|
|
|
题名
|
作者
|
年代
|
出处
|
被引量
|
| 1 | Robot-assisted laparoscopic vs open gastrectomy for gastric cancer:Systematic review and meta-analysis显示文摘AIM To evaluate the potential effectiveness of robot-assisted gastrectomy(RAG) in comparison to open gastrectomy(OG) for gastric cancer patients.METHODS A comprehensive systematic literature search using PubM ed,EMBASE,and the Cochrane Library was carried out to identify studies comparing RAG and OG in gastric cancer.Participants of any age and sex were considered for inclusion in comparative studies of the two techniques independently from type of gastrectomy.A meta-analysis of short-term perioperative outcomes was performed to evaluate whether RAG is equivalent to OG.The primary outcome measures were set for estimated blood loss,operative time,conversion rate,morbidity,and hospital stay.Secondary among postoperative complications,wound infection,bleeding and anastomotic leakage were also analysed.RESULTS A total of 6 articles,5 retrospective and 1 randomized controlled study,involving 6123 patients overall,with 689(11.3%) cases submitted to RAG and 5434(88.7%) to OG,satisfied the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis.RAG was associated with longer operation time than OG(weighted mean difference 72.20 min;P < 0.001),but with reduction in blood loss and shorter hospital stay(weighted mean difference-166.83 mL and-1.97 d respectively;P < 0.001).No differences were found with respect to overall postoperative complications(P = 0.65),wound infection(P = 0.35),bleeding(P = 0.65),and anastomotic leakage(P = 0.06).The postoperative mortality rates were similar between the two groups.With respect to oncological outcomes,no statistical differences among the number of harvested lymph nodes were found(weighted mean difference-1.12;P = 0.10).CONCLUSION RAG seems to be a technically valid alternative to OG for performing radical gastrectomy in gastric cancer resulting in safe complications. | Stefano Caruso Alberto Patriti Franco Roviello Lorenzo De Franco Franco Franceschini Graziano Ceccarelli Andrea Coratti | 2017 | World Journal of Clinical Oncology2017，8，3： | 23 |
| 2 | Laparoscopic and robot-assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer: Current considerations显示文摘Radical gastrectomy with an adequate lymph-adenectomy is the main procedure which makes it possible to cure patients with resectable gastric cancer(GC). A number of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis provide phase Ⅲ evidence that laparoscopic gastrectomy is technically safe and that it yields better short-term outcomes than conventional open gastrectomy for early-stage GC. While laparoscopic gastrectomy has become standard therapy for early-stage GC, especially in Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea, the use of minimally invasive techniques is still controversial for the treatment of more advanced tumours, principally due to existing concerns about its oncological adequacy and capacity to carry out an adequately extended lymphadenectomy. Some intrinsic drawbacks of the conventional laparoscopic technique have prevented the worldwide spread of laparoscopic gastrectomyfor cancer and, despite technological advances in recent year, it remains a technically challenging procedure. The introduction of robotic surgery over the last ten years has implied a notable mutation of certain minimally invasive procedures, making it possible to overcome some limitations of the traditional laparoscopic technique. Robot-assisted gastric resection with D2 lymph node dissection has been shown to be safe and feasible in prospective and retrospective studies. However, to date there are no high quality comparative studies investigating the advantages of a robotic approach to GC over traditional laparoscopic and open gastrectomy. On the basis of the literature review here presented, robot-assisted surgery seems to fulfill oncologic criteria for D2 dissection and has a comparable oncologic outcome to traditional laparoscopic and open procedure. Robot-assisted gastrectomy was associated with the trend toward a shorter hospital stay with a comparable morbidity of conventional laparoscopic and open gastrectomy, but randomized clinical trials and longer follow-ups are needed to evaluate the possible influence of robot gastrectomy on GC patient survival. | Stefano Caruso Alberto Patriti Franco Roviello Lorenzo De Franco Franco Franceschini Andrea Coratti Graziano Ceccarelli | 2016 | World Journal of Gastroenterology2016，22，25： | 23 |
| 3 | Minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer: A comparison between robotic, laparoscopic and open surgery显示文摘AIM To investigate the role of minimally invasive surgery for gastric cancer and determine surgical, clinical, and oncological outcomes.METHODS This is a propensity score-matched case-control study, comparing three treatment arms: robotic gastrectomy(RG), laparoscopic gastrectomy(LG), open gastrectomy(OG). Data collection started after sharing a specific study protocol. Data were recorded through a tailored and protected web-based system. Primary outcomes: harvested lymph nodes, estimated blood loss, hospital stay, complications rate. Among the secondary outcomes, there are: operative time, R0 resections, POD of mobilization, POD of starting liquid diet and soft solid diet. The analysis includes the evaluation of type and grade of postoperative complications. Detailed information of anastomotic leakages is also provided.RESULTS The present analysis was carried out of 1026 gastrectomies. To guarantee homogenous distribution of cases, patients in the RG, LG and OG groups were 1:1:2 matched using a propensity score analysis with a caliper = 0.2. The successful matching resulted in a total sample of 604 patients(RG = 151; LG = 151; OG = 302). The three groups showed no differences in all baseline patients characteristics, type of surgery(P = 0.42) and stage of the disease(P = 0.16). Intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower in the LG(95.93 ± 119.22) and RG(117.91 ± 68.11) groups compared to the OG(127.26 ± 79.50, P = 0.002). The mean number of retrieved lymph nodes was similar between the RG(27.78 ± 11.45), LG(24.58 ± 13.56) and OG(25.82 ± 12.07) approach. A benefit in favor of the minimally invasive approaches was found in the length of hospital stay(P < 0.0001). A similar complications rate was found(P = 0.13). The leakage rate was not different(P = 0.78) between groups.CONCLUSION Laparoscopic and robotic surgery can be safely performed and proposed as possible alternative to open surgery. The main highlighted benefit is a faster postoperative functional recovery. | Amilcare Parisi Daniel Reim Felice Borghi Ninh T Nguyen Feng Qi Andrea Coratti Fabio Cianchi Maurizio Cesari Francesca Bazzocchi Orhan Alimoglu Johan Gagnière Graziano Pernazza Simone D'Imporzano Yan-Bing Zhou Juan-Santiago Azagra Olivier Facy Steven T Brower Zhi-Wei Jiang Lu Zang Arda Isik Alessandro Gemini Stefano Trastulli Alexander Novotny Alessandra Marano Tong Liu Mario Annecchiarico Benedetta Badii Giacomo Arcuri Andrea Avanzolini Metin Leblebici Denis Pezet Shou-Gen Cao Martine Goergen Shu Zhang Giorgio Palazzini Vito D'Andrea Jacopo Desiderio | 2017 | World Journal of Gastroenterology2017，23，13： | 17 |
| 4 | Robot-assisted Gastrectomy for Gastric Cancer: Current Status and Technical Considerations显示文摘 | Andrea Coratti Mario Annecchiarico Michele Di Marino Edoardo Gentile Francesco Coratti Pier Cristoforo Giulianotti | 2013 | World Journal of Surgery2013，，12： | 5 |
| 5 | Esophageal surgery in minimally invasive era显示文摘The widespread popularity of new surgical technologies such as laparoscopy, thoracoscopy and robotics has led many surgeons to treat esophageal diseases with these methods. The expected benefits of minimally invasivesurgery(MIS) mainly include reductions of postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and pain and better cosmetic results. All of these benefits could potentially be of great interest when dealing with the esophagus due to the potentially severe complications that can occur after conventional surgery. Moreover, robotic platforms are expected to reduce many of the difficulties encountered during advanced laparoscopic and thoracoscopic procedures such as anastomotic reconstructions, accurate lymphadenectomies, and vascular sutures. Almost all esophageal diseases are approachable in a minimally invasive way, including diverticula, gastro-esophageal reflux disease, achalasia, perforations and cancer. Nevertheless, while the limits of MIS for benign esophageal diseases are mainly technical issues and costs, oncologic outcomes remain the cornerstone of any procedure to cure malignancies, for which the long-term results are critical. Furthermore, many of the minimally invasive esophageal operations should be compared to pharmacologic interventions and advanced pure endoscopic procedures; such a comparison requires a difficult literature analysis and leads to some confounding results of clinical trials. This review aims to examine the evidence for the use of MIS in both malignancies and more common benign disease of the esophagus, with a particular emphasis on future developments and ongoing areas of research. | lapo bencini luca moraldi ilenia bartolini andrea coratti | 2016 | World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery2016，8，1： | 5 |
| 6 | Robot-assisted laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer显示文摘Phase Ⅲ evidence in the shape of a series of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses has shown that laparoscopic gastrectomy is safe and gives better short-term results with respect to the traditional open technique for early-stage gastric cancer. In fact, in the East laparoscopic gastrectomy has become routine for early-stage gastric cancer. In contrast, the treatment of advanced gastric cancer through a minimally invasive way is still a debated issue, mostly due to worries about its oncological efficacy and the difficulty of carrying out an extended lymphadenectomy and intestinal reconstruction after total gastrectomy laparoscopically. Over the last ten years the introduction of robotic surgery has implied overcoming some intrinsic drawbacks found to be present in the conventional laparoscopic procedure. Robotassisted gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy has been shown to be safe and feasible for the treatment of gastric cancer patients. But unfortunately, most available studies investigating the robotic gastrectomy for gastric cancer compared to laparoscopic and open technique are so far retrospective and there have not been phase Ⅲ trials. In the present review we looked at scientific evidence available today regarding the new high-tech surgical robotic approach, and we attempted to bring to light the real advantages of robot-assisted gastrectomy compared to the traditional laparoscopic and open technique for the treatment of gastric cancer. | Stefano Caruso Franco Franceschini Alberto Patriti Franco Roviello Mario Annecchiarico Graziano Ceccarelli Andrea Coratti | 2017 | World Journal of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy2017，9，1： | 4 |
| 7 | Robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: single-surgeon experience显示文摘 | Pier Cristoforo Giulianotti Fabio Sbrana Francesco Maria Bianco Enrique Fernando Elli Galaxy Shah Pietro Addeo Giuseppe Caravaglios Andrea Coratti | 2010 | Surgical Endoscopy2010，，7： | 3 |
| 8 | Minimally invasive surgical approach to pancreatic malignancies显示文摘Pancreatic surgery for malignancy is recognized as challenging for the surgeons and risky for the patientsdue to consistent perioperative morbidity and mortality. Furthermore, the oncological long-term results are largely disappointing, even for those patients who experience an uneventfully hospital stay. Nevertheless, surgery still remains the cornerstone of a multidisciplinary treatment for pancreatic cancer. In order to maximize the benefits of surgery, the advent of both laparoscopy and robotics has led many surgeons to treat pancreatic cancers with these new methodologies. The reduction of postoperative complications, length of hospital stay and pain, together with a shorter interval between surgery and the beginning of adjuvant chemotherapy, represent the potential advantages over conventional surgery. Lastly, a better cosmetic result, although not crucial in any cancerous patient, could also play a role by improving overall well-being and patient self-perception. The laparoscopic approach to pancreatic surgery is, however, difficult in inexperienced hands and requires a dedicated training in both advanced laparoscopy and pancreatic surgery. The recent large diffusion of the da Vinci® robotic platform seems to facilitate many of the technical maneuvers, such as anastomotic biliary and pancreatic reconstructions, accurate lymphadenectomy, and vascular sutures. The two main pancreatic operations, distal pancreatectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy, are approachable by a minimally invasive path, but more limited interventions such as enucleation are also feasible. Nevertheless, a word of caution should be taken into account when considering the increasing costs of these newest technologies because the main concerns regarding these are the maintenance of all oncological standards and the lack of long-term follow-up. The purpose of this review is to examine the evidence for the use of minimally invasive surgery in pancreatic cancer(and less aggressive tumors), with particular attention to the oncological results and widespread reproducibility of each technique. | Lapo Bencini Mario Annecchiarico Marco Farsi Ilenia Bartolini Vita Mirasolo Francesco Guerra Andrea Coratti | 2015 | World Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology2015，7，12： | 3 |
| 9 | Current status of robotic distal pancreatectomy: A systematic review显示文摘 | Roberto Cirocchi Stefano Partelli Andrea Coratti Jacopo Desiderio Amilcare Parisi Massimo Falconi | 2013 | Surgical Oncology2013，，： | 2 |
| 10 | Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large communi- ty hospital显示文摘 | Giulianotti PC Coratti A Angelini M | 2003 | Arch Surg2003，138，7： | 1 |
| 11 | Totally robotic right hepatectomy: surgical technique and outcomes 显示文摘 | Giulianotti PC Sbrana F Coratti A | 2011 | Arch Surg2011，146，7： | 1 |
| 12 | Minimally invasive sequential treatment of synchronous colorectal liver metastases by laparoscopic colectomy and robotic right hepatectomy显示文摘 | Pier Cristoforo Giulianotti Alessandro Giacomoni Andrea Coratti Pietro Addeo Francesco Maria Bianco | 2010 | International Journal of Colorectal Disease2010，，12： | 1 |
| 13 | Robotic liver surgery: results for 70 resections显示文摘 | Giulianotti PC Coratti A Sbrana F | 2011 | Surgery2011，149，1： | 1 |
| 14 | Minimally invasive sequential treatment of synchronous colorectal liver metastases by laparoscopic colectomy and robotic right hepatectomy显示文摘 | Giulianotti PC Giaeomoni A Coratti A | 2010 | Int J Colorectal Dis2010，25，12： | 1 |
| 15 | Robotic liver surgery: results for 70 resections显示文摘 | Giulianotti PC Coratti A Sbrana F | 2011 | Surgery2011，，： | 1 |
| 16 | Robotics in general surgery:personal experience in a large community hospital 显示文摘 | Giulianotti PC Coratti A Angelini M | 2003 | Arch Surg2003，138，7： | 1 |
| 17 | Robotic liver surgery: Results for 70 resections显示文摘 | Pier Cristoforo Giulianotti Andrea Coratti Fabio Sbrana Pietro Addeo Francesco Maria Bianco Nicolas Christian Buchs Mario Annechiarico Enrico Benedetti | 2011 | Surgery2011，，1： | 1 |
| 18 | Perioperative out- comes of laparoscopic and robot-assisted major hepatectomies:an Italian multi-institutional comparative study 显示文摘 | Spampinato MG Coratti A Bianco L | 2014 | Surg En- dosc2014，28，10： | 1 |
| 19 | Robotics in general surgery: personal experience in a large community hospital 显示文摘 | C uilianotti PC Coratti A Angelini M | 2003 | Arch Surg2003，138，7： | 1 |
| 20 | Laparoscopic ver-sus open resection for colorectal cancer : meta-analysis ofthe chief trials显示文摘 | Coratti F Coratti A Malatesti R ei a/ | 2009 | G Chir2009，30，89： | 1 |
您所在的机构暂未开通此部分的功能，请联系管理员