Cited 0 times in

Propensity Score-matched Donor and Recipient Outcomes: Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Donor Right Hepatectomy

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author김덕기-
dc.contributor.author김명수-
dc.contributor.author이재근-
dc.contributor.author주동진-
dc.contributor.author최기홍-
dc.contributor.author최진섭-
dc.contributor.author한대훈-
dc.date.accessioned2025-05-02T00:25:53Z-
dc.date.available2025-05-02T00:25:53Z-
dc.date.issued2025-03-
dc.identifier.issn0041-1337-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/205383-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Few studies have examined the long-term outcomes of recipients in minimally invasive donor hepatectomies, particularly comparing robotic and laparoscopic donor procedures. Understanding these outcomes is crucial for optimizing surgical approaches and improving the overall success of living donor liver transplantation. This study aimed to compare the feasibility and safety of robotic donor right hepatectomy (RDRH) and laparoscopic donor right hepatectomy (LDRH) by evaluating total follow-up patient outcomes. Methods: This retrospective, single-center study included 117 and 118 donors who underwent RDRH and LDRH between March 2016 and June 2023, respectively. After performing 1:1 propensity score matching, 71 donor-recipient pairs were included in each group. Donor and recipient complications were divided into early (within 90 d) and late (after 90 d) biliary and vascular complications. Results: In the matched cohort, major complication rates of donors were similar in both groups. Bile duct (BD) variation was not significantly different; however, the rates of multiple BD openings (26.8% versus 54.9%; P = 0.001) and major biliary complications in recipients were higher in the LDRH group (22.5% versus 42.3%; P = 0.012). The cumulative biliary complication rate was significantly higher in the LDRH group. Early biliary complications were not significantly different; however, the rate of late biliary complications was higher in the LDRH group (11.3% versus 23.9%; P = 0.047). Conclusions: RDRH demonstrated comparable postoperative complications to LDRH in donors but showed fewer recipient biliary complications. This could be attributed to the precision of robotic dissection and BD division, resulting in fewer multiple BD openings.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherLippincott Williams & Wilkins-
dc.relation.isPartOfTRANSPLANTATION-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.subject.MESHAdult-
dc.subject.MESHFeasibility Studies-
dc.subject.MESHFemale-
dc.subject.MESHHepatectomy* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHHepatectomy* / methods-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHLaparoscopy* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHLaparoscopy* / methods-
dc.subject.MESHLiver Transplantation* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHLiver Transplantation* / methods-
dc.subject.MESHLiving Donors*-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHMiddle Aged-
dc.subject.MESHPostoperative Complications / epidemiology-
dc.subject.MESHPostoperative Complications / etiology-
dc.subject.MESHPropensity Score-
dc.subject.MESHRetrospective Studies-
dc.subject.MESHRisk Factors-
dc.subject.MESHRobotic Surgical Procedures* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHRobotic Surgical Procedures* / methods-
dc.subject.MESHTime Factors-
dc.subject.MESHTissue and Organ Harvesting* / adverse effects-
dc.subject.MESHTissue and Organ Harvesting* / methods-
dc.subject.MESHTreatment Outcome-
dc.titlePropensity Score-matched Donor and Recipient Outcomes: Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Donor Right Hepatectomy-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Surgery (외과학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorNa Reum Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDai Hoon Han-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDong Jin Joo-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJae Geun Lee-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDeok-Gie Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorMyoung Soo Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJin Sub Choi-
dc.contributor.googleauthorGi Hong Choi-
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/TP.0000000000005245-
dc.contributor.localIdA05303-
dc.contributor.localIdA00424-
dc.contributor.localIdA03068-
dc.contributor.localIdA03948-
dc.contributor.localIdA04046-
dc.contributor.localIdA04199-
dc.contributor.localIdA04273-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ02754-
dc.identifier.eissn1534-6080-
dc.identifier.pmid39439020-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://journals.lww.com/transplantjournal/fulltext/2025/03000/propensity_score_matched_donor_and_recipient.21.aspx-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Deok Gie-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor김덕기-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor김명수-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor이재근-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor주동진-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor최기홍-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor최진섭-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor한대훈-
dc.citation.volume109-
dc.citation.number3-
dc.citation.startPagee166-
dc.citation.endPagee174-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationTRANSPLANTATION, Vol.109(3) : e166-e174, 2025-03-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Surgery (외과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.