File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: An international multicenter propensity‐score matched and coarsened‐exact matched analysis comparing robotic versus laparoscopic partial liver resections of the anterolateral segments

TitleAn international multicenter propensity‐score matched and coarsened‐exact matched analysis comparing robotic versus laparoscopic partial liver resections of the anterolateral segments
Authors
Keywordsanterolateral segment
laparoscopic liver resection
minimally invasive liver surgery
robotic liver resection
Issue Date1-Aug-2022
PublisherSpringer
Citation
Journal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences, 2022, v. 29, n. 8, p. 843-854 How to Cite?
Abstract

Background: Robotic liver resections (RLR) may have the ability to address some of the drawbacks of laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) but few studies have done a head-to-head comparison of the outcomes after anterolateral segment resections by the two techniques. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted of 3202 patients who underwent minimally invasive LR of the anterolateral liver segments at 26 international centres from 2005 to 2020. Two thousand six hundred and six cases met study criteria of which there were 358 RLR and 1868 LLR cases. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups using a 1:3 Propensity Score Matched (PSM) and 1:1 Coarsened Exact Matched (CEM) analysis. Results: Patients matched after 1:3 PSM (261 RLR vs 783 LLR) and 1:1 CEM (296 RLR vs 296 LLR) revealed no significant differences in length of stay, readmission rates, morbidity, mortality, and involvement of or close oncological margins. RLR surgeries were associated with significantly less blood loss (50 mL vs 100 ml, P


Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/338787
ISSN
2021 Impact Factor: 3.149
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.630
ISI Accession Number ID

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKadam, Prashant-
dc.contributor.authorSutcliffe, Robert P-
dc.contributor.authorScatton, Olivier-
dc.contributor.authorSucandy, Iswanto-
dc.contributor.authorKingham, T. Peter-
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Rong-
dc.contributor.authorChoi, Gi Hong-
dc.contributor.authorSyn, Nicholas L-
dc.contributor.authorGastaca, Mikel-
dc.contributor.authorChoi, Sung-Hoon-
dc.contributor.authorChiow, Adrian K. H-
dc.contributor.authorMarino, Marco V-
dc.contributor.authorEfanov, Mikhail-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Jae-Hoon-
dc.contributor.authorChong, Charing C-
dc.contributor.authorTang, Chung-Ngai-
dc.contributor.authorCheung, Tan-To-
dc.contributor.authorPratschke, Johann-
dc.contributor.authorWang, Xiaoying-
dc.contributor.authorCampos, Ricardo Robless-
dc.contributor.authorIvanecz, Arpad-
dc.contributor.authorPark, James O-
dc.contributor.authorRotellar, Fernando-
dc.contributor.authorFuks, David-
dc.contributor.authorD'Hondt, Mathieu-
dc.contributor.authorHan, Ho-Seong-
dc.contributor.authorTroisi, Roberto I-
dc.contributor.authorGoh, Brian K. P-
dc.contributor.authorChan, Chung-Yip-
dc.contributor.authorPrieto, Mikel-
dc.contributor.authorSchotte, Henri-
dc.contributor.authorDe Meyere, Celine-
dc.contributor.authorLai, Eric-
dc.contributor.authorKrenzien, Felix-
dc.contributor.authorSchmelzle, Moritz-
dc.contributor.authorMontalti, Roberto-
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Qu-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Kit-Fai-
dc.contributor.authorSalimgereeva, Diana-
dc.contributor.authorAlikhanov, Ruslan-
dc.contributor.authorLee, Lip-Seng-
dc.contributor.authorJang, Jae Young-
dc.contributor.authorLim, Chetana-
dc.contributor.authorLabadie, Kevin P-
dc.contributor.authorLopez-Lopez, Victor-
dc.date.accessioned2024-03-11T10:31:31Z-
dc.date.available2024-03-11T10:31:31Z-
dc.date.issued2022-08-01-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences, 2022, v. 29, n. 8, p. 843-854-
dc.identifier.issn1868-6974-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/338787-
dc.description.abstract<p> <span>Background: Robotic liver resections (RLR) may have the ability to address some of the drawbacks of laparoscopic liver resections (LLR) but few studies have done a head-to-head comparison of the outcomes after anterolateral segment resections by the two techniques. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted of 3202 patients who underwent minimally invasive LR of the anterolateral liver segments at 26 international centres from 2005 to 2020. Two thousand six hundred and six cases met study criteria of which there were 358 RLR and 1868 LLR cases. Perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups using a 1:3 Propensity Score Matched (PSM) and 1:1 Coarsened Exact Matched (CEM) analysis. Results: Patients matched after 1:3 PSM (261 RLR vs 783 LLR) and 1:1 CEM (296 RLR vs 296 LLR) revealed no significant differences in length of stay, readmission rates, morbidity, mortality, and involvement of or close oncological margins. RLR surgeries were associated with significantly less blood loss (50 mL vs 100 ml, P</span> <br></p>-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherSpringer-
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Sciences-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.subjectanterolateral segment-
dc.subjectlaparoscopic liver resection-
dc.subjectminimally invasive liver surgery-
dc.subjectrobotic liver resection-
dc.titleAn international multicenter propensity‐score matched and coarsened‐exact matched analysis comparing robotic versus laparoscopic partial liver resections of the anterolateral segments-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/jhbp.1149-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-85133973546-
dc.identifier.volume29-
dc.identifier.issue8-
dc.identifier.spage843-
dc.identifier.epage854-
dc.identifier.eissn1868-6982-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000787672600001-
dc.identifier.issnl1868-6974-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats