The evidence behind robot-assisted abdominopelvic surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Despite recent advancements, the advantage of robotic surgery over other traditional modalities still harbors academic inquiries. We seek to take a recently published high-profile narrative systematic review regarding robotic surgery and add meta-analytic tools to identify further benefits of robotic surgery. METHODS: Data from the published systematic review were extracted and meta-analysis were performed. A fixed-effect model was used when heterogeneity was not significant (Chi2 p ≥ 0.05, I2 ≤ 50%) and a random-effects model was used when heterogeneity was significant (Chi2 p < 0.05, I2 > 50%). Forest plots were generated using RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: Robotic surgery had comparable overall complications compared to laparoscopic surgery (p = 0.85), which was significantly lower compared to open surgery (odds ratio 0.68, p = 0.005). Compared to laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery had fewer open conversions (risk difference - 0.0144, p = 0.03), shorter length of stay (mean difference - 0.23 days, p = 0.01), but longer operative time (mean difference 27.98 min, p < 0.00001). Compared to open surgery, robotic surgery had less estimated blood loss (mean difference - 286.8 mL, p = 0.0003) and shorter length of stay (mean difference - 1.69 days, p = 0.001) with longer operative time (mean difference 44.05 min, p = 0.03). For experienced robotic surgeons, there were less overall intraoperative complications (risk difference - 0.02, p = 0.02) and open conversions (risk difference - 0.03, p = 0.04), with equivalent operative duration (mean difference 23.32 min, p = 0.1) compared to more traditional modalities. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that compared to laparoscopy, robotic surgery may improve hospital length of stay and open conversion rates, with added benefits in experienced robotic surgeons showing lower overall intraoperative complications and comparable operative times.

Limb Amputations in Cancer: Modern Perspectives, Outcomes, and Alternatives.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes current findings regarding limb amputation within the context of cancer, especially in osteosarcomas and other bony malignancies. We seek to answer the question of how amputation is utilized in the contemporary management of cancer as well as explore current advances in limb-sparing techniques. RECENT FINDINGS: The latest research on amputation has been sparse given its extensive history and application. However, new research has shown that rotationplasty, osseointegration, targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR), and regenerative peripheral nerve interfaces (RPNI) can provide patients with better functional outcomes than traditional amputation. While limb-sparing surgeries are the mainstay for managing musculoskeletal malignancies, limb amputation is useful as a palliative technique or as a primary treatment modality for more complex cancers. Currently, rotationplasty and osseointegration have been valuable limb-sparing techniques with osseointegration continuing to develop in recent years. TMR and RPNI have also been of interest in the modern management of patients requiring full or partial amputations, allowing for better control over myoelectric prostheses.