# Analysis of the Effect of Robots in the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer Based on Smart Medicine

Authors: Hongquan Qiu; Dongzhi Wang; Haiyan Miao
Journal: Journal of Healthcare Engineering
 (2021)

---

## Abstract

In order to study the effect of robots in the treatment of pancreatic cancer in the context of smart medical, this paper improves the robot recognition technology and data processing technology and improves the system kernel algorithm through the hash algorithm. Unlike the traditional sequencing method that directly uses the gray average value as a feature, the hash algorithm calculates the gray three-average value of each frame block and uses the difference of the three-average value of adjacent frame blocks to perform detection. Moreover, this paper proposes a detection and localization scheme based on hash local matching, which consists of two parts: coarse matching and fine matching. In addition, this paper designs a control experiment to analyze the effect of robots in the treatment of pancreatic cancer, counts multiple sets of data, and uses mathematical statistics to process and visually display the experimental data. The research shows that the robot has a good clinical effect in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

The pancreas is located deep in the abdomen and there are several important blood vessels around it. Therefore, pancreatic surgery is difficult and risky. It has been done through open surgery for a long time. Moreover, for a long period of time, the development of minimally invasive surgery in pancreatic surgery has been slower than in other surgeries. The robotic surgery system that came out at the end of the last century brought a turning point in this situation. The unique advantages of robotic surgical assistance systems have made pancreatic surgeons challenge minimally invasive surgery [1]. For advanced pancreatic tumors, radical surgery combined with vascular resection and reconstruction can give patients more benefits. Open pancreatectomy combined with vascular resection and reconstruction has been widely used, and the use of robotic surgery systems for pancreatectomy combined with vascular resection and reconstruction is a new challenge for pancreatic surgeons [2]. The Da Vinci Robotic Surgical Assist System was launched in 1997 and began to be put into clinical use in 2000, and it continues to develop, constantly innovating. The world’s first robotic surgery was a robotic cholecystectomy completed in 1998. In 2002, the first robot-assisted pancreatectomy was completed. The operation time was 275 minutes and the robot time was 185 minutes. In 2008, 8 cases of robot-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy were reported, and the average operation time was 490 minutes. From 2003 to 2009, 60 cases of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy were completed. With rich surgical experience, many experts and scholars began to carry out robotic pancreatectomy combined with vascular reconstruction.For the first time in 2011, 5 instances of robotic pancreatectomy with vascular resection and repair were described. The portal vein was concluded for 20 minutes in two of the instances: one case was anastomosed end-to-end and one case had part of the portal vein wall removed and reconstructed using a polytetrafluoroethylene patch. Second, one case involved resection of the pancreas body and tail combined with portal vein reconstruction, with the portal vein blocked for 24 minutes and repaired with a polytetrafluoroethylene patch, and the other two cases involved resection of the pancreas body and tail combined with resection of the abdominal cavity [3].The robotic surgical system has two important advantages over laparoscopic surgery: (1) the robotic surgical instrument has a flexible wrist joint, which can imitate the surgeon’s hand movement by 720° rotation. The laparoscopic instrument can only move along one axis and cannot be bent. (2) The instrument arm of the robotic surgery system has multiple movable joints, which can completely restore the hand movements of the surgeon and can be operated intuitively. Laparoscopic instruments are often in a lever motion mode, and the moving direction of the instruments is opposite to that of the surgeon. Therefore, the advantages of robotic surgery systems are more obvious than those of laparoscopy. The key to using a robot-assisted system to complete vascular resection and reconstruction is that the instrument arm can completely restore the surgeon’s delicate anatomical anastomosis operation. In robotic surgery, surgeons cannot feel force feedback, but they can build visual force feedback through accumulated experience and rich training to avoid disoperation. The viewing angle of the robot system is 3D imaging, which can be magnified up to 15 times, which can clearly and intuitively distinguish the vascular structure, provide a better field of view for resection and reconstruction of blood vessels, and avoid and control bleeding through delicate operations.


## 2. Related Work

Because the pancreas is located deep in the abdominal cavity, the surrounding anatomy is complicated, and pancreatic surgery often involves surrounding large blood vessels, the risk of surgery is higher. Therefore, laparoscopic technology was initially introduced into the field of pancreatic surgery only as an auxiliary diagnostic tool. Literature [4] performed preoperative laparoscopic ultrasonography on 35 cases of pancreatic cancer. The results showed that the application of laparoscopy and abdominal ultrasound in the staging and resectable evaluation of pancreatic cancer is sensitive and accurate, thus avoiding unnecessary open surgery. However, the laparoscopic technology has a long learning curve, a two-dimensional field of vision without a three-dimensional effect, an unstable laparoscopic lens, and a small degree of freedom of the straight instrument, and it does not conform to the operator’s ergonomics [5]. This hinders the application of laparoscopy in the surgical treatment of pancreatic tumors to a certain extent, but there are still many surgeons who devote their energy to the field of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery and have carried out relevant research reports.The first animal trial of the laparoscopic pancreatic body and tail excision on pigs was performed in literature [6], and it was a perfect success, ushering in a new era for minimally invasive pancreatic surgery. The first instance of the laparoscopic pancreatic body and tail excision was successfully executed [7]. At present, laparoscopy is a phased treatment and a resectable method in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Laparoscopic ultrasonography was used on 35 pancreatic cancer patients in literature [8]. T, N, and M staging accuracy was 80 percent, 76 percent, and 68 percent, respectively, while overall TNM staging accuracy was 68 percent. Sensitivities were 86 percent, 43 percent, and 67 percent, respectively, for unresectable, distant metastatic, and lymph node metastasis. When compared to imaging methods like CT and endoscopic ultrasound, laparoscopic and laparoscopic ultrasound technologies may offer pancreatic malignant tumors, objectively evaluate resectability, and prevent many needless laparotomies. For advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer, the most commonly utilized palliative therapy technique is gastrointestinal, biliary, and enteral drainage. Laparoscopy offers a number of benefits over traditional open surgery, including a significant decrease in yellowing, less trauma, quicker recovery, and fewer problems.Literature [9] performed laparoscopic palliative gastrointestinal anastomosis on 14 patients with pancreatic cancer using laparoscopy. By comparing with patients undergoing palliative surgery for pancreatic cancer through open surgery, it is concluded that compared with open surgery, laparoscopic surgery has significant advantages in reducing postoperative complications, perioperative mortality, and postoperative hospital stay. Due to the complicated anatomy around the pancreas, the effect of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy is not ideal. Compared with open surgery, it has no advantages in terms of operation time, complication rate, and length of stay. Literature [10] described the first case of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy and successfully applied minimally invasive surgery to implement radical resection of pancreatic tumor. However, due to the difficulty of pancreaticoduodenectomy, the surgical area is adjacent to the important blood vessels in the abdominal cavity. Laparoscopic cholangiojejunostomy and pancreatojejunostomy are difficult to operate under laparoscopy. In the 10 cases of laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy reported by Gagner, the transfer rate reached 40%, and the average operation time and the average length of hospital stay showed no advantages compared with open surgery. However, in the literature related to laparoscopic pancreatic surgery, the dominant position is still laparoscopic pancreatectomy. After a case of laparoscopic pancreatic body and tail resection was implemented in literature [11], laparoscopic pancreatic body and tail resection has been rapidly developed and used more and more widely in the treatment of benign and borderline pancreatic tumors. The results of multiple nonrandomized controlled studies have shown that laparoscopic pancreatic body and tail resection has the advantages of less intraoperative blood loss and shorter hospital stay compared with open surgery. However, the perioperative mortality and complication rate were not statistically different, and laparoscopic surgery did not increase the incidence of pancreatic fistula and other complications. Laparoscopic radical malignant tumor resection needs to ensure sufficient margins and thorough lymph node and nerve dissection. Whether laparoscopic pancreatic body and tail resection is suitable for radical resection of pancreatic malignant tumors is still controversial. Literature [12] analyzed the clinical data of 212 cases of pancreatic cancer patients who underwent pancreatic body and tail resection. It was found that there is no significant difference between laparoscopic and traditional open pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer in terms of R0 resection rate, number of lymph node dissections, and median survival time after surgery.The Da Vinci robotic surgery system is also the first fully commercialized robotic system for clinical surgery. The Da Vinci robotic surgery system is composed of three major parts: the doctor’s operation control system, the robotic arm system, and the video imaging system [13]. Physician operation control system is the core of the Da Vinci robotic surgery system, which is composed of the three-dimensional vision system, operating table, input and output equipment, and computer system. In addition to the operation control system, the robotic arm system includes a semimanual cart system and 4 robotic arms. Among them, one is a centered four-joint camera arm, and the other three are six-joint robotic arms, which integrate various basic operating instruments necessary for surgery. In addition, a major feature of the Da Vinci robotic surgery system is that different Endo Wrist components are installed on the robotic arm, which can imitate the operator’s wrist movements and enhance the flexibility of the instrument. Moreover, due to the flexible action and compact size of the manipulator, it can make up for some blind spots in the surgical operation and complete some operations that cannot be completed by the operator’s hands. The video imaging system is a major innovation of the system, which breaks through the bottleneck of previous video acquisition and realizes the three-dimensional vision of the surgeon. At the same time, it can adjust the focus of the eyes at any time according to the needs of the operation, so that a more realistic and layered anatomical structure is presented in the field of vision of the surgeon, and the surgeon’s surgical operation is more refined [14].Furthermore, the robot system has multiple functions for zooming in and out, fine control of fingertips, elimination of hand vibration, and motion ratio setting (the surgeon’s handle operation is reduced by a certain percentage) [15]. Then, the instrument arm repeats the action according to the reduced action range) and the action index (when the doctor’s action stops, the surgical instrument controverts the action).


## 3. Research on the Algorithm of the Effect of Robots in the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer

The resulting sequencing features include flaws in robustness and identification because of evaluating the performance of the current sequencing technique and directly utilizing the gray average value of the video frame blocks for sequencing. It is impossible to ensure detection performance when this sorting function is utilized directly in video copy detection. As a result, this article proposes to use quantization and statistical analysis techniques to build video frame sequencing features in order to achieve high-performance sequencing features [16].The main purpose of introducing quantization is to overcome the influence of a certain gray value change in the frame block on the overall frame block ordering. The uniform quantization of all gray values in the set range into a fixed gray level can effectively solve the robustness problem caused by a small number of gray value changes. Considering the application background of video copy detection and the time efficiency of structural features, this paper recommends using linear quantization with better time efficiency to quantize the gray value of frame blocks. Linear quantization and nonlinear quantization will affect the performance of frame sequencing features.While improving robustness, identifying characteristics is also a pressing issue that must be addressed. The two frames are separate movies in the conventional sequence feature construction, and the grayscale mean value of each block is significantly different, but the sequence value of the frame block may be precisely the same. This is because the conventional sequencing feature can only represent the grayscale difference in each frame block but not the grayscale value distribution. If the distribution of gray values in each frame block is addressed while building the sequence feature, the structured sequence feature will be more recognizable. This article offers a technique for incorporating statistical analysis into the creation of sequencing features by counting the distribution of gray values included in each frame block and sorting the distribution of gray values to create sequencing features.The improved sequencing feature is constructed as follows.First, the gray value of the video frame is quantized into v gray levels. The proportion of each gray level in the frame block is used as the basis for sequencing to generate a sequenced hash for detection.The quantile is used to quantize the gray value, and the gray value in the frame is set tox1,x2,…,xn. Its sequence from small to large is denoted as x1,x2,…,xn. The formula for calculating the p-quantile for quantification is defined. For 0 ≤ p ≤ 1 and n gray values, the p-quantile Mp is [17](1)Mp=Xnp+1,np=∉Z,12xnp+xnp+1,np∈Z.Among them,Z represents a set of integers and [np] represents the integer part of np. In this paper, the gray level v = 3 is selected, and the quantile Mp when p = 1/3 and p = 2/3 are calculated, respectively. Through the quantile Mp, the gray value Xl is quantized by (2), and the quantized video frame of Xl is shown in Figure 1 [18]:(2)Xl=1xl≤M1/3,2M1/3<xl<M2/3,3xl≥M2/3.Figure 1
Improved sequencing features. (a) Quantized frame. (b) Frame segmentation. (c) The proportion of each gray level value in the block. (d) Sequencing matrix.
(a)(b)(c)(d)The video frame is divided into 2 × 2 blocks (as shown in Figure1(b)), and the proportion of each gray level in the block is calculated (as shown in Figure 1(c)). Moreover, a sequence value generation table (such as Table 1) is established to sequence the frame blocks according to the difference in the gray-scale ratio contained in each block [19].Table 1
Statistical table of comparison of operation time.
No.Control group (H)Test group (H)12.273.0822.142.8231.923.2742.343.2052.102.8962.783.9372.243.9482.543.9292.082.76102.793.24111.913.40122.663.21132.574.18142.963.07152.563.73162.903.31172.903.86182.972.74191.992.81202.434.15212.863.57222.624.18232.884.07241.942.77252.213.15262.454.09272.063.56282.384.17292.113.86302.573.84312.032.91322.553.39332.464.01342.513.44352.503.37362.822.66372.472.61382.083.94392.693.87402.312.63In the process of copy detection, the hash distance between the detected video and the registered video is calculated. When the distanceD⋅ is less than the threshold ε, the detected video is considered a copy of the registered video. Aiming at the proposed improved sequential hash copy detection, this paper designs a scheme to calculate the video distanceD⋅. The scheme includes the calculation process of the hash space and time distance and combines the two distances to form the final distance used to judge the identity of the copy.V=V0,…,Vn−1 represents a video sequence containing n frames, Vi=V1i,…,Vmi represents m frame blocks of the i-th frame, and Vj represents the j-th block. Vq=Vq0,…,VqN−1 represents the detection video, Vr=Vr0,…,VrM−1 represents the registered video, and N << M. Vr[p: p + N − 1] is the segmented subvideo in the registered video, the starting frame is V[p], which contains N frames in total, and 0 ≤ p ≤ n − N.Sq,j represents the sequenced hash code of Vq[i] and sr,p + i represents the sequenced hash code of Vr[p:p + N − 1], 0 ≤ i ≤ N − 1. The hash space distance is defined as(3)dsqi,sr,p+i=1C∑j=1msq,ij−sr,p+ij,where dsqi,sr,p+ih is the distance after normalization and C is the maximum distance between two frames of sequenced hash codes. ∀si,sj∈sm , and sm is the set of all hashes. In this paper, since the total number of selected sequenced hash codes is 7, and the frame is divided into 4 blocks, m = 4, C = 24.The spatial distanceDs of the video sequence can be obtained by calculating the average value of the distance of each frame of the video sequence:(4)DSVq,Vp:p+N−1r=∑i=0N−1dsqi,sr,p+iN,where tij represents the amount of change of the sequenced hash code on the time axis and tij can be calculated by (5)(5)tij=sij−si−1j.The change distanceDr between the detection video V and the registered video Vr[p:p + N − 1] on the time axis is defined as [20](6)DrVq,Vrp:p+N−1=dTtq,tr=14N−1∑J=14∑i≠1N−1ftq,ij−tr,p+ij.Among them,dTtq,tr is the normalized distance. Since the maximum difference between tq,ij and tq,ij is 6, fx=x/6 is in the scheme.The calculation formula ofDVq,Vrp:p+N−1 is as follows:(7)DVq,Vrp:p+N−1=∂DSVq,Vrp:p+N−1+1+∂DTVq,Vrp:p+N−1.Among them,α∈[0, 1] represents a weighting coefficient, and the influence of the hash space domain and time domain distance on the overall distance can be balanced by adjusting the value of α, so as to obtain the best distance calculation scheme.Using the hash distance calculation method, it can be judged whetherVq is a copy of Vr. The detection process is as follows:(1)
p of Vrp:p+N−1is set to 0.(2)
The distanceDVq,Vrp:p+N−1 is calculated.(3)
p is increased by 1, and step (2) is repeated until p = n − M, where n is the number of frames of the detected video.(4)
The minimum distance tested is compared with the thresholds. If the distance D at the position p’ is less than the given threshold ε, then Vq is considered to be a copy of Vr, and the copy position is p’.In the process of hash construction, unlike the traditional sequencing method, which directly uses the average gray value as a feature, the three-average gray value of each frame block is first calculated, and the detection hash is constructed by using the three-average difference of adjacent frame blocks.The gray value sequence of the frame block isx1,x2,…,xn ; the sequence from small to large is recorded as x1,x2,…,xn; and the calculation formula for the median is(8)M=Xn+1/2,n=1,3,5…,12xn/2+xn/2+1,n=2,4,6….The median is a numerical feature that describes the location of the data center. A significant feature of the median is that it is not easily affected by outliers and has strong robustness:(9)Mp=Xnp+1,np=∉Z,12xnp+xnp+1,np∈Z.Among them,Z represents a set of integers. [np] represents the integer part of np. P = 0.75 and p = 0.25 are called upper and lower quartiles, respectively.The calculation formula of the three-mean valueM∧ is(10)M∧=14M0.25+12M+14M0.75,where V=V0,…,Vn−1 represents a video sequence containing n frames, Vi=V1i,…,Vmi represents m frame blocks of the i-th frame, and Vj represents the j-th block on the Hilbert curve. Vij represents the gray three-mean value of Vji; then, the hash code of the j block of the i-th frame can be calculated by the following:(11)Hij=0,vij≥vij+1,1,vij<vij+1.In the formula, 0 <i ≤ m.The more blocks the frame is divided into, the longer the hash code generated by the frame. The relationship between the length of the hash code and the performance of the detection system will be further discussed in the following part. The above method is used to construct a hash for each frame block in the video sequence, and finally the generated hash data are combined in order to form a hash code for copy detection.The hash matching algorithm has a very important impact on the performance of the detection system. A high-precision matching algorithm can enhance the robustness of the hash and reduce the false alarm and missed alarm rate of the system. Therefore, this paper proposes a video shot detection and positioning scheme based on the hash local matching.Hx=X1,X2,…,XM,Hy=Y1,Y2,…,YN, respectively, represent the target video hash that needs to be matched and a piece of registered video hash in the database. When M = N, the video clip similarity rate (CSR) is defined as(12)CSRHx,Hy=∑l=1MIdXl,Yl≤εM.In the formula,d⋅ is the distance function and when M < N, the sequence similarity rate (SSR) of the video shot is defined:(13)SSR=Hx,Hy=∂Nmatch+βNmiss+γNgapM.Among them,Nmatch, Nmiss, and Ngap, respectively, represent the number of frames that are successfully matched and the number of frames that are not successfully matched and rematched, and α, β, and γ represent weight values.In order to improve the accuracy of lens matching, this paper designs a hash matching scheme consisting of two parts: coarse matching and fine matching.The rough matching process is divided into two steps:(1)
The algorithm calculates the CSR ofHx and Hyi, where Hyi=Yi+Yi+1,…,Yi+M−1 and i ≤ N − M + 1(2)
The algorithm reserves the position where the CSR value exceeds the thresholdT1 and defines the position where the CSR value achieves the maximum value as the coarse matching result positionConsidering that there may be some editing processing for the time domain (such as dropping frames, inserting frames, or short clips), the method of dynamic programming is introduced in the fine matching, and the fine matching process is performed in two steps:(1)
At the position of the rough matching result inHy, the algorithm selects a video sequence with a length of 3M and represents it as Hy∗(2)
If the SSR exceeds the thresholdT2, the position is considered to be the best lens matching positionIn order to ensure that the features extracted from the video content can meet the robustness of various processing operations, a point-based feature construction method is selected. The process of feature extraction is shown in Figure2.Figure 2
Feature extraction process.First, the algorithm uses an improved Harris corner detector to extract the corner points of each frame of the video and performs differential calculations on the neighboring pointsI(x, y) in the corner point space to generate a 5-dimensional feature vector f⟶1, as follows:(14)f⟶1=∂I∂x,∂I∂y,∂2I∂x∂y,∂2I∂x2,∂2I∂y2.The algorithm selects 4 pixels adjacent to the corner space to generate the point feature vector together. Through differential calculation and standardization of these points (such asthe following equation), a 20-dimensional local point feature vector F⟶ is obtained:(15)F⟶=f⟶1f⟶1,f⟶2f⟶2,f⟶3f⟶3,f⟶4f⟶4,where F⟶ is used as a local point feature of the video to construct a hash. In order to enhance the feature robustness of constructing hash, a point feature screening process is introduced into the system. Features that are poor in robustness and may affect the detection performance of the system are removed, and only strong robust features are retained. In order to achieve feature screening, firstly, the feature points are tracked, the movement behavior of the points is classified, and then the best feature suitable for the detection system is selected.In order to reduce the computational complexity, this paper selects the point classification scheme proposed in the literature. This paper calculates all the point featuresF⟶ in the current frame and 15 adjacent frames in the time domain and calculates the average value F′ of each point feature F⟶ as follows:(16)F′=∂I1/∂x+∂I1/∂y+∂I1/∂x∂y+∂I1/∂x2+∂I1/∂y2+∂I2/∂x+∂I2/∂y+∂I2/∂x∂y+∂I2/∂x2+∂I2/∂y2+∂I3/∂x+∂I3/∂y+∂I3/∂x∂y+∂I3/∂x2+∂I3/∂y2+∂I4/∂x+∂I4/∂y+∂I4/∂x∂y+∂I4/∂x2+∂I4/∂y220.TheL norm distance between the mean value F of all point features in adjacent frames is calculated, as shown in (17). Among them, H represents the number of point features:(17)F′=∑i=1HFi′21/2.Through the matching of the points in the adjacent frames, the trajectory tracking of the feature points in the video frame can be realized, and thus the motion trajectory parameters of each point in the frame can be established.The range of points in the time domain istctn,tcout. The range of points in the spatial domain is xmin,xmaxymin,ymax.Using the obtained point motion trajectory parameters, the properties of the points can be classified, such as permanent stable points and transient unstable points, moving points, and stationary points. Considering the robustness of persistently stable points relative to other kinds of points, this paper selects the feature vectorF⟶ of persistently stable points that exist in the video for more than 30 frames as the feature of constructing robust hash.


## 4. Analysis of the Effect of Robots in the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer Based on Smart Medicine

In this paper, the analysis of the effect of robots on pancreatic cancer is studied through controlled experiments. The control group takes laparoscopic pancreatectomy, and the test group takes robot-assisted pancreatectomy. There are 40 groups of people in both the experimental group and the control group. Observation indicators mainly include operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization time, spleen preservation rate, and conversion to laparotomy rate. The relevant data of the two groups of patients were compared.First of all, this paper compares the operation time of the test group and the control group, and the results are shown in Table1 and Figure 3.Figure 3
Statistical diagram of comparison of operation time.The intraoperative blood losses of the test group and the control group are compared, and the results obtained are shown in Table2 and Figure 4.Table 2
Statistical table of comparison of intraoperative blood loss.
No.Control group (ML)Test group (ML)1350.47276.332279.48316.543234.17420.414363.43367.535296.85312.206332.60329.887336.55438.498239.91430.889355.88354.4710288.07286.3611225.81415.4412369.96340.1913301.53449.6614228.18363.0315339.51373.3516272.70434.0617241.50301.8118333.92383.8919266.42422.4520222.96415.0521222.67385.3522276.80321.6323287.16393.9224304.29379.0125354.61386.4226366.84345.7827349.46381.1028245.50446.5229233.28297.3130325.49343.9631220.80443.1532352.06339.6333366.70386.1134327.09335.0635264.91359.4036222.67342.0737362.51313.0938261.67413.0339308.09292.3640237.42313.11Figure 4
Statistical diagram of comparison of intraoperative blood loss.The hospitalization times of the test group and the control group were compared, and the results obtained are shown in Table3 and Figure 5.Table 3
Statistical table of comparison of hospitalization time.
No.Control group (D)Test group (D)15.6312.6728.639.9137.858.2546.7710.0355.637.9268.798.7176.2212.9589.738.9798.638.70105.509.24115.1810.89128.6312.97138.5211.57149.357.49157.437.73169.628.91177.2111.68189.987.85199.027.47209.8010.28218.9211.45229.767.72235.937.50245.359.41256.667.81269.768.49277.9911.99285.707.81296.1110.13307.8012.66317.5210.44327.088.73335.468.05346.637.94355.8111.79366.509.75377.6910.48385.308.74397.0010.48409.4912.49Figure 5
Statistical diagram of comparison of hospitalization time.The spleen preservation rates of the test group and the control group were compared, and the results obtained are shown in Table4 and Figure 6.Table 4
Statistical table of comparison of spleen preservation rate.
No.Control group (%)Test group (%)143.8040.20247.6543.87351.8248.28443.6641.03543.8543.80646.5941.92743.1947.12854.6554.96941.9141.291050.2350.111141.9742.991246.1153.381349.3947.251448.5051.821542.6546.971643.5840.401744.7942.191840.4046.151950.1948.262048.2246.712146.8549.952246.8453.112344.8549.722444.1950.022542.9540.632652.8248.502744.3054.822851.2242.532944.7754.833040.2844.663142.9652.013242.7244.443353.2043.083444.4443.303549.7651.333649.1547.353740.1640.123840.4051.403951.7340.124051.9341.09Figure 6
Statistical diagram of comparison of spleen preservation rate.The conversions to laparotomy rate of the test group and the control group were compared, and the results obtained are shown in Table5 and Figure 7.Table 5
Statistical table of conversion to laparotomy rate.
No.Control group (%)Test group (%)18.953.7229.429.9735.8610.2643.747.7159.8512.3565.239.6578.853.81811.957.9396.202.01107.967.22114.583.75123.979.31132.236.34149.519.95152.892.39162.852.091712.412.751811.124.41192.254.58205.7510.00214.5511.55227.455.53236.6510.162411.8510.65258.588.04269.534.75272.833.40283.922.542912.363.72307.908.653110.2711.353212.759.60338.895.30342.335.723511.855.13362.7212.65373.429.683811.008.823911.108.18403.3312.35Figure 7
Statistical diagram of conversion to laparotomy rate.


## 5. Conclusion

It can be seen from the above studies that there is no statistical difference between the test group and the control group in the rate of spleen preservation and the rate of abdominal opening. However, the operation time of the test group was significantly higher than that of the control group. Robotic treatment of pancreatic cancer is still in clinical trials and can continue to be optimized in the future, while traditional treatment methods are already very mature. The length of hospital stay and blood loss of the test group are lower than those of the control group, and there are statistical differences.Pancreatic cancer surgery using a robot is a safe procedure with clear benefits in terms of flexibility and stability. As a result, robot-assisted pancreatic cancer surgery is considered a complicated and difficult pancreatic cancer surgery.



---

*Source: 9734882-2021-09-20.xml*