Dataset Information

Laparoscopic Liver Resection Using a Silicone Band Retraction Method (With Video).

ABSTRACT:

Background

The success of laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) depends on stable and full exposure of the parenchymal transection plane. We evaluated the efficacy of LLR using a silicone band retraction method for lesions in the anterolateral and posterosuperior segments.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 189 consecutive patients who had undergone LLR in our hospital between July 2010 and July 2020. They were divided into 2 groups according to whether LLR was performed before (conventional group; n=64) or after (silicone band group; n=125) the introduction of the silicone band retraction method.

Results

The silicone band group demonstrated significantly less blood loss than that by the conventional group. The mean operative time and the hospital stay in the silicone band group were obviously shorter than that in the conventional group. The open conversion rate and the major complication rate were significantly lower in the silicone band group than that in the conventional group.

Conclusion

The silicone band retraction method is a useful approach that results in a safe LLR.

SUBMITTER: Sakai H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8168932 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAs an emerging technology, robot-assisted surgical system has some potential merits in many complicated endoscopic procedures compared with laparoscopic surgery. But robot-assisted liver resection is still a controversial problem on its advantages compared with laparoscopic liver resection. We aimed to perform the meta-analysis to assess and compare the clinical outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic liver resection.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase databases, Clinicaltrials, and Opengrey through March 24, 2020, including references of qualifying articles. English-language, original investigations in humans about robot-assisted and laparoscopic hepatectomy were included. Titles, abstracts, and articles were reviewed by at least 2 independent readers. Continuous and dichotomous variables were compared by the weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR), respectively.ResultsOf 936 titles identified in our original search, 28 articles met our criteria, involving 3544 patients. Compared with laparoscopy, the robot-assisted groups had longer operative time (WMD: 36.93; 95% CI, 19.74-54.12; P < 0.001), lower conversion rate (OR: 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46-0.87; P = 0.005), higher transfusion rate (WMD: 2.39; 95% CI, 1.51-3.76; P < 0.001) and higher total cost (WMD:0.49; 95% CI, 0.42-0.55; P < 0.001). In addition, the baseline characteristics of patients about largest tumor size was larger (WMD: 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.56; P < 0.001) and malignant lesions rate was higher (WMD: 1.50; 95% CI, 1.21-1.86; P < 0.001) in the robot-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy. The subgroup analysis of minor hepatectomy showed robot-assisted was associated with longer operative time (WMD: 36.00; 95% CI, 12.59-59.41; P = 0.003), longer length of stay (WMD: 0.51; 95% CI, 0.02-1.01; p = 0.04) and higher total cost (WMD: 0.48; 95% CI, 0.25-0.72; P < 0.001) (Table 3); while the subgroup analysis of major hepatectomy showed robot-assisted was associated with lower estimated blood loss (WMD: -122.43; 95% CI, -151.78--93.08; P < 0.001).ConclusionsOur meta-analysis revealed that robot-assisted was associated with longer operative time, lower conversion rate, higher transfusion rate and total cost, and robot-assisted has certain advantages in major hepatectomy compared with laparoscopic hepatectomy.