PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Surgery is currently the only effective treatment for retroperitoneal tumors that do not involve any specific organ. The use of robots for removing both benign and malignant retroperitoneal tumors is considered safe and feasible. However, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether robotic retroperitoneal tumor resection (RMBRs) is superior to open retroperitoneal malignant resection (OMBRs). This study compares the short-term outcomes of robotic excision of benign and malignant retroperitoneal tumors with open excision of the same-sized tumors.
METHODS: The study compared demographics and outcomes of patients who underwent robotic resection (n = 54) vs open resection (n = 54) of retroperitoneal tumors between March 2018 and December 2022. A 1:1 matching analysis was conducted to ensure a fair comparison.
RESULTS: The study found that RBMRs resulted in reduced operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBM), and postoperative hospital stay (PSH) when compared to OBMRs. Additionally, RBMRs reduced EBL, PHS, and OT for patients with malignant tumor involvement in major vessels. No significant differences were found in tumor size, blood transfusion rate, and morbidity rate between the RBMRs and OBMRs groups.
CONCLUSIONS: When comparing RMBRs to OMBRs, it was observed that RMBR was associated with lower (EBL), shorter postoperative hospital stays (PHS), and reduced operative time (OT) in a specific group of patients with both benign and malignant tumors.
METHODS: The study compared demographics and outcomes of patients who underwent robotic resection (n = 54) vs open resection (n = 54) of retroperitoneal tumors between March 2018 and December 2022. A 1:1 matching analysis was conducted to ensure a fair comparison.
RESULTS: The study found that RBMRs resulted in reduced operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBM), and postoperative hospital stay (PSH) when compared to OBMRs. Additionally, RBMRs reduced EBL, PHS, and OT for patients with malignant tumor involvement in major vessels. No significant differences were found in tumor size, blood transfusion rate, and morbidity rate between the RBMRs and OBMRs groups.
CONCLUSIONS: When comparing RMBRs to OMBRs, it was observed that RMBR was associated with lower (EBL), shorter postoperative hospital stays (PHS), and reduced operative time (OT) in a specific group of patients with both benign and malignant tumors.
摘要：
背景：手术是目前对不涉及任何特定器官的腹膜后肿瘤的唯一有效治疗方法。使用机器人切除良性和恶性腹膜后肿瘤被认为是安全可行的。然而,没有足够的证据来确定机器人腹膜后肿瘤切除术(RMBRs)是否优于开放式腹膜后恶性切除术(OMBRs).这项研究比较了机器人切除良性和恶性腹膜后肿瘤与开放切除相同大小肿瘤的短期结果。
方法：该研究比较了2018年3月至2022年12月期间接受机器人切除术（n=54）和开放切除术（n=54）的腹膜后肿瘤患者的人口统计学和结局。进行1:1匹配分析以确保公平的比较。
结果：研究发现RBMR导致手术时间（OT）减少，估计失血量（EBM），与OBMR相比，术后住院时间（PSH）。此外,RBMR降低了EBL，PHS,恶性肿瘤累及主要血管的患者为OT。肿瘤大小无明显差异，输血率,RBMR组和OBMR组之间的发病率。
结论：将RMBR与OMBR进行比较时，据观察，人民币R与较低(EBL)相关，术后住院时间短（PHS），并减少了特定组的良性和恶性肿瘤患者的手术时间（OT）。
方法：该研究比较了2018年3月至2022年12月期间接受机器人切除术（n=54）和开放切除术（n=54）的腹膜后肿瘤患者的人口统计学和结局。进行1:1匹配分析以确保公平的比较。
结果：研究发现RBMR导致手术时间（OT）减少，估计失血量（EBM），与OBMR相比，术后住院时间（PSH）。此外,RBMR降低了EBL，PHS,恶性肿瘤累及主要血管的患者为OT。肿瘤大小无明显差异，输血率,RBMR组和OBMR组之间的发病率。
结论：将RMBR与OMBR进行比较时，据观察，人民币R与较低(EBL)相关，术后住院时间短（PHS），并减少了特定组的良性和恶性肿瘤患者的手术时间（OT）。
