Abstract 318P
Background
Open IL (O-ILND) has been the gold standard for surgical treatment of the inguin, in the development of minimally invasive modifications of IL, including laparoscopic IL (VEIL) and robotic-assisted IL (RA-VEIL). They have been used to improve surgical outcomes in IL. We compared perioperative and survival outcomes among the three postoperative patients to guide the choice of minimally invasive technique for IL.
Methods
From January 2017 to June 2024, a retrospective analysis was performed on 27 admitted patients with inguinal lymph node metastases. Nine patients underwent robot-assisted videoendoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (RA-VEIL group n=9), 10 patients underwent laparoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL group n=10), and 8 patients underwent open inguinal lymphadenectomy (open group n=8).
Results
In comparing the operation time of the three groups, it can be concluded that the VEIL group (102.50±23.12) was significantly shorter than that of the O-ILND group (183.38±67.92, p<0.001). The RA-VEIL group (140.00±29.15) was significantly shorter than that in the O-ILND group (183.38±67.92, p=0.048<0.05). In comparing the intraoperative blood loss of the three groups, we found that the VEIL group (71.00±16.63) was significantly less than that in the O-ILND group (168.75±96.13, p<0.001). The RA-VEIL group (46.67±23.45) was significantly less than that in the O-ILND group (168.75±96.13, p<0.001). However, there were no significant differences in intraoperative lymph node yield, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative drainage tube removal time, and hospital cost between the RA-VEIL, VEIL, and O-ILND groups.
Conclusions
We have demonstrated that VEIL and RA-VEIL are safe and equally effective techniques, and that VEIL and RA-VEIL are comparable to and superior to O-ILND in the perioperative period compared to O-ILND in patients with inguinal lymph node metastases. VEIL and RA-VEIL should be considered as two minimally invasive options for open surgery.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China (82172777).
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.