Short-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for patients presenting with suspected gallbladder cancer: Report of 8 cases

Zeng, Gerald Joseph; Teo, Nan Zun; Goh, Brian K. P.

doi:10.4103/jmas.jmas_229_17

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 1 - 3 Laparoscopic surgery confers many benefits such as smaller surgical scars, reduced blood loss, and faster recovery times. 4 - 6 Nonetheless, its widespread adoption remains restricted due to the technically demanding nature of the MIDP especially with the straight rigid instruments used in conventional laparoscopy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A single institution experience with robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies

Lee

Kabir

Koh

et al. 2020

Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Backgrounds/Aims: This study aims to describe our experience with minimally-invasive distal pancreatectomies, with emphasis on the comparison between robotic distal pancreatectomy (RDP) and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP). Methods: Retrospective review of 102 consecutive RDP and LDP from 2006 to 2019 was performed. Results: There were 27 and 75 patients who underwent RDP and LDP, respectively. There were 12 (11.8%) open conversions and 16 (15.7%) patients had major (＞grade 2) morbidities. Patients who underwent RDP had significantly higher rates of splenic preservation (44.4% vs. 13.3%, p=0.002), higher rates of splenic-vessel preservation (40.7% vs. 9.3%, p=0.001), higher median difficulty score (5 vs. 3, p=0.002) but longer operation time (385 vs. 245 minutes, p＜0.001). The rate of open conversion tended to be lower with RDP (3.7% vs. 14.7%, p=0.175). Conclusions: In our institution practice, both RDP and LDP were safe and effective. The use of RDP appeared to be complementary to LDP, allowing us to perform more difficult procedures with comparable postoperative outcomes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A single institution experience with robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies

Lee

Kabir

Koh

et al. 2020

Ann Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…32 Subsequent reports predominantly still combined outcomes for isolated robotic-assisted approaches with other minimally invasive techniques. [33][34][35] Georgakis et al reported the first series of robotic resections in a cohort of patients from the United States (UPMC health care system, Pittsburgh) comparing 17 MIS resections including 14 robotic-assisted to 17 open resections with comparable operative and postoperative outcomes; however, a robotspecific comparison was not included in the analysis. 36 In 2019, Goel et al reported the first dedicated comparison of 27 robotic radical cholecystectomies to a control of open resections in patients treated at Tata Memorial Center in Mubai, India.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Robotic Resection of Gallbladder Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Comparative Study to Open Resection

Tschuor

Pickens

Isenberg

et al. 2021

The American Surgeon™

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Minimally invasive surgery is gaining support for resection of gallbladder cancer (GBC). This study aims to compare operative and early outcomes of robotic resection (RR) to open resection (OR) from a single institution performing a high volume of robotic HPB surgery. Methods Twenty patients with GBC underwent RR from January 2013 to August 2019. Outcomes were compared to a historical control of 23 patients with OR. Radical cholecystectomy for suspected GBC and completion operations for incidental GBC after routine cholecystectomy were both included. Results Robotic resection had lower blood loss compared to OR (150 vs 350 mL, P = .002) and shorter postoperative length of stay (2.5 vs 6 days, P < .001), while median operative time was similar (193 vs 208 min, P = .604). There were no statistical differences in 30-day major complications or readmissions. No 30-day mortalities occurred. There was no statistical difference in survival trend ( P = .438) or median lymph node harvest (5 vs 3, P = .189) for RR compared to OR. Conclusion Robotic resection of GBC is safe and efficient, with lower length of hospital stay and blood loss compared to OR. Technical benefits of robotic-assisted surgery may prove advantageous though larger studies are still needed.

show abstract

Safety of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease: a systematic review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Short-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for patients presenting with suspected gallbladder cancer: Report of 8 cases

Cited by 11 publications

References 30 publications

A single institution experience with robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies

A single institution experience with robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies

Robotic Resection of Gallbladder Cancer: A Single-Center Retrospective Comparative Study to Open Resection

Safety of single-incision robotic cholecystectomy for benign gallbladder disease: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About