• Surgery · Apr 2012

    Comparative Study

    Comparison of intraoperative time use and perioperative outcomes for robotic versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy.

    • Koray Karabulut, Orhan Agcaoglu, Shamil Aliyev, Allan Siperstein, and Eren Berber.
    • Division of Endocrine Surgery, Endocrinology and Metabolism Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
    • Surgery. 2012 Apr 1; 151 (4): 537-42.

    BackgroundRecently, robotic techniques have been described for adrenalectomy. However, scant data exist in the literature regarding the comparison of robotic with the conventional laparoscopic approach. We aimed to analyze intraoperative time use and perioperative outcomes in robotic vs laparoscopic adrenalectomy for both lateral transabdominal (LT) and posterior retroperitoneal (PR) approaches.MethodsA robotic adrenalectomy program was started in September 2008, and techniques for both the LT (n = 32) and PR (n = 18) approaches were established. Data of robotic cases were compared with those of 50 consecutive laparoscopic cases (LT = 32, PR = 18) before the onset of the program from a prospective, institutional review board-approved database. Operative times for individual steps of the procedures were captured from operative video recordings, including docking, exposure, dissection, and hemostasis.ResultsFor both LT and PR approaches, there was no difference when we compared the robotic with the laparoscopic groups regarding demographics, tumor type, and body mass index. For the LT approach, despite larger tumor size (x ± SEM) in the robotic vs the laparoscopic group (4.7 ± 0.4 vs 3.8 ± 0.4 cm, P = .05), the operative times were similar (168 ± 10 minutes vs 159 ± 8 minutes, P = .5). There was no difference between the two approaches regarding the time spent for the individual steps of the operation. In the PR approach, with similar tumor sizes (2.7 ± 0.3 cm vs 2.3 ± 0.3 cm, P = .4), operative time (minutes) was equivalent (166 ± 9 vs 170 ± 15; P = .8). Time spent intra-operatively for each step was similar, except for shorter hemostasis time in the robotic group (23 ± 4 minutes vs 42 ± 9 minutes, P = .03). The robotic docking time (21 vs 25 minutes) decreased by 50% in the second year of the study for both approaches. The presence of two staff surgeons vs a staff and a fellow decreased operative time for the robotic LT (P < .02) but not the robotic PR approach. For laparoscopic and robotic procedures, the morbidity was 10% and 2%, respectively. Overall, hospital stay was 1.5 ± 0.9 days (range, 1-4 vs 1.1 ± 0.3 days) (range, 1-2; P = .006). The percentage of patients requiring more than 1 day of hospital stay was 28% vs 14% (P = .09).ConclusionTo our knowledge, this is the first study reporting an intraoperative time analysis for robotic adrenalectomy. Intraoperative time use was similar between the laparoscopic and robotic groups for both LT and PR approaches. However, the morbidity was less and hospital stay was shorter after the robotic procedures.Copyright © 2012 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…