Chinese expert consensus on robot-assisted choledochal cyst excision in children (2022)
-
摘要: 儿童机器人手术几乎与成人外科同步,但发展较慢。自2006年Woo R首次报道达芬奇机器人辅助小儿胆总管囊肿手术后,逐渐在临床上得到应用,并取得良好效果。中国自2013年成功开展机器人辅助小儿胆总管囊肿手术以来,手术的数量以及质量均达到令人瞩目的水平。随着技术进步及推广,儿童机器人手术的普及率也不断提高。为进一步规范临床医疗行为,保障治疗质量,促进手术技术规范、健康发展,中国医师协会医学机器人医师分会小儿外科专业委员会和中国妇幼保健协会妇幼微创专业委员会组织国内相关专家,反复研讨,制定机器人辅助儿童先天性胆总管囊肿手术中国专家共识以指导同道更好地开展此类手术。本共识重点介绍手术适应证、手术流程和操作技术,手术相关并发症在共识的最后给予详细的阐述。Abstract: Robotic surgery in children started almost simultaneously with it in adults, but proceeded slowly. Since the Da Vinci robotic choledochal cyst(CC) surgery for children was firstly reported by Woo R et al in 2006, it has been gradually applied in more and more pediatric surgery centers with satisfied results. Though the successful implementation of robot-assisted congenital choledochal cyst excision in China was in 2013, the quantity and quality of this surgery have already reached a remarkable level. With the progress and application of the new technology, the acceptance of the robotic surgery for CC have kept increasing. In order to standardize the clinical practice, guarantee the quality of treatment, promote the healthy development of robotic choledochal cyst surgery for children, the Professional Committee of Pediatric Robotic Surgery of Medical Robotic Surgery Doctor Branch of Chinese Medical Doctor Association & Professional Committee of Maternal and Child Minimally Invasive Surgery of China Maternal and Child Health Association organized relevant experts to initiate the consensus on robot-assisted choledochal cyst excision in children. The consensus focuses on surgical indications, procedures and techniques, and the prevention and treatment of related surgical complications are also provided as supplementary at the end of the consensus.
-
Key words:
- Choledochal Cyst /
- Robot-Assisted Surgery /
- Expert Consensus /
- Children
-
表 1 GRADE 系统评价法推荐级别列表
Table 1. Recommended levels of GRADE systemic evaluation method
项目 内容 证据质量等级 高(A) 未来研究几乎不可能改变目前疗效评价结果的可信度 中(B) 未来研究可能对目前疗效评估结果有重要影响,可能改变目前结果的可信度 低(C) 未来研究很可能对目前疗效评估结果有重要影响,改变目前结果的可信度的可能性大 极低(D) 任何疗效评估都不确定 推荐强度分级 强推荐(1) 明确显示干预措施利大于弊或弊大于利 弱推荐(2) 利弊不确定或利弊相当