Major hepatectomy in elderly patients: possible benefit from robotic platform utilization

The far-reaching impact of robotic-assisted surgery on healthcare systems

The use of Robotic-Assisted Surgery (RAS) in Canada continues to grow and evolve, demonstrating improvements in patient and clinical outcomes across a wide range of surgical procedures. Global studies show how implementing a RAS program can also increase hospital capacity, drive benefits in health human resources, and improve overall health system efficiency. Despite the evidence of these positive results, Canada lags behind other developed nations in adopting RAS. Drawing on the experience of surgeons and health leaders from across Canada, this article focuses on the benefits of adopting RAS and discusses the challenges organizations face in successfully funding and implementing RAS programs. This includes the innovative approaches health leaders are taking to support equitable access to RAS for patients and offers evidence-informed strategies that can help unlock the full potential of RAS-beyond the operating room-to improve overall quality of care and the sustainability of the Canadian healthcare system.

Safety and feasibility of liver resection including major hepatectomy for geriatric patients with hepatocellular carcinoma: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether hepatectomy, which ranges in invasiveness from partial to major hepatectomy, is safe and feasible for older adult patients. Therefore, we compared its postoperative complications and long-term outcomes between younger and older adult patients.

METHODS

Patients who underwent hepatectomies for hepatocellular carcinoma (N = 883) were evaluated. Patients were divided into two groups: aged < 75 years (N = 593) and ≥ 75 years (N = 290). Short-term outcomes and prognoses were compared between the groups in the entire cohort. The same analyses were performed for the major hepatectomy cohort.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, no significant differences were found in complications between patients aged < 75 and ≥ 75 years, and the multivariate analysis did not reveal age as a prognostic factor for postoperative complications. However, overall survival was significantly worse in older patients, although no significant differences were noted in time to recurrence or cancer-specific survival. In the multivariate analyses of time to recurrence, overall survival, and cancer-specific survival, although older age was an independent poor prognostic factor for overall survival, it was not a prognostic factor for time to recurrence and cancer-specific survival. In the major hepatectomy subgroup, short- and long-term outcomes, including time to recurrence, overall survival, and cancer-specific survival, did not differ significantly between the age groups. In the multivariate analysis, age was not a significant prognostic factor for complications, time to recurrence, overall survival, or cancer-specific survival.

CONCLUSION

Hepatectomy, including minor and major hepatectomy, may be safe and oncologically feasible options for selected older adult patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

Robotic Major Hepatectomy in Elderly Patient

BACKGROUND

the role of minimally invasive liver surgery has been progressively developed, with the practice increasing in safety and feasibility also with respect to major liver resections. The aim of this study was to analyze the feasibility and safety of major liver resection in elderly patients.

METHODS

data from a multicentric retrospective database including 1070 consecutive robotic liver resections in nine European hospital centers were analyzed. Among these, 131 were major liver resections. Patients were also divided in two groups (<65 years old and ≥65 years old) and perioperative data were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

a total of 131 patients were included in the study. Operative time was 332 ± 125 min. Postoperative overall complications occurred in 27.1% of patients. Severe complications (Clavien Dindo ≥ 3) were 9.9%. Hospital stay was 6.6 ± 5.3 days. Patients were divided into two groups based on their age: 75 patients < 65 years old and 56 patients ≥ 65 years old. Prolonged pain, lung infection, intensive care stay, and 90-day readmission were worse in the elderly group. The two groups were matched for ASA and Charlson comorbidity score and, after statistical adjustment, postoperative data were similar between two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

robotic major liver resection in elderly patients was associated with satisfying short-term outcomes.

Inferior vena cava hemangioma resected using a novel Toumai robotic surgical platform

This study aims to investigate the significance of using the Toumai robotic platform for the resection of inferior vena cava (IVC) hemangiomas. Our objective is to provide information on the potential benefits of this innovative approach in managing these uncommon vascular tumors and to contribute to the growing body of knowledge in the field of surgical oncology and vascular surgery. A 37-year-old female patient with an incidental finding of a right retroperitoneal mass underwent contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging, which confirmed the diagnosis of an IVC hemangioma. Due to the rarity and complexity of this vascular tumor, the medical team opted for a novel approach using the Toumai robotic surgical platform (Shanghai MicroPort MedBot Group Co, Ltd). Under general anesthesia, the patient was placed in the left lateral decubitus position, and the robotic arms were controlled remotely through the Toumai platform. A transperitoneal approach was adopted, and the surgeon meticulously resected the tumor while preserving the integrity of the IVC. The use of the Toumai robotic platform facilitated precise tumor resection, minimizing the risk of damage to surrounding structures. The minimally invasive nature of the robotic surgery contributed to a reduced incidence of postoperative complications and accelerated patient recovery. Furthermore, the remote fifth-generation mobile network surgical capabilities of the Toumai platform allow for expert care to be provided to patients despite geographic barriers. The robotic-assisted surgical approach using the Toumai platform demonstrates its potential benefits in managing rare and complex vascular tumors such as IVC hemangiomas. Robotic technology has the potential to revolutionize the field of surgical oncology and vascular surgery, leading to improved patient outcomes and healthcare delivery. However, more extensive clinical studies and larger case series are needed to validate the long-term safety and efficacy of this innovative surgical approach. Continued research and collaboration between clinicians and robotic technology experts are essential to fully realize the potential of robotic-assisted surgery for the benefit of patients with rare and challenging medical conditions.

Comparative study of operative expenses: robotic vs. laparoscopic vs. open liver resections at a university hospital in the UK

Robotic liver resections (RLR) are increasingly being performed and has previously been considered more costly. The aim is to explore the cost of RLR compared with laparoscopic and open liver resection in a single National Health Service (NHS) hospital. A retrospective review of patients who underwent RLR, LLR, and OLR from April 2014 to December 2022 was conducted. The primary outcomes were the cost of consumables and median income, and the secondary outcomes were the overall length of stay and mortality at 90 days. Overall, 332 patients underwent liver resections. There were 204 males (61.4%) and 128 females (38.6%), with a median age of 62 years (IQR: 51-77 years). Of these, 60 patients (18.1%) underwent RLR, 21 patients (6.3%) underwent LLR, and 251 patients (75.6%) underwent OLR. Median consumables cost per case was £3863 (IQR: £3458-£5061) for RLR, £4326 (IQR: £4273-£4473) for LLR, and £4,084 (IQR: £3799-£5549) for the OLR cohort (p = 0.140). Median income per case was £7999 (IQR: £4509-£10,777) for RLR, £7497 (IQR: £2407-£14,576) for LLR, and £7493 (IQR: £2542-£14,121) for OLR. The median length of stay (LOS) for RLR was 3 days (IQR: 2-4.7 days) compared to 5 days for LLR (IQR: 4.5-7 days) and 6 days for OLR (IQR: 5-8 days, p < 0.001). Within the NHS, RLR has consumable costs comparable to OLR and LLR. It is also linked with a shorter LOS and generates similar income for patients undergoing OLR and LLR.