Recent patterns in minimally invasive colectomies: Where are we now?

被引:0
|
作者
Laredo, Jonathan A. [1 ]
Patel, Devanshi [1 ]
Byerly, Saskya [1 ]
Filiberto, Dina M. [1 ]
Wood, Elizabeth H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tennessee, Hlth Sci Ctr, Coll Med, Dept Surg, Memphis, TN 38152 USA
来源
LAPAROSCOPIC ENDOSCOPIC AND ROBOTIC SURGERY | 2025年 / 8卷 / 01期
关键词
Robotic surgery; Laparoscopy; Colectomy; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; ROBOTIC SURGERY; COLON-CANCER; FUNDAMENTALS; SURVIVAL; OUTCOMES; TRENDS;
D O I
10.1016/j.lers.2024.09.003
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques such as laparoscopy and robotic surgery for colorectal resection have been cited as superior to traditional open surgery because of their associations with decreased operating room time, hospital stay length, and postoperative morbidity. Despite these benefits, the open approach remains a common surgical method for colorectal resection procedures. We aim to evaluate the most recent yearly trends in open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches to provide insight into uptake and present the status of MIS in the field of colorectal surgery. Methods: Data were collected from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted colectomy database for the years 2014-2020. The surgical approach was classified as either open, laparoscopic, or robotic. Analysis was performed to identify trends in colorectal surgery categorized by year, patient age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, body mass index (BMI), and emergency status. Results: There was an overall decline in both open and laparoscopic surgery cases (from 38.4% to 34.4% and from 57.4% to 50.8%, respectively) and an overall increase in robotic surgery cases (from 4.2% to 14.8%) from 2014 through 2020. Open surgery was the most common approach for the lowest BMI category (<18.5 kg/m2), highest risk ASA classes (4-5) and most emergent surgeries, whereas robotic surgery rates were negligible for these groups. Laparoscopy was the most prevalent approach for all other categories. Conclusion: Laparoscopy was the most prevalent approach in colorectal surgery, although the total case proportions generally tended to decrease. While open surgery remains the approach of choice for emergent procedures, laparoscopic case proportions increased marginally in this category, likely owing to increases in surgeon comfort and continued expansion of laparoscopic training efforts. Importantly, the total prevalence of robotic surgery increased significantly between 2014 and 2020, which may be attributable to advancements in the robotic platform and increases in familiarity and competence with the technology. We anticipate a continuation of these trends in the future and recommend the creation of a national robotic surgery training standard. (c) 2024 Zhejiang University. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co. Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
引用
收藏
页码:23 / 27
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Phakic intraocular lenses: Where are we now?
    Kohnen, Thomas
    JOURNAL OF CATARACT AND REFRACTIVE SURGERY, 2018, 44 (02) : 121 - 123
  • [42] Introduction to Special Issue on Outcome Measures for IDD: Where We Have Been, Where We Are Now, and Where We Are Heading
    Kelleher, Bridgette L.
    Wheeler, Anne C.
    AJIDD-AMERICAN JOURNAL ON INTELLECTUAL AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES, 2020, 125 (06): : 413 - 417
  • [43] Minimally invasive colectomies can be performed with similar outcomes to open counterparts for colorectal cancer emergencies: a propensity score matching analysis utilizing ACS-NSQIP
    J. Chang
    E. Assouline
    K. Calugaru
    Z. Z. Gajic
    V. Doğru
    J. J. Ray
    A. Erkan
    E. Esen
    M. Grieco
    F. Remzi
    Techniques in Coloproctology, 2023, 27 : 1065 - 1071
  • [44] Minimally Invasive Surgery in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Where Do We Stand?
    Berzenji, Lawek
    Wen, Wen
    Verleden, Stijn
    Claes, Erik
    Yogeswaran, Suresh Krishan
    Lauwers, Patrick
    Van Schil, Paul
    Hendriks, Jeroen M. H.
    CANCERS, 2023, 15 (17)
  • [45] Editorial: Neonatal ECMO in 2019: Where Are We Now? Where Next?
    Cavallaro, Giacomo
    Di Nardo, Matteo
    Hoskote, Aparna
    Tibboel, Dick
    FRONTIERS IN PEDIATRICS, 2022, 9
  • [46] Simulation in Surgery. Where Are We Now and Where to From Here?
    Jakimowicz, J. J.
    Jakimowicz, Caroline M.
    CIRUGIA Y CIRUJANOS, 2011, 79 (01): : 41 - 45
  • [47] The state of emergency department extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Where are we now, and where are we going?
    Ciullo, Anna L.
    Tonna, Joseph E.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF EMERGENCY PHYSICIANS OPEN, 2024, 5 (01)
  • [48] Complete mesocolic excision in minimally invasive surgery of colonic cancer: do we need the robot?
    Dirk Wilhelm
    Thomas Vogel
    Philipp-Alexander Neumann
    Helmut Friess
    Michael Kranzfelder
    European Surgery, 2021, 53 : 166 - 174
  • [49] Minimally invasive pancreatic surgerywhere are we going?
    Sahakyan, Mushegh A.
    Labori, Knut Jorgen
    Primavesi, Florian
    Soreide, Kjetil
    Staettner, Stefan
    Edwin, Bjorn
    EUROPEAN SURGERY-ACTA CHIRURGICA AUSTRIACA, 2019, 51 (03): : 98 - 104
  • [50] Minimally Invasive Surgery: Are We Doing It Right?
    Harshal A. Chohatakar
    Vibha Ramesh
    Niranjan Paramashivaiah
    Krishnaswamy Lakshman
    Indian Journal of Surgery, 2021, 83 : 1185 - 1191