4.4 Article

Laparoscopic robot-assisted resection of tumors located in posterosuperior liver segments

期刊

UPDATES IN SURGERY
卷 67, 期 2, 页码 177-183

出版社

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s13304-015-0304-5

关键词

Robot; da Vinci; Liver; Posterosuperior segments; Segmentectomy; Sub-segmentectomy

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laparoscopic resection of liver tumors located in the posterosuperior segments is a challenging operation that could be facilitated by robotic assistance. Laparoscopic resection of 12 tumors located in posterosuperior segments (IVa: 1; VII: 5; VIII: 6) was carried out under robotic assistance. All patients had a single tumor nodule. Data were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Surgery required a mean of 260.4 min (115-430) and was completed laparoscopically in all but one patient, who required conversion to mini-laparotomy because of intolerance of pneumoperitoneum (8.3 %). Mean estimated blood loss was 252.7 ml (50-600), making transfusion necessary in 3 patients (25.0 %). Post-operative complications occurred in 4 patients (33.3 %), being of Clavien-Dindo grade II in 3 patients (25.0 %) and Clavien-Dindo grade IV in 1 patient (8.3 %). Reoperation was required in 1 patient, who subsequently had a long hospital stay, because of decompensated cirrhosis. Median length of hospital stay was 8.5 days (7-96). No patient was readmitted. Pathology showed hepatocellular carcinoma in 7 patients (58.3 %), liver metastasis in 2 patients (16.6 %), and hepatic adenoma, focal nodular hyperplasia, and hemangioma in one patient each (8.3 %). All patients had a margin negative resection. After a mean follow-up period of 21.4 months (+/- 24.4), no patient with malignant histology developed recurrence. Our initial experience confirms that laparoscopic robot-assisted resection of tumors located in the posterosuperior segments is feasible. Further experience is needed before final conclusions can be drawn and meaningful comparison with other surgical techniques becomes possible.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据