首页> 外文期刊>Journal of robotic surgery >An analysis of the impact of previous laparoscopic hysterectomy experience on the learning curve for robotic hysterectomy
【24h】

An analysis of the impact of previous laparoscopic hysterectomy experience on the learning curve for robotic hysterectomy

机译:以往腹腔镜子宫切除术经验对机器人子宫切除术学习曲线的影响分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

To analyze and compare the safety and perioperative outcomes of newly trained robotic surgeons with previous laparoscopic hysterectomy experience (TLH Exp) and those without previous laparoscopic hysterectomy experience (Non-TLH Exp). The purpose is to determine the effect of previous advanced laparoscopic skills on the performance in robotic assisted laparoscopic surgery. We will also compare the perioperative outcomes between the total laparoscopic hysterectomies (TLH), and robotic assisted laparoscopic hysterectomies (RALH) of a single experienced (TLH Exp) robotic surgeon. The purpose is to determine benefits and/or risks, if any, of one approach over the other in the hands of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon. Prospective data were collected on the first consecutive series of RALH performed by (TLH Exp) and (Non-TLH Exp) surgeons, with perioperative outcomes and morbidity being evaluated. In addition, retrsopective data were collected on a consecutive series of patients in a TLH group and compared with the outcomes in the robotic group for benign hysterectomies by the same surgeon. The parameters that were analyzed for associations with these two groups were estimated blood loss (EBL), Hb drop, length of hospital stay (LOS), procedure time, pain medication use, and complications. The (TLH Exp) group had 64 patients, and the (Non-TLH Exp) group had 72 patients. When comparing patients in the (TLH Exp) group with patients in (Non-TLH Exp) group, the mean age was 44 and 45 (P = 0.8), mean BMI was 27.7 and 29.5 kg/m2 (P = 0.2), mean procedure time was 121 and 174 min (P 0.05), mean console time was 70 and 119 min (P 0.05), mean EBL was 64 and 84 ml (P = 0.3), with a Hb drop 1.7 and 1.33 (P = 0.2), uterine weight was 192 and 205 gms (P = 0.7), and length of stay was 1.07 and 1.33 days (P = 0.2), respectively. The (TLH Exp) surgeons had a lower OR, procedure and console time, but a higher hemoglobin drop, with no difference in EBL. There were no operative deaths, or conversions in either group. Morbidity occurred in two patients (3 %) in each group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups. In the (TLH Exp) group it included a blood transfusion and a readmission for a postoperative ileus. In the (Non-TLH Exp), the complications included a blood transfusion and a return to the OR for a vaginal cuff dehiscence. When comparing a single (TLH Exp) surgeon's own TLH versus RALH, there were 64 RALH and 49 TLH cases. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean procedure time 121.1 versus 88.8 min (P 0.05), mean Hb drop 1.7 versus 2.3 (P 0.05), and mean EBL 64.2 versus 158 ml (P 0.05), respectively. The RALH group had a longer procedure time, but lower Hb drop, and less estimated blood loss. There were no operative deaths, or conversions in either group. Morbidity occurred in 2 patients in the robotic group, and included one blood transfusion, and one postoperative ileus. There were no complications noted in the laparoscopic hysterectomy group. Previous advanced laparoscopic skills appear to only significantly impact the length of the procedure, but not other variables. Robotic surgery may level the playing field between the basic and advanced laparoscopic surgeon for robotic assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. In comparing the outcomes of RALH versus TLH by a single surgeon, the robotic assistance appeared to lengthen the procedure time, but reduce the amount of blood loss. Robotic surgery may offer a benefit of reduced blood loss at the expense of longer operating time. Similar studies including different surgeons are needed to validate these points, and thereby determine the risk-benefit balance between the two approaches for benign simple hysterectomies.
机译:分析和比较新培训的机器人手术医生的安全性和围手术期结局,这些医生具有先前的腹腔镜子宫切除术经验(TLH Exp)和没有腹腔镜子宫切除术经验(Non-TLH Exp)。目的是确定以前的高级腹腔镜检查技术对机器人辅助腹腔镜手术性能的影响。我们还将比较单个经验丰富的(TLH Exp)机器人外科医生的总腹腔镜子宫切除术(TLH)与机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术(RALH)的围手术期结果。目的是在经验丰富的腹腔镜外科医生手中确定一种方法相对于另一种方法的收益和/或风险(如果有)。收集了(TLH Exp)和(Non-TLH Exp)外科医生进行的RALH连续第一个系列的前瞻性数据,并评估了围手术期的结局和发病率。此外,在TLH组中收集了一系列患者的回顾性数据,并与同一位外科医生在机器人组中对良性子宫切除术的结果进行了比较。分析与这两组相关性的参数是失血量(EBL),血红蛋白下降,住院时间(LOS),手术时间,止痛药使用和并发症。 (TLH Exp)组有64例患者,(Non-TLH Exp)组有72例患者。将(TLH Exp)组的患者与(Non-TLH Exp)组的患者进行比较时,平均年龄为44岁和45岁(P = 0.8),平均BMI为27.7和29.5 kg / m2(P = 0.2),平均程序时间为121和174分钟(P <0.05),平均控制台时间为70和119分钟(P <0.05),平均EBL为64和84 ml(P = 0.3),Hb下降为1.7和1.33(P =子宫重量为192和205克(P = 0.7),住院天数分别为1.07天和1.33天(P = 0.2)。 (TLH Exp)外科医生的OR,操作和控制台时间较短,但血红蛋白下降较高,EBL无差异。两组均无手术死亡或conversion依。每组中有2名患者(3%)发生了发病,两组之间无统计学差异。在(TLH Exp)组中,包括输血和术后肠梗阻的再入院。在(Non-TLH Exp)中,并发症包括输血和阴道袖口裂开回到手术室。比较单个(TLH Exp)外科医生自己的TLH与RALH时,有64例RALH和49例TLH。平均手术时间分别为121.1和88.8分钟(P <0.05),平均Hb下降1.7和2.3(P <0.05),平均EBL 64.2和158 ml(P <0.05)有统计学差异。 RALH组的手术时间较长,但Hb下降较低,估计失血较少。两组均无手术死亡或conversion依。机器人组中有2例患者发生了疾病,其中包括1例输血和1例术后肠梗阻。腹腔镜子宫切除术组未发现并发症。以前的高级腹腔镜检查技巧似乎仅对手术时间长短有重大影响,而对其他变量没有影响。机器人外科手术可以为基础的腹腔镜子宫切除术和高级腹腔镜外科手术医生之间的公平竞争提供条件。在比较单个外科医生对RALH与TLH的结果时,机器人辅助似乎可以延长手术时间,但可以减少失血量。机器人手术的好处可能是减少失血量,但要花费更长的手术时间。需要进行包括不同外科医生在内的类似研究来验证这些观点,从而确定良性单纯性子宫切除术在两种方法之间的风险-收益平衡。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号