http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
A single institution experience with robotic and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomies
Shi Qing Lee,Tousif Kabir,Ye-Xin Koh,Jin-Yao Teo,Ser-Yee Lee,Juinn-Huar Kam,Peng-Chung Cheow,Prema Raj Jeyaraj,Pierce K. H. Chow,London L. Ooi,Alexander Y. F. Chung,Chung-Yip Chan,Brian K. P. Goh 한국간담췌외과학회 2020 Annals of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery Vol.24 No.3
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.