| 1. |
- Vatansever, Safa, et al.
(författare)
-
Robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic adrenalectomy : Results from the EUROCRINE Surgical Registry
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Surgery (United States). - : Elsevier BV. - 0039-6060. ; 171:5, s. 1224-1230
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Adrenalectomy is routinely performed via the minimally invasive approach. Safety of adrenalectomy using the robot-assisted technique has been widely demonstrated by several series, but the literature is scarce regarding the comparison of conventional laparoscopic versus robot-assisted approach. We decided to carry out a multicenter study to compare clinical and surgical outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy. Methods: This is a retrospective case-control study, including data from centers affiliated to the Surgical Registry EUROCRINE. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery for adrenal tumors and registered between 2015 and 2018 were included. Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy was compared. All comparisons were carried out in terms of complication rate, conversion rate and duration of stay. Results: A total of 1,005 patients from 46 clinics underwent robotic or conventional laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Median age was 55 (interquartile range: 45−65) years. Robotic adrenalectomy was performed in 189 (18.8%) patients. According to Clavien-Dindo classification, complication rate was lower in the robotic surgery group (1.6% vs 16.5%, P <.001). Laparoscopic surgery and active hormonal status were significantly correlated with complications, both in univariate and multivariate analysis. There was no significant difference between laparoscopic and robotic surgery groups, in terms of conversion rate (2.1% vs 0.5%, respectively, P =.147). Duration of stay was shorter in the robotic adrenalectomy group (82.1% vs 28.8%, P <.001). Conclusion: Analysis of the EUROCRINE database supports that robotic adrenalectomy resulted in a lower complication rate and shorter duration of stay, compared with laparoscopic adrenalectomy. Granular data to support this is warranted.
|
|
| 2. |
- Inabnet, William B., 3rd, et al.
(författare)
-
Correlating the Bethesda System for Reporting Thyroid Cytopathology with Histology and Extent of Surgery : A Review of 21,746 Patients from Four Endocrine Surgery Registries Across Two Continents
- 2020
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Surgery. - : Springer. - 0364-2313 .- 1432-2323. ; 44:2, s. 426-435
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The Bethesda system for cytopathology (TBSRTC) is a 6-tier diagnostic framework developed to standardize thyroid cytopathology reporting. The aim of this study was to determine the risk of malignancy (ROM) for each Bethesda category.METHODS: Thyroidectomy-related data from 314 facilities in 22 countries were entered into the following outcome registries: CESQIP (North America), Eurocrine (Europe), SQRTPA (Sweden) and UKRETS (UK). Demographic, cytological, pathologic and extent of surgery data were mapped into one dataset and analyzed.RESULTS: Out of 41,294 thyroidectomy patient entries from January 1, 2015, to June 30, 2017, 21,746 patients underwent both thyroid FNA and surgery. A comparison of cytology and surgical pathology data demonstrated a ROM for Bethesda categories 1 to 6 of 19.2%, 12.7%, 31.9%, 31.4%, 77.8% and 96.0%, respectively. Male patients had a higher rate of malignancy for every Bethesda category. Secondary analysis demonstrated a high ROM in male patients with Bethesda 3 category aged 31-35 years (52.1%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 37.9-66.2%), aged 36-40 years (55.9%, 95% CI 39.2-72.6%) and aged 41-45 years (46.9%, 95% CI 33-60.9%). Patients with Bethesda 5 and 6 scores were more likely to undergo total thyroidectomy (65.9% and 84.6%); for patients with Bethesda scores 2 and 3, a higher percentage of females underwent total thyroidectomy compared to males in spite of a higher ROM for males.CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate that Bethesda categories 1-4 are associated with a higher ROM compared to the first edition of TBSRTC, especially in male patients, and validate findings from the second edition of TBSRTC.
|
|
