Top

Published in:

01-02-2017 | Original Scientific Report

Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Left Lateral Sectionectomy: Analysis of Surgical Outcomes and Costs by a Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study

Authors: Chady Salloum, Chetana Lim, Eylon Lahat, Concepcion Gomez I. Gavara, Eric Levesque, Philippe Compagnon, Daniel Azoulay

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 2/2017

Abstract

Background

After comparing with open approach, left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) has become standard in terms of short-term outcomes without jeopardizing long-term survival when performed for malignancy. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term and economic outcomes of laparoscopic (L-LLS) and robotic (R-LLS) LLS.

Methods

All consecutive patients who underwent L-LLS or R-LLS from 1997 to 2014 were analyzed. Short-term and economic outcomes were compared between the two groups using a propensity score matching (PSM).

Results

Ninety-six consecutive cases of LLS were performed using the laparoscopic (80 cases; 83 %) or robotic (16 cases; 17 %) approach. The two groups were similar for operative and surgical outcomes. Operation time was similar in the R-LLS compared to the L-LLS group (190 vs. 162 min; p = 0.10). Perioperative costs were higher (1457 € vs. 576 €; p < 0.0001) in the R-LLS group than in the L-LLS group; however, postoperative costs were similar between the two groups (4065 € in the R-LLS group vs. 5459 € in the L-LLS group; p = 0.30). Total costs were similar between the two groups (5522 € in the R-LLS group vs. 6035€ in the L-LLS group; p = 0.70). The PSM included 14 patients for each group. Surgical and economic outcomes remained similar after PSM, except for total operating time which was significantly longer in the R-LLS group than in the L-LLS group.

Conclusions

Even if feasible and safe, the robotic approach does not seem so far to offer additional benefit in terms of intra- and postoperative outcomes over the laparoscopic approach in patients requiring LLS. Total costs associated with the R-LLS group are not greater than that associated with the L-LLS group, which is the standard of care so far.

Cleary SP, Han HS, Yamamoto M et al (2016) The comparative costs of laparoscopic and open liver resection: a report for the 2nd international consensus conference on laparoscopic liver resection. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-016-4801-5

Mirnezami R, Mirnezami AH, Chandrakumaran K et al (2011) Short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic and open hepatic resection: systematic review and meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 13(5):295–308CrossRef

Nguyen KT, Laurent A, Dagher I et al (2009) Minimally invasive liver resection for metastatic colorectal cancer: a multi-institutional, international report of safety, feasibility, and early outcomes. Ann Surg 250(5):842–848CrossRefPubMed

Nota CL, Rinkes IH, Molenaar IQ et al (2016) Robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection: a systematic review and pooled analysis of minor and major hepatectomies. HPB (Oxford) 18(2):113–120CrossRef

Montalti R, Berardi G, Patriti A et al (2015) Outcomes of robotic vs laparoscopic hepatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 21(27):8441–8451CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Qiu J, Chen S, Chengyou D (2015) A systematic review of robotic-assisted liver resection and meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatic neoplasms. Surg Endosc 30(3):862–875CrossRefPubMed

Lee MKT, Gao F, Strasberg SM (2014) Perceived complexity of various liver resections: results of a survey of experts with development of a complexity score and classification. J Am Coll Surg 220(1):64–69CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Buell JF, Cherqui D, Geller DA et al (2009) The international position on laparoscopic liver surgery: the Louisville Statement, 2008. Ann Surg 250(5):825–830CrossRefPubMed

Wakabayashi G, Cherqui D, Geller DA et al (2015) Recommendations for laparoscopic liver resection: a report from the second international consensus conference held in Morioka. Ann Surg 261(4):619–629PubMed

10.

Ratti F, Barkhatov LI, Tomassini F et al (2015) Learning curve of self-taught laparoscopic liver surgeons in left lateral sectionectomy: results from an international multi-institutional analysis on 245 cases. Surg Endosc 30(8):3618–3629

11.

Berber E, Akyildiz HY, Aucejo F et al (2010) Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of liver tumours. HPB (Oxford) 12(8):583–586CrossRef

12.

Ji WB, Wang HG, Zhao ZM et al (2011) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic anatomic hepatectomy in China: initial experience. Ann Surg 253(2):342–348CrossRefPubMed

13.

Chan OC, Tang CN, Lai EC et al (2011) Robotic hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: a cohort study. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 18(4):471–480CrossRefPubMed

14.

Kandil E, Noureldine SI, Saggi B, Buell JF (2013) Robotic liver resection: initial experience with three-arm robotic and single-port robotic technique. JSLS 17(1):56–62CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Lai EC, Yang GP, Tang CN (2013) Robot-assisted laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: short-term outcome. Am J Surg 205(6):697–702CrossRefPubMed

16.

Packiam V, Bartlett DL, Tohme S et al (2012) Minimally invasive liver resection: robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy. J Gastrointest Surg 16(12):2233–2238CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Tranchart H, Ceribelli C, Ferretti S et al (2014) Traditional versus robot-assisted full laparoscopic liver resection: a matched-pair comparative study. World J Surg 38(11):2904–2909CrossRefPubMed

18.

Tsung A, Geller DA, Sukato DC et al (2014) Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy: a matched comparison. Ann Surg 259(3):549–555CrossRefPubMed

19.

Yu YD, Kim KH, Jung DH et al (2014) Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection: a comparative study from a single center. Langenbecks Arch Surg 399(8):1039–1045CrossRefPubMed

20.

Casciola L, Patriti A, Ceccarelli G et al (2011) Robot-assisted parenchymal-sparing liver surgery including lesions located in the posterosuperior segments. Surg Endosc 25(12):3815–3824CrossRefPubMed

21.

Spampinato MG, Coratti A, Bianco L et al (2014) Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted major hepatectomies: an Italian multi-institutional comparative study. Surg Endosc 28(10):2973–2979CrossRefPubMed

22.

Yu YD, Kim KH, Jung DH et al (2014) Robotic versus laparoscopic liver resection: a comparative study from a single center. Langenbeck’s Arch Surg 399(8):1039–1045CrossRef

23.

Kim JK, Park JS, Han DH et al (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy of liver. Surg Endosc. doi:10.1007/s00464-016-4803-3

24.

Lee KF, Cheung YS, Chong CC et al (2015) Laparoscopic and robotic hepatectomy: experience from a single centre. ANZ J Surg 86(3):122–126CrossRefPubMed

25.

Cherqui D, Husson E, Hammoud R et al (2000) Laparoscopic liver resections: a feasibility study in 30 patients. Ann Surg 232(6):753–762CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

26.

Cherqui D (2003) Laparoscopic liver resection. Br J Surg 90(6):644–646CrossRefPubMed

27.

Lesurtel M, Cherqui D, Laurent A et al (2003) Laparoscopic versus open left lateral hepatic lobectomy: a case-control study. J Am Coll Surg 196(2):236–242CrossRefPubMed

28.

Chang S, Laurent A, Tayar C et al (2007) Laparoscopy as a routine approach for left lateral sectionectomy. Br J Surg 94(1):58–63CrossRefPubMed

29.

Bryant R, Laurent A, Tayar C, Cherqui D (2009) Laparoscopic liver resection-understanding its role in current practice: the Henri Mondor Hospital experience. Ann Surg 250(1):103–111CrossRefPubMed

30.

Salloum C, Lim C, Azoulay D (2015) Robot-assisted laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy for benign and malignant liver tumors. J Visc Surg 152(6):373–378CrossRefPubMed

31.

Tsung A, Geller DA, Sukato DC et al (2013) Robotic versus laparoscopic hepatectomy: a matched comparison. Ann Surg 259(3):549–555CrossRef

32.

de’Angelis N, Alghamdi S, Renda A et al (2015) Initial experience of robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy for transverse colon cancer: a matched case-control study. World J Surg Oncol 13:295CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Balzan S, Belghiti J, Farges O et al (2005) The “50-50 criteria” on postoperative day 5: an accurate predictor of liver failure and death after hepatectomy. Ann Surg 242(6):824–828, discussion 828–829

34.

Ishak K, Baptista A, Bianchi L et al (1995) Histological grading and staging of chronic hepatitis. J Hepatol 22(6):696–699CrossRefPubMed

35.

Lonjon G, Boutron I, Trinquart L et al (2013) Comparison of treatment effect estimates from prospective nonrandomized studies with propensity score analysis and randomized controlled trials of surgical procedures. Ann Surg 259(1):18–25CrossRef

36.

Ocuin LM, Tsung A (2015) Robotic liver resection for malignancy: current status, oncologic outcomes, comparison to laparoscopy, and future applications. J Surg Oncol 112(3):295–301CrossRefPubMed

37.

Fernandes E, Elli E, Giulianotti P (2014) The role of the dual console in robotic surgical training. Surgery 155(1):1–4CrossRefPubMed

38.

Scatton O, Katsanos G, Boillot O et al (2014) Pure laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy in living donors: from innovation to development in France. Ann Surg 261(3):506–512CrossRef

39.

Aikawa M, Miyazawa M, Okamoto K et al (2012) Single-port laparoscopic hepatectomy: technique, safety, and feasibility in a clinical case series. Surg Endosc 26(6):1696–1701CrossRefPubMed

40.

Shetty GS, You YK, Choi HJ et al (2012) Extending the limitations of liver surgery: outcomes of initial human experience in a high-volume center performing single-port laparoscopic liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Surg Endosc 26(6):1602–1608CrossRefPubMed

41.

Gavriilidis P, Lim C, Menahem B et al (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy—the first meta-analysis. HPB (Oxford) 18(7):567–574CrossRef

42.

Valente R, Azoulay D (2015) Is multimodality the “Third Way” in the challenge robot versus laparoscopy for liver resections? Ann Surg. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000000922

43.

Giulianotti PC, Bianco FM, Daskalaki D et al (2016) Robotic liver surgery: technical aspects and review of the literature. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 5(4):311–321CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Salloum C, Lim C, Fuentes L et al (2016) Fusion of information from 3D printing and surgical robot: an innovative minimally technique illustrated by the resection of a large celiac trunk aneurysm. World J Surg 40(1):245–247CrossRefPubMed

45.

Alaraimi B, El Bakbak W, Sarker S et al (2014) A randomized prospective study comparing acquisition of laparoscopic skills in three-dimensional (3D) vs. two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopy. World J Surg 38(11):2746–2752CrossRefPubMed

Title: Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Left Lateral Sectionectomy: Analysis of Surgical Outcomes and Costs by a Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study
Authors: Chady Salloum
Chetana Lim
Eylon Lahat
Concepcion Gomez I. Gavara
Eric Levesque
Philippe Compagnon
Daniel Azoulay
Publication date: 01-02-2017
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: World Journal of Surgery / Issue 2/2017
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-016-3736-2

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Robotic-Assisted Versus Laparoscopic Left Lateral Sectionectomy: Analysis of Surgical Outcomes and Costs by a Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 2/2017

Evidence-Based Management of Pain After Excisional Haemorrhoidectomy Surgery: A PROSPECT Review Update

Treatment Access and Survival Amongst British Asians with Pancreatic Cancer

Handcrafted Vacuum-Assisted Device for Skin Ulcers Treatment Versus Traditional Therapy, Randomized Controlled Trial

The Presence of Serum p53 Antibody Predicts the Pathological Tumor Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with Docetaxel, Cisplatin and Fluorouracil (DCF) in Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Sublobar Resection Margin Width Does Not Affect Recurrence of Clinical N0 Non-small Cell Lung Cancer Presenting as GGO-Predominant Nodule of 3 cm or Less

Prognostic Relevance of the Timing of Initiating and the Completion of Adjuvant Therapy in Patients with Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma