Peer Review #2 of "Management of recurrent ureteral stricture: a retrospectively comparative study with robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery versus open approach (v0.1)"

AbstractTo investigate factors associated with the risk of major complications after radical prostatectomy (RP) by the open (ORP) or robot-assisted (RARP) approach for prostate cancer (PCa) in a tertiary referral center. 1062 consecutive patients submitted to RP were prospectively collected. The following outcomes were addressed: (1) overall postoperative complications: subjects with Clavien-Dindo System (CD) one through five versus cases without any complication; (2) moderate to major postoperative complications: cases with CD < 2 vs. ≥ 2, and 3) major post-operative complications: subjects with CDS CD ≥ 3 vs. < 3. The association of pre-operative and intra-operative factors with the risk of postoperative complications was assessed by the logistic regression model. Overall, complications occurred in 310 out of 1062 subjects (29.2%). Major complications occurred in 58 cases (5.5%). On multivariate analysis, major complications were predicted by PCa surgery and intraoperative estimated blood loss (EBL). ORP compared to RARP increased the risk of major CD complications from 2.8 to 19.3% (OR = 8283; p < 0.0001). Performing ePLND increased the risk of major complications from 2.4 to 7.4% (OR = 3090; p < 0.0001). Assessing intraoperative blood loss, the risk of major postoperative complications was increased by BL above the third quartile when compared to subjects with intraoperative blood loss up to the third quartile (10.2% vs. 4.6%; OR = 2239; 95%CI: 1233–4064). In the present cohort, radical prostatectomy showed major postoperative complications that were independently predicted by the open approach, extended lymph-node dissection, and excessive intraoperative blood loss.

Download Full-text

Robotic Pneumonectomy for Lung Cancer: Perioperative Outcomes and Factors Leading to Conversion to Thoracotomy

Innovations Technology and Techniques in Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery ◽

10.1177/1556984520978227 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 155698452097822

Author(s):

Byron D. Patton ◽

Daniel Zarif ◽

Donna M. Bahroloomi ◽

Iam C. Sarmiento ◽

Paul C. Lee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Statistical Significance ◽

Patient Characteristics ◽

Perioperative Outcomes ◽

Safe Procedure ◽

Open Approach ◽

Robotic Approach ◽

Robotic Group ◽

Robot Assisted ◽

Estimated Blood Loss

Objective In the tide of robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery, few cases of robot-assisted pneumonectomy exist in the literature. This study evaluates the perioperative outcomes and risk factors for conversion to thoracotomy with an initial robotic approach to pneumonectomy for lung cancer. Methods This study is a single-center retrospective review of all pneumonectomies for lung cancer with an initial robotic approach between 2015 and 2019. Patients were divided into 2 groups: surgeries completed robotically and surgeries converted to thoracotomy. Patient demographics, preoperative clinical data, surgical pathology, and perioperative outcomes were compared for meaningful differences between the groups. Results Thirteen total patients underwent robotic pneumonectomy with 8 of them completed robotically and 5 converted to thoracotomy. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the groups. The Robotic group had a shorter operative time ( P < 0.01) and less estimated blood loss ( P = 0.02). There were more lymph nodes harvested in the Robotic group ( P = 0.08) but without statistical significance. There were 2 major complications in the Robotic group and none in the Conversion group. Neither tumor size nor stage were predictive of conversion to thoracotomy. Conversions decreased over time with a majority occurring in the first 2 years. There were no conversions for bleeding and no mortalities. Conclusions Robotic pneumonectomy for lung cancer is a safe procedure and a reasonable alternative to thoracotomy. With meticulous technique, major bleeding can be avoided and most procedures can be completed robotically. Larger studies are needed to elucidate any advantages of a robotic versus open approach.

Download Full-text