Short-term outcomes in robotic vs laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis surgery: a propensity score match study.
Robotic colorectal surgery
Robotic pouch surgery, Robotic IPAA surgery
Journal
Langenbeck's archives of surgery
ISSN: 1435-2451
Titre abrégé: Langenbecks Arch Surg
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9808285
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 May 2023
04 May 2023
Historique:
received:
08
11
2022
accepted:
14
04
2023
medline:
8
5
2023
pubmed:
4
5
2023
entrez:
4
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Laparoscopic ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) surgery offers improved short-term outcomes over open surgery but can be technically challenging. Robotic surgery has been increasingly used for IPAA surgery, but there is limited evidence supporting its use. This study aims to compare the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic IPAA procedures. All consecutive patients receiving laparoscopic and robotic IPAA surgery at 3 centres, from 3 countries, between 2008 and 2019 were identified from prospectively collated databases. Robotic surgery patients were propensity score matched with laparoscopic patients for gender, previous abdominal surgery, ASA grade (I, II vs III, IV) and procedure performed (proctocolectomy vs completion proctectomy). Their short-term outcomes were examined. A total of 89 patients were identified (73 laparoscopic, 16 robotic). The 16 patients that received robotic surgery were matched with 15 laparoscopic patients. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. There were no statistically significant differences in any of the investigated short-term outcomes. Length of stay trend was higher for laparoscopic surgery (9 vs 7 days, p = 0.072) CONCLUSION: Robotic IPAA surgery is safe and feasible and offers similar short-term outcomes to laparoscopic surgery. Length of stay may be lower for robotic IPAA surgery, but further larger scale studies are required in order to demonstrate this.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37140753
doi: 10.1007/s00423-023-02898-1
pii: 10.1007/s00423-023-02898-1
pmc: PMC10160174
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
175Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Ann Surg. 2012 Dec;256(6):1045-8
pubmed: 22609840
Br Med J. 1978 Jul 8;2(6130):85-8
pubmed: 667572
Colorectal Dis. 2013 Jul;15(7):e340-51
pubmed: 23560590
Colorectal Dis. 2018 Feb;20(2):O30-O38
pubmed: 29091335
Colorectal Dis. 2012 Apr;14(4):e134-56
pubmed: 22151033
Ann Surg. 2015 Jan;261(1):129-37
pubmed: 24662411
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2016 Jun;26(3):e37-40
pubmed: 27258914
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2022 Jun;407(4):1605-1612
pubmed: 35294600
Tech Coloproctol. 2019 Mar;23(3):259-266
pubmed: 30941619
Surg Endosc. 2011 Feb;25(2):521-5
pubmed: 20607559
J Gastrointest Surg. 2015 Mar;19(3):516-26
pubmed: 25394387
Surg Endosc. 2013 Jun;27(6):1887-95
pubmed: 23292566
J Robot Surg. 2022 Nov 16;:
pubmed: 36380262
Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 Nov;7(11):991-1004
pubmed: 36087608
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2016 Mar;31(3):735-6
pubmed: 26033482
J Gastrointest Surg. 2012 Mar;16(3):587-94
pubmed: 21964583
Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Apr;48(2):427-35
pubmed: 26875201
Surg Endosc. 2017 Oct;31(10):4067-4076
pubmed: 28271267
Colorectal Dis. 2017 Dec;19(12):1092-1099
pubmed: 28644545
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2013 Aug;398(6):807-16
pubmed: 23686277
Surg Innov. 2015 Aug;22(4):368-75
pubmed: 25377216
Int J Colorectal Dis. 2021 Jul;36(7):1345-1356
pubmed: 33611619
Ann Surg. 1995 Aug;222(2):120-7
pubmed: 7639579
Colorectal Dis. 2018 Jul;20(7):597-605
pubmed: 29383826
Colorectal Dis. 2016 Dec;18(12):1162-1166
pubmed: 27110866
Surg Endosc. 2021 Dec;35(12):6796-6806
pubmed: 33289055
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009 Jan 21;(1):CD006267
pubmed: 19160273
World J Surg. 2016 Apr;40(4):1010-6
pubmed: 26552907