The conversion rate from minimally invasive to open surgery for liver resection has been known to be high, but researchers from the University of Illinois, Chicago, have reported that conversion rates are considerably lower in robot-assisted liver resections, which may ultimately improve survival and complication rates.
Master Video/Shutterstock
Their study, published in the International Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery, found that the overall conversion rate of robot-assisted to open surgery for liver resection was 4.4%, considerably lower than that for the pure laparoscopic approach. “The robotic assist could potentially help in decreasing the conversion rate,” said Federico Gheza, MD, and his coauthors. They claimed that this is the first paper to focus on reasons for conversion from robot-assisted liver resection to open surgery.
The study findings are based on a systematic review of 29 series of 1,091 patients who had robot-assisted liver resection, including Dr. Gheza’s and his coauthors’ own series of 139 patients who had the operation from 2007 to 2017. The series were published from 2009 to 2017.
Dr. Gheza’s and his coauthors’ series had a conversion rate of 7.9%. When their results were included with those of the previously published studies, the conversion rate was 4.8%.
Dr. Gheza and his coauthors noted that the conversion rate for minimally invasive hepatic operations is one of the highest among all types of laparoscopic operations, with rates reported as high as 23% in published series (Ann Surg. 2016;263:761-77). “More importantly, preliminary database analysis and large series review suggested an association between conversion and higher morbidity and mortality,” the study noted.
The purpose of the systematic review was to better understand reasons for conversion from robotic to open in liver resections, Dr. Gheza and his coauthors said. They noted a study of 2,861 laparoscopic resections reported that more than one-third of patients were converted for bleeding, and almost one-fifth (18.9%) for peritoneal adhesions (Ann Surg. 2017;268:1051-7). “In the whole literature on hepatic robotic surgery, no conversion due to adhesion was reported,” Dr. Gheza and his coauthors said.
A subanalysis of nine series that included both robotic (360 patients) and laparoscopic (462 patients) surgeries found conversion rates of 2.5% vs. 8%, respectively (P less than .01).
Dr. Gheza and his coauthors called for a prospective trial to further define the impact of robotic surgery on conversions, but the clinical implications of conversions to open surgery in minimally invasive hepatic surgery remain unclear.
Dr. Gheza disclosed relationships with Medtronic. Coauthor P. C. Giulianotti, MD, reported financial relationships with Intuitive, Covidien/Medtronic and Ethicon/Johnson & Johnson. The other coauthors had no relationships to disclose.
SOURCE: Gheza F et al. Intl J Med Robotics Comp Assisted Surg. 2018; doi:10.1002/rcs.1976.