Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy 8/2019

24.10.2018

Robotic surgery trends in general surgical oncology from the National Inpatient Sample

verfasst von: Camille L. Stewart, Philip H. G. Ituarte, Kurt A. Melstrom, Susanne G. Warner, Laleh G. Melstrom, Lily L. Lai, Yuman Fong, Yanghee Woo

Erschienen in: Surgical Endoscopy | Ausgabe 8/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Robotic surgery is offered at most major medical institutions. The extent of its use within general surgical oncology, however, is poorly understood. We hypothesized that robotic surgery adoption in surgical oncology is increasing annually, that is occurring in all surgical sites, and all regions of the US.

Study design

We identified patients with site-specific malignancies treated with surgical resection from the National Inpatient Sample 2010–2014 databases. Operations were considered robotic if any ICD-9-CM robotic procedure code was used.

Results

We identified 147,259 patients representing the following sites: esophageal (3%), stomach (5%), small bowel (5%), pancreas (7%), liver (5%), and colorectal (75%). Most operations were open (71%), followed by laparoscopic (26%), and robotic (3%). In 2010, only 1.1% of operations were robotic; over the 5-year study period, there was a 5.0-fold increase in robotic surgery, compared to 1.1-fold increase in laparoscopy and 1.2-fold decrease in open surgery (< 0.001). These trends were observed for all surgical sites and in all regions of the US, they were strongest for esophageal and colorectal operations, and in the Northeast. Adjusting for age and comorbidities, odds of having a robotic operation increased annually (5.6 times more likely by 2014), with similar length of stay (6.9 ± 6.5 vs 7.0 ± 6.5, p = 0.52) and rate of complications (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83–1.01, p = 0.08) compared to laparoscopy.

Conclusions

Robotic surgery as a platform for minimally invasive surgery is increasing over time for oncologic operations. The growing use of robotic surgery will affect surgical oncology practice in the future, warranting further study of its impact on cost, outcomes, and surgical training.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Yates DR, Vaessen C, Roupret M (2011) From Leonardo to da Vinci: the history of robot-assisted surgery in urology. BJU Int 108:1708–1714CrossRefPubMed Yates DR, Vaessen C, Roupret M (2011) From Leonardo to da Vinci: the history of robot-assisted surgery in urology. BJU Int 108:1708–1714CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Melstrom LG, Warner SG, Woo Y, Sun V, Lee B, Singh G, Fong Y (2018) Selecting incision-dominant cases for robotic liver resection: towards outpatient hepatectomy with rapid recovery. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 7:77–84CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Melstrom LG, Warner SG, Woo Y, Sun V, Lee B, Singh G, Fong Y (2018) Selecting incision-dominant cases for robotic liver resection: towards outpatient hepatectomy with rapid recovery. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 7:77–84CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Coil MA (1992) Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 45:613–619CrossRefPubMed Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Coil MA (1992) Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 45:613–619CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Collins TC, Daley J, Henderson WH, Khuri SF (1999) Risk factors for prolonged length of stay after major elective surgery. Ann Surg 230:251–259CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Collins TC, Daley J, Henderson WH, Khuri SF (1999) Risk factors for prolonged length of stay after major elective surgery. Ann Surg 230:251–259CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Lawson EH, Louie R, Zingmond DS, Brook RH, Hall BL, Han L, Rapp M, Ko CY (2012) A comparison of clinical registry versus administrative claims data for reporting of 30-day surgical complications. Ann Surg 256:973–981CrossRefPubMed Lawson EH, Louie R, Zingmond DS, Brook RH, Hall BL, Han L, Rapp M, Ko CY (2012) A comparison of clinical registry versus administrative claims data for reporting of 30-day surgical complications. Ann Surg 256:973–981CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Wright JD (2017) Robotic-assisted surgery: balancing evidence and implementation. JAMA 318:1545–1547CrossRefPubMed Wright JD (2017) Robotic-assisted surgery: balancing evidence and implementation. JAMA 318:1545–1547CrossRefPubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Liang JT, Huang KC, Lai HS, Lee PH, Jeng YM (2007) Oncologic results of laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery for stage II or III left-sided colon cancers: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg Oncol 14:109–117CrossRefPubMed Liang JT, Huang KC, Lai HS, Lee PH, Jeng YM (2007) Oncologic results of laparoscopic versus conventional open surgery for stage II or III left-sided colon cancers: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg Oncol 14:109–117CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Lacy AM, Bemelman WA, Andersson J, Angenete E, Rosenberg J, Fuerst A, Haglind E, COLOR II Study Group (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372:1324–1332CrossRefPubMed Bonjer HJ, Deijen CL, Abis GA, Cuesta MA, van der Pas MH, de Lange-de Klerk ES, Lacy AM, Bemelman WA, Andersson J, Angenete E, Rosenberg J, Fuerst A, Haglind E, COLOR II Study Group (2015) A randomized trial of laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer. N Engl J Med 372:1324–1332CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, Boller AM, George V, Abbas M, Peters WR Jr, Maun D, Chang G, Herline A, Fichera A, Mutch M, Wexner S, Whiteford M, Marks J, Birnbaum E, Margolin D, Larson D, Marcello P, Posner M, Read T, Monson J, Wren SM, Pisters PW, Nelson H (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314:1346–1355CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Fleshman J, Branda M, Sargent DJ, Boller AM, George V, Abbas M, Peters WR Jr, Maun D, Chang G, Herline A, Fichera A, Mutch M, Wexner S, Whiteford M, Marks J, Birnbaum E, Margolin D, Larson D, Marcello P, Posner M, Read T, Monson J, Wren SM, Pisters PW, Nelson H (2015) Effect of laparoscopic-assisted resection vs open resection of stage II or III rectal cancer on pathologic outcomes: The ACOSOG Z6051 randomized clinical trial. JAMA 314:1346–1355CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Zurück zum Zitat van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA, Fürst A, Lacy AM, Hop WC, Bonjer HJ, COlorectal cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection II (COLOR II) Study Group (2013) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 14:210–218CrossRefPubMed van der Pas MH, Haglind E, Cuesta MA, Fürst A, Lacy AM, Hop WC, Bonjer HJ, COlorectal cancer Laparoscopic or Open Resection II (COLOR II) Study Group (2013) Laparoscopic versus open surgery for rectal cancer (COLOR II): short-term outcomes of a randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 14:210–218CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Straatman J, van der Wielen N, Cuesta MA, Daams F, Roig Garcia J, Bonavina L, Rosman C, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Gisbertz SS, van der Peet DL (2017) Minimally invasive versus open esophageal resection: three-year follow-up of the previously reported randomized controlled trial: the TIME Trial. Ann Surg 266:232–236CrossRefPubMed Straatman J, van der Wielen N, Cuesta MA, Daams F, Roig Garcia J, Bonavina L, Rosman C, van Berge Henegouwen MI, Gisbertz SS, van der Peet DL (2017) Minimally invasive versus open esophageal resection: three-year follow-up of the previously reported randomized controlled trial: the TIME Trial. Ann Surg 266:232–236CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Hu Y, Huang C, Sun Y, Su X, Cao H, Hu J, Xue Y, Suo J, Tao K, He X, Wei H, Ying M, Hu W, Du X, Chen P, Liu H, Zheng C, Liu F, Yu J, Li Z, Zhao G, Chen X, Wang K, Li P, Xing J, Li G (2016) Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic versus open D2 distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 34:1350–1357CrossRefPubMed Hu Y, Huang C, Sun Y, Su X, Cao H, Hu J, Xue Y, Suo J, Tao K, He X, Wei H, Ying M, Hu W, Du X, Chen P, Liu H, Zheng C, Liu F, Yu J, Li Z, Zhao G, Chen X, Wang K, Li P, Xing J, Li G (2016) Morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic versus open D2 distal gastrectomy for advanced gastric cancer: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 34:1350–1357CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Fujii K, Yasuda K, Inomata M, Adachi Y (2002) A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laproscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report. Surgery 131:S306–S311CrossRefPubMed Kitano S, Shiraishi N, Fujii K, Yasuda K, Inomata M, Adachi Y (2002) A randomized controlled trial comparing open vs laproscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy for the treatment of early gastric cancer: an interim report. Surgery 131:S306–S311CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Ejaz A, Sachs T, He J, Spolverato G, Hirose K, Ahuja N, Wolfgang CL, Makary MA, Weiss M, Pawlik TM (2014) A comparison of open and minimally invasive surgery for hepatic and pancreatic resections using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Surgery 156:538–547CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ejaz A, Sachs T, He J, Spolverato G, Hirose K, Ahuja N, Wolfgang CL, Makary MA, Weiss M, Pawlik TM (2014) A comparison of open and minimally invasive surgery for hepatic and pancreatic resections using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Surgery 156:538–547CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, Quirke P, West N, Rautio T, Thomassen N, Tilney H, Gudgeon M, Bianchi PP, Edlin R, Hulme C, Brown J (2017) Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA 318:1569–1580CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jayne D, Pigazzi A, Marshall H, Croft J, Corrigan N, Copeland J, Quirke P, West N, Rautio T, Thomassen N, Tilney H, Gudgeon M, Bianchi PP, Edlin R, Hulme C, Brown J (2017) Effect of robotic-assisted vs conventional laparoscopic surgery on risk of conversion to open laparotomy among patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer: the ROLARR randomized clinical trial. JAMA 318:1569–1580CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim MJ, Park SC, Park JW, Chang HJ, Kim KY, Nam BH, Sohn DK, Oh JH (2018) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: A phase II open label prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 267:243–251CrossRefPubMed Kim MJ, Park SC, Park JW, Chang HJ, Kim KY, Nam BH, Sohn DK, Oh JH (2018) Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: A phase II open label prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg 267:243–251CrossRefPubMed
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK, Kim YW, Lee HJ, Ryu KW, Park JM, An JY, Kim MC, Park S, Song KY, Oh SJ, Kong SH, Suh BJ, Yang DH, Ha TK, Kim YN, Hyung WJ (2016) Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 263:103–109CrossRefPubMed Kim HI, Han SU, Yang HK, Kim YW, Lee HJ, Ryu KW, Park JM, An JY, Kim MC, Park S, Song KY, Oh SJ, Kong SH, Suh BJ, Yang DH, Ha TK, Kim YN, Hyung WJ (2016) Multicenter prospective comparative study of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg 263:103–109CrossRefPubMed
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Joyce D, Morris-Stiff G, Falk G, El-Hayek K, Chalikonda S, Walsh RM (2014) Robotic surgery of the pancreas. World J Gastroenterol 20:14726–14732CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Joyce D, Morris-Stiff G, Falk G, El-Hayek K, Chalikonda S, Walsh RM (2014) Robotic surgery of the pancreas. World J Gastroenterol 20:14726–14732CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Barbash GI, Glied SA (2010) New technology and health care costs–the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 363:701–704CrossRef Barbash GI, Glied SA (2010) New technology and health care costs–the case of robot-assisted surgery. N Engl J Med 363:701–704CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Turchetti G, Palla I, Pierotti F, Cuschieri A (2012) Economic evaluation of da Vinci-assisted robotic surgery: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 26:598–606CrossRefPubMed Turchetti G, Palla I, Pierotti F, Cuschieri A (2012) Economic evaluation of da Vinci-assisted robotic surgery: a systematic review. Surg Endosc 26:598–606CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Higgins RM, Frelich MJ, Bosler ME, Gould JC (2017) Cost analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic general surgery procedures. Surg Endosc 31:185–192CrossRefPubMed Higgins RM, Frelich MJ, Bosler ME, Gould JC (2017) Cost analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic general surgery procedures. Surg Endosc 31:185–192CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Tarr ME, Brancato SJ, Cunkelman JA, Polcari A, Nutter B, Kenton K (2015) Comparison of postural ergonomics between laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy: a pilot study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 22:234–238CrossRefPubMed Tarr ME, Brancato SJ, Cunkelman JA, Polcari A, Nutter B, Kenton K (2015) Comparison of postural ergonomics between laparoscopic and robotic sacrocolpopexy: a pilot study. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 22:234–238CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Szeto GP, Poon JT, Law WL (2013) A comparison of surgeon’s postural muscle activity during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic rectal surgery. J Robot Surg 7:305–308CrossRefPubMed Szeto GP, Poon JT, Law WL (2013) A comparison of surgeon’s postural muscle activity during robotic-assisted and laparoscopic rectal surgery. J Robot Surg 7:305–308CrossRefPubMed
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Mucksavage P, Kerbl DC, Lee JY (2011) The da Vinci(®) Surgical System overcomes innate hand dominance. J Endourol 25:1385–1388CrossRefPubMed Mucksavage P, Kerbl DC, Lee JY (2011) The da Vinci(®) Surgical System overcomes innate hand dominance. J Endourol 25:1385–1388CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Moore LJ, Wilson MR, Waine E, Masters RS, McGrath JS, Vine SJ (2015) Robotic technology results in faster and more robust surgical skill acquisition than traditional laparoscopy. J Robot Surg 9:67–73CrossRef Moore LJ, Wilson MR, Waine E, Masters RS, McGrath JS, Vine SJ (2015) Robotic technology results in faster and more robust surgical skill acquisition than traditional laparoscopy. J Robot Surg 9:67–73CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Lusch A, Bucur PL, Menhadji AD, Okhunov Z, Liss MA, Perez-Lanzac A, McDougall EM, Landman J (2014) Evaluation of the impact of three-dimensional vision on laparoscopic performance. J Endourol 28:261–266CrossRefPubMed Lusch A, Bucur PL, Menhadji AD, Okhunov Z, Liss MA, Perez-Lanzac A, McDougall EM, Landman J (2014) Evaluation of the impact of three-dimensional vision on laparoscopic performance. J Endourol 28:261–266CrossRefPubMed
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilhelm D, Reiser S, Kohn N, Witte M, Leiner U, Mühlbach L, Ruschin D, Reiner W, Feussner H (2014) Comparative evaluation of HD 2D/3D laparoscopic monitors and benchmarking to a theoretically ideal 3D pseudodisplay: even well-experienced laparoscopists perform better with 3D. Surg Endosc 28:2387–2397CrossRefPubMed Wilhelm D, Reiser S, Kohn N, Witte M, Leiner U, Mühlbach L, Ruschin D, Reiner W, Feussner H (2014) Comparative evaluation of HD 2D/3D laparoscopic monitors and benchmarking to a theoretically ideal 3D pseudodisplay: even well-experienced laparoscopists perform better with 3D. Surg Endosc 28:2387–2397CrossRefPubMed
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Son GM, Kim JG, Lee JC, Suh YJ, Cho HM, Lee YS, Lee IK, Chun CS (2010) Multidimensional analysis of the learning curve for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 20:609–617CrossRefPubMed Son GM, Kim JG, Lee JC, Suh YJ, Cho HM, Lee YS, Lee IK, Chun CS (2010) Multidimensional analysis of the learning curve for laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 20:609–617CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Jiménez-Rodríguez RM, Díaz-Pavón JM, de la Portilla de Juan F, Prendes-Sillero E, Dussort HC, Padillo J (2013) Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 28:815–821CrossRefPubMed Jiménez-Rodríguez RM, Díaz-Pavón JM, de la Portilla de Juan F, Prendes-Sillero E, Dussort HC, Padillo J (2013) Learning curve for robotic-assisted laparoscopic rectal cancer surgery. Int J Colorectal Dis 28:815–821CrossRefPubMed
35.
Zurück zum Zitat de’Angelis N, Lizzi V, Azoulay D, Brunetti F (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer: analysis of the initial simultaneous learning curve of a surgical fellow. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 26:882–892CrossRefPubMed de’Angelis N, Lizzi V, Azoulay D, Brunetti F (2016) Robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy for colon cancer: analysis of the initial simultaneous learning curve of a surgical fellow. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 26:882–892CrossRefPubMed
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Lamb MN, Bardakcioglu O (2017) The learning curve of robotic assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery and how to start applying robotic technology in colorectal surgery. In: Obias V (ed) Robotic colon and rectal surgery. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, pp 11–15CrossRef Lamb MN, Bardakcioglu O (2017) The learning curve of robotic assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery and how to start applying robotic technology in colorectal surgery. In: Obias V (ed) Robotic colon and rectal surgery. Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, pp 11–15CrossRef
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Efanov M, Alikhanov R, Tsvirkun V, Kazakov I, Melekhina O, Kim P, Vankovich A, Grendal K, Berelavichus S, Khatkov I (2017) Comparative analysis of learning curve in complex robot-assisted and laparoscopic liver resection. HPB 19:818–824CrossRefPubMed Efanov M, Alikhanov R, Tsvirkun V, Kazakov I, Melekhina O, Kim P, Vankovich A, Grendal K, Berelavichus S, Khatkov I (2017) Comparative analysis of learning curve in complex robot-assisted and laparoscopic liver resection. HPB 19:818–824CrossRefPubMed
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Shakir M, Boone BA, Polanco PM, Zenati MS, Hogg ME, Tsung A, Choudry HA, Moser AJ, Bartlett DL, Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH (2015) The learning curve for robotic distal pancreatectomy: an analysis of outcomes of the first 100 consecutive cases at a high-volume pancreatic centre. HPB 17:580–586CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Shakir M, Boone BA, Polanco PM, Zenati MS, Hogg ME, Tsung A, Choudry HA, Moser AJ, Bartlett DL, Zeh HJ, Zureikat AH (2015) The learning curve for robotic distal pancreatectomy: an analysis of outcomes of the first 100 consecutive cases at a high-volume pancreatic centre. HPB 17:580–586CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Perrone VG, Miccoli M, Brozzetti S, Boggi U (2015) The learning curve in robotic distal pancreatectomy. Updates Surg 67:257–264CrossRefPubMed Napoli N, Kauffmann EF, Perrone VG, Miccoli M, Brozzetti S, Boggi U (2015) The learning curve in robotic distal pancreatectomy. Updates Surg 67:257–264CrossRefPubMed
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Wright JD, Tergas AI, Hou JY, Burke WM, Chen L, Hu JC, Neugut AI, Ananth CV, Hershman DL (2016) Effect of regional hospital competition and hospital financial status on the use of robotic-assisted surgery. JAMA Surg 151:612–620CrossRefPubMed Wright JD, Tergas AI, Hou JY, Burke WM, Chen L, Hu JC, Neugut AI, Ananth CV, Hershman DL (2016) Effect of regional hospital competition and hospital financial status on the use of robotic-assisted surgery. JAMA Surg 151:612–620CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Robotic surgery trends in general surgical oncology from the National Inpatient Sample
verfasst von
Camille L. Stewart
Philip H. G. Ituarte
Kurt A. Melstrom
Susanne G. Warner
Laleh G. Melstrom
Lily L. Lai
Yuman Fong
Yanghee Woo
Publikationsdatum
24.10.2018
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Surgical Endoscopy / Ausgabe 8/2019
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6554-9

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2019

Surgical Endoscopy 8/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.