Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Surg Endosc. 2016 Mar;30(3):1004-13. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4284-9. Epub 2015 Jun 27.

Robotic versus laparoscopic resections of posterosuperior segments of the liver: a propensity score-matched comparison.

Author information

1
Department. of Gastroenterology and Transplantation Surgery, Ospedali Riuniti Ancona, Ancona, Italy.
2
Department. of General and Hepato-Biliary Surgery, Liver Transplantation Service, Ghent University Hospital Medical School, De Pintelaan 185, 2K12 IC, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
3
Division. of General, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, General Hospital of Spoleto, Spoleto, Italy.
4
Department. of General and Hepato-Biliary Surgery, Liver Transplantation Service, Ghent University Hospital Medical School, De Pintelaan 185, 2K12 IC, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. roberto.troisi@ugent.be.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Open parenchymal-preserving resection is the current standard of care for lesions in the posterosuperior liver segments. Laparoscopy and robot-assisted surgery are emergent surgical approaches for liver resections, even in posteriorly located lesions. The objective of this study was to compare robot-assisted to laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections for lesions located in segments 7, 8, 4a, and 1.

METHODS:

Demographics, comorbidities, clinicopathologic characteristics, surgical treatments, and outcomes from patients who underwent laparoscopic and robot-assisted liver resection in two centers for lesions in the posterosuperior segments between June 2008 and February 2014 were reviewed. A 1:2 matched propensity score analysis was performed by individually matching patients in the robotic cohort to patients in the laparoscopic cohort based on demographics, comorbidities, performance status, tumor stage, location, and type of resection.

RESULTS:

Thirty-six patients who underwent robot-assisted liver resection were matched with 72 patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection. Matched patients displayed no significant differences in postoperative outcomes as measured by blood loss, hospital stay, R0 negative margin rate, and mortality. The overall morbidity according to the comprehensive complication index was also similar (34.6 ± 33 vs. 18.4 ± 11.3, respectively, for robotic and laparoscopic approach, p = 0.11). Patients undergoing robotic liver surgery had significantly longer inflow occlusion time (77 vs. 25 min, p = 0.001) as compared with their laparoscopic counterparts.

CONCLUSIONS:

Although number and severity of complications in the robotic group appears to be higher, robotic and laparoscopic parenchymal-preserving liver resections in the posterosuperior segments display similar safety and feasibility.

KEYWORDS:

Laparoscopic liver resections; Posterosuperior segments; Propensity score; Robotic liver resections

PMID:
26123328
DOI:
10.1007/s00464-015-4284-9
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center