摘要
一位新闻记者-机器人与机器学习的工作人员新闻编辑每日新闻-肿瘤学的新研究-直肠癌是一篇报道的主题。根据NewsRx记者从中国成都发来的新闻报道，研究表明：“机器人手术(RS)越来越受欢迎；然而，腹会阴切除(APR)直肠癌(RC)的证据很少。比较RS和腹腔镜手术(LS)在4月对RC的疗效。”新闻记者引用了成都第五人民医院的一篇研究文章:“我们回顾性地确定了2016年4月至2022年6月接受RS或LS PR的RC患者。比较了两组患者的短期手术结果。为了减少潜在的混杂因素的影响,我们使用倾向评分匹配。”对133例RC患者进行倾向性评分匹配后,各组42例,RS组(17/42,40.5%)明显低于LS组(27/42,40.5%)。两组在手术时间(=0.564)、术中输血(=0.314)、再手术率(=0.314)、切除淋巴结(=0.309)、肿瘤周边切缘(CRM)阳性率(=0.314)等方面均无显著性差异,Meta分析显示RS组CRM阳性率(=0.04)、估计失血量(<0.00001)、术后住院时间短(=0.02),术后并发症少(=0.002)。
Abstract
By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Robotics & Machine Learning Daily News Daily News-New research on Oncology - Rectal Canc er is the subject of a report. According to news reporting from Chengdu, People' s Republic of China, by NewsRx journalists, research stated, "Robotic surgery (R S) is gaining popularity; however, evidence for abdominoperineal resection (APR) of rectal cancer (RC) is scarce. To compare the efficacy of RS and laparoscopic surgery (LS) in APR for RC." The news correspondents obtained a quote from the research from Chengdu Fifth Pe ople's Hospital, "We retrospectively identified patients with RC who underwent A PR by RS or LS from April 2016 to June 2022. Data regarding short-term surgical outcomes were compared between the two groups. To reduce the effect of potential confounding factors, propensity score matching was used, with a 1:1 ratio betwe en the RS and LS groups. A meta-analysis of seven trials was performed to compar e the efficacy of robotic and laparoscopic APR for RC surgery. Of 133 patients, after propensity score matching, there were 42 patients in each group. The posto perative complication rate was significantly lower in the RS group (17/42, 40.5% ) than in the LS group (27/42, 64.3%) ( = 0.029). There was no sign ificant difference in operative time ( = 0.564), intraoperative transfusion ( = 0.314), reoperation rate ( = 0.314), lymph nodes harvested ( =0.309), or circum ferential resection margin (CRM) positive rate ( = 0.314) between the two groups . The meta-analysis showed patients in the RS group had fewer positive CRMs ( = 0.04), lesser estimated blood loss (<0.00001), shorter pos toperative hospital stays ( = 0.02), and fewer postoperative complications ( = 0 .002) than patients in the LS group."
NETL
NSTL