Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of surgical outcomes of intracorporeal hepaticojejunostomy in the excision of choledochal cysts using laparoscopic versus robot techniques.

Purpose: Increasing surgical expertise in minimally invasive surgery has allowed laparoscopic surgery to be performed in many abdominal surgeries. Laparoscopic choledochal cyst excision and Roux-en-Y hepaticojejunostomy are challenging and sophisticated surgeries because of the difficult anastomosis. Recent advances in robotic surgery have enabled more delicate and precise movements, and Endowrist instruments allow for securing sutures during anastomosis. This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic hepaticojejunostomy in choledochal cyst excision.

Methods: Sixty-seven patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic-hybrid choledochal cyst excision from 2004 to 2016 were retrospectively analyzed and compared. In robotic surgery, dissection was performed laparoscopically, and hepaticojejunostomy was performed using a robotic platform.

Results: The mean operative time was significantly longer in robotic surgery than in laparoscopic surgery (247.94 ± 54.14 minutes vs . 181.31 ± 43.06 minutes, P < 0.05). The mean estimated blood loss (108.71 ± 15.53 mL vs . 172.78 ± 117.46 mL, respectively, P = 0.097) and postoperative hospital stay (7.33 ± 2.96 days vs . 6.22 ± 1.06 days, P = 0.128) were comparable between procedures. Compared to the laparoscopic approaches, robotic surgery had significantly less short-term complications (22.4% vs . 0%, P = 0.029). There were more biliary leakage (n = 7, 14.3%) observed during the first 30 days after surgery in laparoscopy while none were observed in the robotic method.

Conclusion: Robotic surgery allow for more precise and secure sutures during anastomosis thereby reducing biliary complications. With expanding knowledge and expertise, robotic surgery may offer more advantages over laparoscopy in the era of minimally invasive surgery.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app