基于倾向性评分匹配的机器人辅助腹腔镜与腹腔镜胆道恶性肿瘤根治术短期结局比较OA北大核心
Propensity score-matched comparison of short-term outcomes between robotic-assisted and laparoscopic radical resection for biliary tract cancers
背景与目的:胆道恶性肿瘤预后极差,根治性切除是目前唯一可能治愈的手段.相较传统开腹手术,腹腔镜已被证实在安全性和有效性方面具有优势,但在复杂操作中仍受限.机器人辅助腹腔镜因其高清三维视野与灵活操作系统,被认为可弥补腹腔镜技术不足.然而,目前缺乏平衡基线差异后机器人辅助腹腔镜与普通腹腔镜在胆道恶性肿瘤治疗中的安全性对比研究.本研究旨在通过倾向性评分匹配(PSM),比较两种术式的短期安全性差异. 方法:回顾性纳入中国胆道肿瘤协作组数据库中151例接受根治性切除的患者,其中腹腔镜组128例,机器人辅助腹腔镜组23例.为平衡基线差异,首先进行1∶1倾向性评分匹配(PSM),成功匹配腹腔镜19例与机器人19例;随后以机器人组为基准,再行1∶2 PSM,最终获得腹腔镜36例与机器人18例.比较两组主要结局(中转开腹率、转ICU率、术后并发症)及次要结局(手术时间、术中出血量、输血量、术后住院时间、再手术率、再入院率、住院费用等),并采用多因素回归分析探讨中转开腹与术后住院时间的影响因素. 结果:PSM后两组基线特征平衡.主要结局方面,腹腔镜组中转开腹率明显高于机器人组(41.7%vs.0,P=0.001),而两组转ICU率、术后并发症总发生率及不同Clavien-Dindo分级并发症发生率差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05).次要结局方面,腹腔镜组术后住院时间明显长于机器人组(18.5 drs.8.0 d,P=0.005);手术时间、术中出血量、输血量、再手术率、再入院率及住院费用等差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05).中转开腹率的Logistic回归分析中虽未发现有统计学意义的影响因素,但中分化肿瘤、术前CA19-9升高、收获淋巴结增多均显示风险升高趋势.多因素线性回归显示,机器人辅助手术是缩短术后住院时间的独立因素(P=0.024),术前总胆红素(P=0.020)、手术时间(P=0.000)、术后并发症(P=0.006)及二次手术(P=0.005)则与住院时间延长相关. 结论:机器人辅助腹腔镜胆道肿瘤根治术在短期安全性方面不劣于普通腹腔镜,且可降低中转开腹率、缩短住院时间.其在复杂解剖或高难度病例中可能具有更大优势,为临床提供了一种可行的微创选择,但其推广仍需综合考虑经济成本及医疗资源.
Background and Aims:Biliary tract cancers(BTCs)are highly aggressive malignancies with dismal prognosis,for which radical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment.Laparoscopic surgery has demonstrated superiority over open surgery in perioperative safety and recovery,yet it is technically limited in complex operations.Robot-assisted laparoscopy,with its high-definition three-dimensional vision and enhanced instrument dexterity,may overcome these limitations.However,comparative evidence balancing baseline differences between laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical resections for BTCs is still lacking.This study aimed to evaluate and compare their short-term safety using propensity score matching(PSM). Methods:A total of 151 patients with biliary tract cancers who underwent radical resection were retrospectively enrolled from the Chinese Biliary Tract Tumor Collaborative Group database,including 128 in the laparoscopic group and 23 in the robotic-assisted laparoscopic group.To balance baseline differences,an initial 1∶1 PSM was performed,yielding 19 laparoscopic and 19 robotic cases.Subsequently,using the robotic group as the reference,a 1∶2 PSM was conducted,resulting in 36 laparoscopic and 18 robotic cases.Primary outcomes(conversion to open surgery,ICU admission,and postoperative complications)and secondary outcomes(operative time,intraoperative blood loss,transfusion,postoperative hospital stay,reoperation,readmission,and hospitalization costs)were compared between the two groups.Multivariate regression analyses were performed to explore factors associated with conversion to open surgery and postoperative hospital stay. Results:After matching,baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups.For primary outcomes,the conversion rate to open surgery was significantly higher in the laparoscopic group than in the robotic group(41.7%vs.0,P=0.001),while ICU admission,overall postoperative complications,and Clavien-Dindo graded complications showed no significant differences(all P>0.05).For secondary outcomes,the postoperative hospital stay was significantly more extended in the laparoscopic group compared with the robotic group(18.5 d vs.8.0 d,P=0.005),whereas operative time,intraoperative blood loss,transfusion,reoperation,readmission,and hospitalization costs were comparable(all P>0.05).Logistic regression for conversion did not identify statistically significant predictors,but moderately differentiated tumors,elevated preoperative CA19-9,and higher harvested lymph node counts showed trends toward increased risk.Multivariate linear regression revealed that robotic-assisted surgery was an independent factor for reduced postoperative hospital stay(P=0.024),while preoperative total bilirubin(P=0.020),longer operative time(P=0.000),postoperative complications(P=0.006),and reoperation(P=0.005)were found to be associated with a prolonged hospital stay. Conclusion:Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical resection for BTCs is not inferior to conventional laparoscopy in short-term safety and may further reduce conversion rates and hospital stay.Its technical advantages may be particularly valuable in anatomically complex or challenging cases.Nonetheless,cost-effectiveness and resource allocation should be considered for wider adoption.
阮清扬;周学吟;雷田;田一童;沈瑞婧;陈鸣宇
浙江大学医学院附属邵逸夫医院普通外科,浙江 杭州 310016||浙江大学医学院,浙江 杭州 310030浙江大学医学院附属邵逸夫医院普通外科,浙江 杭州 310016||浙江大学医学院,浙江 杭州 310030浙江大学医学院附属邵逸夫医院普通外科,浙江 杭州 310016||浙江大学医学院,浙江 杭州 310030浙江大学医学院附属邵逸夫医院普通外科,浙江 杭州 310016||浙江大学医学院,浙江 杭州 310030浙江大学医学院附属邵逸夫医院普通外科,浙江 杭州 310016||浙江大学医学院,浙江 杭州 310030浙江大学医学院附属邵逸夫医院普通外科,浙江 杭州 310016||浙江大学医学院,浙江 杭州 310030
医药卫生
胆道肿瘤腹腔镜机器人手术治疗结果倾向性评分
Biliary Tract NeoplasmsLaparoscopesRobotic Surgical ProceduresTreatment OutcomePropensity Score
《中国普通外科杂志》 2025 (8)
1648-1661,14
评论