Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic major liver resection: analysis of outcomes from a single center

  • Mike Fruscione
  • , Ryan Pickens
  • , Erin H. Baker
  • , Allyson Cochran
  • , Adeel Khan
  • , Lee Ocuin
  • , David A. Iannitti
  • , Dionisios Vrochides
  • , John B. Martinie

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background: Debate exists regarding outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy. We reviewed and analyzed major hepatectomies (resection of ≥3 Couinaud liver segments) performed in a minimally invasive fashion at a single institution. Methods: From 2011 to 2016, 473 major hepatectomy procedures were performed, of which 173 (37%) were performed in a minimally invasive fashion (57 robot-assisted and 116 laparoscopic). Patient demographics, operating statistics and outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results: Patients undergoing robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy were older (58.1 vs 53.2 years, respectively; p = 0.030), admitted to ICU postoperatively less frequently (43.9% vs 61.2%, respectively; p = 0.043), and readmitted less often within 90 days (7.0% vs 28.5%, respectively; p = 0.001). No significant differences were identified in relation to complications, blood loss, operative times, and length of stay. Conclusion: Robot-assisted is an effective alternative to laparoscopic major hepatectomy for resection of malignant and benign liver lesions. Robotic-assisted offers technical advantages compared to laparoscopic surgery including improved optic visualization, operative dexterity, and ease of dissection and suturing. This experience suggested that the robotic platform was associated with improved outcomes including reduced postoperative ICU admission and 90-day readmission.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)906-911
Number of pages6
JournalHPB
Volume21
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2019

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic major liver resection: analysis of outcomes from a single center'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this