Multicenter experience in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy : a comparison of hybrid and totally robot-assisted techniques
dc.contributor.author | Grimminger, Peter P. | |
dc.contributor.author | Staubitz, Julia I. | |
dc.contributor.author | Perez, Daniel | |
dc.contributor.author | Ghadban, Tarik | |
dc.contributor.author | Reeh, Matthias | |
dc.contributor.author | Scognamiglio, Pasquale | |
dc.contributor.author | Izbicki, Jakob R. | |
dc.contributor.author | Biebl, Matthias | |
dc.contributor.author | Fuchs, Hans | |
dc.contributor.author | Bruns, Christiane J. | |
dc.contributor.author | Lang, Hauke | |
dc.contributor.author | Becker, Thomas | |
dc.contributor.author | Egberts, Jan-Hendrik | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-08-24T09:41:15Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-08-24T09:41:15Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021 | |
dc.description.abstract | Background Oncological esophageal surgery has evolved significantly in the last decades. From open esophagectomy over (hybrid) minimally invasive surgery, nowadays, robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) approaches are applied. Current techniques require an analysis of possible advantages and disadvantages indicating the direction towards a novel gold standard. Methods Robot-assisted Ivor Lewis esophagectomies, performed in the period from April 2017 to June 2019 in five German centers (Berlin, Cologne, Hamburg, Kiel, Mainz), were included in this study. Pre-, intra-, and postoperative parameters were assessed. Cases were grouped for hybrid (H-RAMIE) versus totally robot-assisted (T-RAMIE) approaches. Postoperative parameters and complications were compared using risk ratios. Results A total of 175 operations were performed as T-RAMIE and 67 as H-RAMIE. Patient age (median age 62 years) and sex (83.1% male) were similarly distributed in both groups. Median duration of esophagectomy was significantly lower in the T-RAMIE group (385 versus 427 min, p < 0.001). The risks of “overall morbidity” (32.0 versus 47.8%; risk ratio [RR], 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.5, 1.1–2.1; p = 0.026), “anastomotic leak” (10.3 versus 22.4%; RR, CI: 2.2, 1.2–4.1; p = 0.020), and “respiratory failure” (1.1 versus 7.5%; RR, CI: 6.5, 1.3–32.9; p = 0.019) were significantly higher in case of H-RAMIE. Conclusions In the five participating German centers, T-RAMIE was the preferred procedure (72.3% of operations). In comparison to H-RAMIE, T-RAMIE was associated with a significantly reduced risk of postoperative morbidity, anastomotic leak, and respiratory failure as well as a significantly reduced time necessary for esophagectomy. | en_GB |
dc.identifier.doi | http://doi.org/10.25358/openscience-7614 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/handle/20.500.12030/7628 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | de |
dc.rights | CC-BY-4.0 | * |
dc.rights.uri | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ | * |
dc.subject.ddc | 610 Medizin | de_DE |
dc.subject.ddc | 610 Medical sciences | en_GB |
dc.title | Multicenter experience in robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy : a comparison of hybrid and totally robot-assisted techniques | en_GB |
dc.type | Zeitschriftenaufsatz | de |
jgu.journal.title | Journal of gastrointestinal surgery | de |
jgu.journal.volume | 25 | de |
jgu.organisation.department | FB 04 Medizin | de |
jgu.organisation.name | Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz | |
jgu.organisation.number | 2700 | |
jgu.organisation.place | Mainz | |
jgu.organisation.ror | https://ror.org/023b0x485 | |
jgu.pages.end | 2469 | de |
jgu.pages.start | 2463 | de |
jgu.publisher.doi | 10.1007/s11605-021-05044-8 | de |
jgu.publisher.issn | 1873-4626 | de |
jgu.publisher.name | Springer | de |
jgu.publisher.place | New York, NY | de |
jgu.publisher.year | 2021 | |
jgu.rights.accessrights | openAccess | |
jgu.subject.ddccode | 610 | de |
jgu.type.dinitype | Article | en_GB |
jgu.type.resource | Text | de |
jgu.type.version | Published version | de |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
- Name:
- multicenter_experience_in_rob-20220822163028833.pdf
- Size:
- 302.59 KB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
- Description:
License bundle
1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
- Name:
- license.txt
- Size:
- 3.57 KB
- Format:
- Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
- Description: