Long-Term and Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Liver Resection for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter, Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Background To assess long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted liver resection (RLR) for colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases as compared to a propensity-matched cohort of laparoscopic liver resections (LLR). Although safety and short-term outcomes of RLR have been described and previously comp...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:World journal of surgery Vol. 44; no. 3; pp. 887 - 895
Main Authors: Beard, Rachel E., Khan, Sidrah, Troisi, Roberto I., Montalti, Roberto, Vanlander, Aude, Fong, Yuman, Kingham, T. Peter, Boerner, Thomas, Berber, Eren, Kahramangil, Bora, Buell, Joseph F., Martinie, John B., Vrochides, Dionisios, Shen, Chengli, Molinari, Michele, Geller, David A., Tsung, Allan
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 01-03-2020
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background To assess long-term oncologic outcomes of robotic-assisted liver resection (RLR) for colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases as compared to a propensity-matched cohort of laparoscopic liver resections (LLR). Although safety and short-term outcomes of RLR have been described and previously compared to LLR, long-term and oncologic data are lacking. Methods A retrospective study was performed of all patients who underwent RLR and LLR for CRC metastases at six high-volume centers in the USA and Europe between 2002 and 2017. Propensity matching was used to match baseline characteristics between the two groups. Data were analyzed with a focus on postoperative and oncologic outcomes, as well as long-term recurrence and survival. Results RLR was performed in 115 patients, and 514 patients underwent LLR. Following propensity matching 115 patients in each cohort were compared. Perioperative outcomes including mortality, morbidity, reoperation, readmission, intensive care requirement, length-of-stay and margin status were not statistically different. Both prematching and postmatching analyses demonstrated similar overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between RLR and LLR at 5 years (61 vs. 60% OS, p  = 0.87, and 38 vs. 31% DFS, p  = 0.25, prematching; 61 vs. 60% OS, p  = 0.78, and 38 vs. 44% DFS, p  = 0.62, postmatching). Conclusions Propensity score matching with a large, multicenter database demonstrates that RLR for colorectal metastases is feasible and safe, with perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes and survival that are largely comparable to LLR.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0364-2313
1432-2323
DOI:10.1007/s00268-019-05270-x