Robotic and laparoscopic right lobe living donation compared to the open approach: A multicenter study on 1194 donor hepatectomies

Author:

Troisi Roberto Ivan1,Cho Hwui-Dong2,Giglio Mariano Cesare1ORCID,Rhu Jinsoo3,Cho Jai Young4,Sasaki Kazuanri5,Han Dai Hoon6,Kwon Choon Hyuck David5ORCID,Han Ho-Seong4ORCID,Chen Po-Da7,Wu Yao-Ming7,Choi Gi Hong6,Choi Gyu Sung3,Kim Ki-Hun2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Division of HPB, Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery, Transplantation Service, Federico II University Hospital, Naples, Italy

2. Division of Hepatobiliary Surgery and Liver Transplantation, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

3. Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea

4. Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul, Korea

5. Department of General Surgery, Digestive Disease, and Surgery Institute, Lerner College of Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA

6. Department of Surgery, Division of Hepatobiliary Pancreatic Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea

7. Department of Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei

Abstract

Due to the success of minimally invasive liver surgery, laparoscopic and robotic minimally invasive donor hepatectomies (MIDH) are increasingly performed worldwide. We conducted a retrospective, multicentre, propensity score–matched analysis on right lobe MIDH by comparing the robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches to assess the feasibility, safety, and early outcomes of MIDHs. From January 2016 until December 2020, 1194 donors underwent a right donor hepatectomy performed with a robotic (n = 92), laparoscopic (n = 306), and open approach (n = 796) at 6 high-volume centers. Donor and recipients were matched for different variables using propensity score matching (1:1:2). Donor outcomes were recorded, and postoperative pain was measured through a visual analog scale. Recipients’ outcomes were also analyzed. Ninety-two donors undergoing robotic surgery were matched and compared to 92 and 184 donors undergoing laparoscopic and open surgery, respectively. Conversions to open surgery occurred during 1 (1.1%) robotic and 2 (2.2%) laparoscopic procedures. Robotic procedures had a longer operative time (493 ± 96 min) compared to laparoscopic and open procedures (347 ± 120 and 358 ± 95 min; p < 0.001) but were associated with reduced donor blood losses (p < 0.001). No differences were observed in overall and major complications (≥ IIIa). Robotic hepatectomy donors had significantly less pain compared to the 2 other groups (p < 0.001). Fifty recipients of robotic-procured grafts were matched to 50 and 100 recipients of laparoscopic and open surgery procured grafts, respectively. No differences were observed in terms of postoperative complications, and recipients’ survival was similar (p=0.455). In very few high-volume centers, robotic right lobe procurement has shown to be a safe procedure. Despite an increased operative and the first warm ischemia times, this approach is associated with reduced intraoperative blood losses and pain compared to the laparoscopic and open approaches. Further data are needed to confirm it as a valuable option for the laparoscopic approach in MIDH.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Transplantation,Hepatology,Surgery

Reference38 articles.

1. Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: A report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka;Wakabayashi;Ann Surg,2015

2. The Southampton guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery: From indication to implementation;Abu-Hilal;Ann Surg,2018

3. Laparoscopic versus open resection for colorectal liver metastases;Fretland;Ann Surg,2018

4. The inflammatory response to stress and angiogenesis in liver resection for colorectal liver metastases: A randomized controlled trial comparing open versus laparoscopic approach;Kasai;Acta Chir Bel,2018

5. Comparative short-term benefits of laparoscopic liver resections: 9000 cases and climbing;Ciria;Ann Surg,2016

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3