"Many hospitals have introduced robotic systems to promote and attract patients. However, for a long time, there seems to be no strong clinical evidence that the efficacy and cost performance of robots are higher than those of endoscopy or open surgery." Vinay Prasad said.
On June 29, the "Annuals of Internal Medicine" published online "Evidence for Robot-assisted Abdominal and Pelvic Surgery: A System Review" (hereinafter referred to as "System Review"), which may be able to answer.
The study was completed by a team of researchers from 4 medical schools in Texas, USA. The research team will launch the "Da Vinci Robot" until April 2021, search multiple databases such as PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and finally include 50 randomized controlled studies involving robotics, laparoscopic or open surgery, including 4898 patients. , Covering almost all abdominal and pelvic surgery in gynecology, gastrointestinal, urology and other departments.
The results showed that in the short term, there was no significant difference between laparoscopic and robotic surgery in terms of intraoperative blood loss, surgical complications, and length of stay. In the long run, there is no significant difference between robotics, laparoscopic and open surgery overall.
In addition, laparoscopy is the "most time-saving" among the three surgical procedures. Relatively speaking, robotic surgery has the highest cost.
In 2020, Ruban Thanigasalam, associate professor of robotic surgery at the University of Sydney, Australia, gave a similar statement in an interview with Nature. "We have compared open surgery and robotic surgery. The preliminary results support the results that have been widely accepted by surgeons over the years: patients undergoing robotic surgery have less blood loss, less pain, and shorter recovery time. But 12 months after the operation, there were no significant differences in urination regulation and sexual function between the two groups. As far as cancer treatment itself is concerned, the long-term outcome is the same. "