Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Robot Surg ; 18(1): 288, 2024 Jul 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39039276

ABSTRACT

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare perioperative and oncologic outcomes in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treated with robotic-assisted surgery versus open laparotomy. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies up to June 15, 2024, were identified using PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Additionally, reference lists of included studies, relevant review articles, and clinical guidelines were manually searched. The primary outcomes evaluated were length of stay, 90-day mortality, postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), and Post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH). Secondary outcomes included estimated blood loss, reoperation rate, lymph node yield, and operative time. The final analysis included 10 retrospective cohort studies involving 23,272 patients (2,179 robotic-assisted and 21,093 open surgery). There were no significant differences between the two procedures in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula, Post-pancreatectomy haemorrhage, lymph node yield, and operative time. However, patients undergoing robotic-assisted surgery had shorter lengths of stay, lower 90-day mortality, and less estimated blood loss compared to those undergoing open surgery. The reoperation rate was higher for the robotic-assisted group. Robotic-assisted surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is safe and feasible. Compared to open surgery, it offers better perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes, but with a higher risk of reoperation.


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal , Length of Stay , Pancreatectomy , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Robotic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Humans , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/surgery , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/mortality , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Pancreatic Neoplasms/mortality , Pancreatectomy/methods , Treatment Outcome , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Operative Time , Pancreatic Fistula/etiology , Pancreatic Fistula/epidemiology , Blood Loss, Surgical/statistics & numerical data , Reoperation/statistics & numerical data , Laparotomy/methods
2.
Quant Imaging Med Surg ; 14(5): 3731-3743, 2024 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38720861

ABSTRACT

Background: Post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) is still a predominant cause of hepatectomy-related mortality. However, it is difficult to evaluate the remnant liver functional reserve accurately before surgery to prevent PHLF. In this study, we aimed to explore the role of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in evaluating remnant liver functional reserve. Methods: For this cross-sectional study, the sample retrospectively included 56 patients undergoing liver resections of at least three segments between June 2019 and September 2022 at The General Hospital of the Western Theater Command. Pre-surgery assessments involved liver computer tomography (CT), an indocyanine green (ICG) clearance test, the Child-Pugh scoring system, and liver function serum biochemical indicators. Each patient underwent a gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI before the hepatectomy, and we measured the remnant hepatocellular uptake index (rHUI) as well as the standard remnant hepatocellular uptake index (SrHUI). We examined the diagnostic utility of rHUI, SrHUI, indocyanine green retention rate of 15 minutes (ICG R15), and Albumin for PHLF. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analyses were used to measure the preoperative liver function parameters (namely, rHUI, SrHUI, ICG R15, and Albumin) for predicting PHLF. The areas under the curve (AUCs) were calculated and compared between different preoperative liver function parameters using the Wilson/Brown method. The Pearson or Spearman correlation coefficient was used for correlation analysis between ICG R15, Albumin, and rHUI and between ICG R15, Albumin, and SrHUI, respectively. Results: Twelve patients (21.43%) had complications of PHLF. We found significant differences in rHUI, SrHUI, ICG R15, and Albumin between the non-PHLF and PHLF groups. The pooled r between ICG R15 and rHUI was -0.591 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.740 to -0.389, P<0.001], and between ICG R15 and SrHUI was -0.534 (95% CI: -0.703 to -0.308, P<0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) values of rHUI, SrHUI, ICG R15, and Ablumin were 0.871 (sensitivity 81.82%; specificity 91.67%), 0.878 (sensitivity 79.55%; specificity 83.33%), 0.835 (sensitivity 99.73%; specificity 66.67%), and 0.782 (sensitivity 88.64%; specificity 58.33%), respectively. Conclusions: We found that the rHUI and SrHUI calculated using the gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI reflected a combination of remnant hepatocyte function and liver volume, and these were useful as a quantitative assessment indicator of remnant liver functional reserve and can be a better predictor of PHLF after major hepatic resection.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL