| Title |
A population-based study comparing laparoscopic and robotic outcomes in colorectal surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Surgical Endoscopy, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00464-015-4218-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael S. Tam, Christodoulos Kaoutzanis, Andrew J. Mullard, Scott E. Regenbogen, Michael G. Franz, Samantha Hendren, Greta Krapohl, James F. Vandewarker, Richard M. Lampman, Robert K. Cleary |
| Abstract |
Current data addressing the role of robotic surgery for the management of colorectal disease are primarily from single-institution and case-matched comparative studies as well as administrative database analyses. The purpose of this study was to compare minimally invasive surgery outcomes using a large regional protocol-driven database devoted to surgical quality, improvement in patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness. This is a retrospective cohort study from the prospectively collected Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative registry designed to compare outcomes of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic, hand-assisted laparoscopic, and robotic colon and rectal operations between July 1, 2012 and October 7, 2014. We adjusted for differences in baseline covariates between cases with different surgical approaches using propensity score quintiles modeled on patient demographics, general health factors, diagnosis, and preoperative co-morbidities. The primary outcomes were conversion rates and hospital length of stay. Secondary outcomes included operative time, and postoperative morbidity and mortality. A total of 2735 minimally invasive colorectal operations met inclusion criteria. Conversion rates were lower with robotic as compared to laparoscopic operations, and this was statistically significant for rectal resections (colon 9.0 vs. 16.9 %, p < 0.06; rectum 7.8 vs. 21.2 %, p < 0.001). The adjusted length of stay for robotic colon operations (4.00 days, 95 % CI 3.63-4.40) was significantly shorter compared to laparoscopic (4.41 days, 95 % CI 4.17-4.66; p = 0.04) and hand-assisted laparoscopic cases (4.44 days, 95 % CI 4.13-4.78; p = 0.008). There were no significant differences in overall postoperative complications among groups. When compared to conventional laparoscopy, the robotic platform is associated with significantly fewer conversions to open for rectal operations, and significantly shorter length of hospital stay for colon operations, without increasing overall postoperative morbidity. These findings and the recent upgrades in minimally invasive technology warrant continued evaluation of the role of the robotic platform in colorectal surgery. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 73 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 17 | 23% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 38 | 52% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 24 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,273,512
of 22,805,349 outputs
Outputs from Surgical Endoscopy
#5,641
of 6,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,637
of 264,844 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Surgical Endoscopy
#58
of 72 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,805,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,031 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,844 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 72 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.