1
|
Papadopoulou K, Dorovinis P, Kykalos S, Schizas D, Stamopoulos P, Tsourouflis G, Dimitroulis D, Nikiteas N. Short-Term Outcomes After Robotic Versus Open Liver Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Cancer 2023; 54:237-246. [PMID: 35199298 DOI: 10.1007/s12029-022-00810-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 02/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robotic liver surgery is a novel technique expanding the field of minimally invasive approaches. An increasing number of studies assess the outcomes of robotic liver resections (RLR). The aim of our meta-analysis is to provide an up-to-date comparison of RLR versus open liver resections (OLR), evaluating its safety and efficacy. MATERIALS AND METHODS A systematic search of MEDLINE, Scopus, Google Scholar, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov for articles published from January 2000 until January 2022 was undertaken. RESULTS Thirteen non-randomized retrospective and one prospective clinical study enlisting 1801 patients met our inclusion criteria, with 640 patients undergoing RLR and 1161 undergoing OLR. RLR resulted in significantly lower overall morbidity (p < 0.001), shorter length of hospital stay (p = 0.002), and less intraoperative blood loss (p < 0.001). Operative time was found to be significantly higher in the RLR group (p < 0.001). Blood transfusion requirements, R0 resection, and mortality rates presented no difference among the two groups. The cumulative rate of conversion was 5% in the RLR group. CONCLUSION The increasing experience in the implementation of the robot will undoubtedly generate more prospective randomized studies, necessary to assess its potential superiority over the traditional open approach, in a variety of hepatic lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Konstantina Papadopoulou
- Laboratory of Experimental Surgery and Surgical Research, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Panagiotis Dorovinis
- Laboratory of Experimental Surgery and Surgical Research, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Medical School, Laiko General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece.
| | - Stylianos Kykalos
- Laboratory of Experimental Surgery and Surgical Research, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Medical School, Laiko General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitrios Schizas
- Laboratory of Experimental Surgery and Surgical Research, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
- 1st Department of Surgery, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Paraskevas Stamopoulos
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Medical School, Laiko General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Gerasimos Tsourouflis
- Laboratory of Experimental Surgery and Surgical Research, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Medical School, Laiko General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitrios Dimitroulis
- Laboratory of Experimental Surgery and Surgical Research, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Medical School, Laiko General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Nikolaos Nikiteas
- Laboratory of Experimental Surgery and Surgical Research, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Medical School, Laiko General Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Machairas N, Dorovinis P, Kykalos S, Stamopoulos P, Schizas D, Zoe G, Terra A, Nikiteas N. Simultaneous robotic-assisted resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: a systematic review. J Robot Surg 2021; 15:841-848. [PMID: 33598830 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-021-01213-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2020] [Accepted: 02/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Simultaneous resections of primary colorectal cancer (CRC) and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) have emerged as safe and efficient procedures for selected patients. Besides the traditional open approach for simultaneous resections, similar outcomes have been reported for minimally invasive approaches. Over the past years, a number of studies have sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of simultaneous robotic-assisted resections (SRAR) for patients with synchronous CRC and CRLM. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the safety, technical feasibility and outcomes of SRAR of the primary CRC and CRLM. A comprehensive review of the literature was undertaken. Nine studies comprising a total of 29 patients (16 males) who underwent SRAR were considered eligible for inclusion. The primary tumor site was the rectum in 22 (76%) patients and the colon in 7 (24%) patients. A minor liver resection was performed in the majority of the cases (n = 24; 82%). The median operative time and estimated blood loss were 399.5 min (range 300-682) and 274 ml (range 10-780 ml), respectively. No cases of conversion to open were reported. The median LOS was 7 days (range 2-28 days). All patients reportedly underwent R0 resection. Overall and major morbidity rates were 38% and 7%, respectively, while no perioperative deaths were reported. Despite the limited number of studies, SRAR seems to be a safe and efficient minimally invasive approach for highly selected patients always implemented in the context of multidisciplinary patient management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikolaos Machairas
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Nationals and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General Hospital Laiko, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece.
| | - Panagiotis Dorovinis
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Nationals and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General Hospital Laiko, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Stylianos Kykalos
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Nationals and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General Hospital Laiko, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Paraskevas Stamopoulos
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Nationals and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General Hospital Laiko, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Dimitrios Schizas
- 1st Department of Surgery, Nationals and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General Hospital Laiko, Athens, Greece
| | - Garoufalia Zoe
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Nationals and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General Hospital Laiko, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Alexis Terra
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Nationals and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General Hospital Laiko, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| | - Nikolaos Nikiteas
- 2nd Department of Propaedeutic Surgery, Nationals and Kapodistrian University of Athens, General Hospital Laiko, Ag. Thoma 17, 11527, Athens, Greece
| |
Collapse
|