Vs. 477.3±47.5 min, p
Full RAMIE vs Hybrid RAMIE: a retrospective study on outcomes evaluation and cost considerations.
To compare the results of Minimally Invasive Esophagectomy performed with a Fully Robot-Assisted technique (F-RAMIE) and a Hybrid approach with laparoscopic abdominal phase (H-RAMIE). Multicentric retrospective analysis of patients who underwent F-RAMIE and H-RAMIE between 2018 and 2023. The primary endpoint was the rate of postoperative complications, secondary endpoints were clinical outcomes, oncological results and costs. Survival analyses were calculated according to the Kaplan-Meier method. The economic evaluation included costs related to operating room time, length of stay, surgical tools, and robotic system maintenance. A total of 100 patients from two experienced surgical centers were included: 64 H-RAMIE and 36 F-RAMIE. The two groups were comparable in baseline clinical conditions and staging. F-RAMIE was associated with longer operative time (434.7 ± 46.4 Vs. 477.3 ± 47.5 min, p < 0.001) and shorter length of Intensive Care Unit stay (1.1 ± 1.1 Vs. 2.3 ± 2.3 days, p = 0.002) than H-RAMIE. There were no significant differences in conversion rate, postoperative complications and length of stay. F-RAMIE demonstrated superior lymph node retrieval (43.8 ± 15.2 Vs. 22.4 ± 10.3, p < 0.001), but no differences in R0 resection rates. Overall survival and recurrences were comparable. Cost analysis revealed a slight economic advantage for F-RAMIE (20,556.3 ± 3,601.2 € Vs. 23,302.4 ± 5,894.5 € p = 0.012), mainly due to hospital stay-related cost (11,267.6 ± 5,912.8 € for H-RAMIE Vs. 8,360.3 ± 3,550.6 €, p = 0.007). F-RAMIE and H-RAMIE proved to be equally safe and effective in terms of postoperative complications and oncological outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future.
Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts.
Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.