Robotic hepatectomy for benign and malignant liver tumors

Sucandy, Iswanto; Schlosser, Sydni; Bourdeau, Timothy J.; Spence, Janelle; Attili, Abdelrahman; Ross, Sharona; Rosemurgy, Alexander S.

doi:10.1007/s11701-019-00935-0

Cited by 39 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our standardized, institutional approach for robotic hepatectomy has been previously described. 12,13 Data were maintained in a secure Microsoft Excel database (Microsoft Corp, Redmon, WA). Statistical analysis was undertaken utilizing GraphPad Prism 9 software (GraphPad Software Inc., San Diego, CA, USA).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Robotic Major Hepatectomy: Influence of Age on Clinical Outcomes

Sucandy

Luberice

Rivera-Espineira

et al. 2020

The American Surgeon™

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study was undertaken to determine if age influences postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing robotic major hepatectomy. Methods Ninety-four patients undergoing robotic major hepatectomy were prospectively followed. With regression analysis, demographic data and postoperative outcomes were compared to age. Data are presented as median (mean ± SD). Results Overall, the patients were of age 62 (61 ± 13) years, body mass index (BMI) of 29 (29 ± 5.9) kg/m2, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class of 3 (3 ± 0.5). The mass size was 5 (5 ± 3.0) cm. The operative duration was 252 (276 ± 106) minutes with an estimated blood loss (EBL) of 175 (249 ± 275.9) mL. One operation was converted to “open” due to bleeding, accounting for the only intraoperative complication. Nine patients required intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Postoperatively, 7 patients had complications with no in-hospital mortalities, and a length of stay (LOS) of 4 (5 ± 2.6) days. Thirteen patients were readmitted within 30 days with 0 deaths within 30 days. A significant relationship was found between age and ASA class ( P = .001) and LOS ( P = .03). No correlation was found when comparing age to operative duration, EBL, ICU admission, ICU duration, complications, and readmission within 30 days. Conclusion For patients undergoing robotic major hepatectomy, there was no significant correlation between age and perioperative outcomes, with the exception of LOS. Increasing age is not associated with increased morbidity or perioperative mortality. With the application of innovative technology, that is, the robotic approach, surgeons should be encouraged to undertake major hepatectomy in elderly patients deemed candidates for surgery.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our standardized, institutional approach for robotic hepatectomy has been previously described. 12,13…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic Major Hepatectomy: Influence of Age on Clinical Outcomes

Sucandy

Luberice

Rivera-Espineira

et al. 2020

The American Surgeon™

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Complete liver resection ± ablation for metastatic colon and rectal cancer is the standard of care since it had been known to increase the 5-year overall survival from approximately 5%-75%. 3,4 This video showed a safe and reproducible minimally invasive parenchymal preserving liver surgery for bilobar colorectal liver metastases. This technique can be applied to other types of hepatobiliary tumors as oncologically appropriate.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Robotic Total Anatomical Left Hepatectomy and Caudate Lobe Resection With Microwave Tumor Ablation. Minimally Invasive Treatment of Bilobar Colorectal Liver Metastasis

Sucandy

Luberice

Crespo

et al. 2020

The American Surgeon™

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Komatsu et al [100] 2016 Martinez-Cecilia et al [101] 2017* Europe Jan 2005-Dec 2012 287 (225) 49 (47) n/a n/a Sotiropoulos et al [102] 2017 Greece Jan 2012-Jan 2017 42 1 1 0…”

Section: Chinamentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic vs. laparoscopic major hepatectomy

Ziogas¹,

Tohme²,

Geller³

2020

MIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of laparoscopic technology and surgical robots in hepatobiliary surgery in the 1990s and 2000s, respectively, has dramatically revolutionized the field. Even though laparoscopic and robotic major hepatectomy was slower to adopt compared to minimally-invasive minor hepatectomy, the number of major hepatectomies performed with both approaches worldwide has significantly increased and is still rising. Despite the few comparative studies between laparoscopic and robotic major hepatectomy, most studies are focused on describing the procedures or reporting the outcomes of each method, either separately, or mixed with minor hepatectomies. Based on the available data, the direct comparison between the two techniques has shown that when robotic major hepatectomy is performed by experienced hepatobiliary surgeons in high-volume centers, it can lead to similar operating times, estimated blood loss, hospital length of stay, complication and mortality rates compared to its laparoscopic counterpart. The likelihood of achieving a margin-negative resection in cancer patients, as well as long-term disease-free and overall-survival are comparable between the groups. However, broader adoption of the robotic approach might be a hurdle in low-volume centers due to the high fixed capital and annual maintenance cost of the surgical robot.

show abstract

Robotic hepatectomy for benign and malignant liver tumors

Cited by 39 publications

References 24 publications

Robotic Major Hepatectomy: Influence of Age on Clinical Outcomes

Robotic Major Hepatectomy: Influence of Age on Clinical Outcomes

Robotic Total Anatomical Left Hepatectomy and Caudate Lobe Resection With Microwave Tumor Ablation. Minimally Invasive Treatment of Bilobar Colorectal Liver Metastasis

Robotic vs. laparoscopic major hepatectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About