Suppr超能文献

技术辅助与钳夹压榨肝切除术:一项系统评价与荟萃分析

Technology-assisted versus clamp-crush liver resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Alexiou Vangelis G, Tsitsias Thomas, Mavros Michael N, Robertson Gavin S, Pawlik Timothy M

机构信息

Alfa Institute of Biomedical Sciences (AIBS), Athens, Greece.

出版信息

Surg Innov. 2013 Aug;20(4):414-28. doi: 10.1177/1553350612468510. Epub 2012 Dec 14.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To review the published evidence on technology-assisted liver resection regarding operative time, intraoperative bleeding, mortality, hospital stay, postoperative bile leak, and other outcomes.

METHOD

A systematic review of clinical studies comparing liver resection using vessel sealing systems (VSSs-LigaSure), Cavitron Ultrasonic Surgical Aspirator (CUSA), or radiofrequency dissecting sealer (RFDS) with the conventional clamp-crushing technique (CC) was performed. Data for each modality were synthesized and individually compared with CC with the methodology of meta-analysis.

RESULT

In all, 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 7 nonrandomized studies evaluating 1539 patients were included. Compared with CC, the VSS group (3 RCTs and 3 nonrandomized studies) had significantly lower blood loss by a mean of 109 mL (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -109; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -192, -26; data on 494 patients), lower risk for postoperative bile leak by 63% (odds ratio [OR] = 0.37; CI = 0.17, 0.78; 559 patients), and shorter total hospital stay by 2 days (WMD = -2.04; CI = -3.08, -1; 340 patients); no difference was noted for liver parenchyma transection time and mortality. No difference was noted between CUSA (4 RCTs and 1 nonrandomized study) or RFDS (3 RCTs and 3 nonrandomized studies) versus CC for any of the studied outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Of the 3 modalities used in liver resection (VSS, CUSA, and RFDS), only VSS appeared to offer significant benefit over standard CC. However, the generalization of our findings is limited by the scarcity and clinical heterogeneity of the published studies. Large, well-designed and implemented RCTs are warranted to further investigate the usefulness of novel modalities used in liver resection.

摘要

目的

回顾已发表的关于技术辅助肝切除术在手术时间、术中出血、死亡率、住院时间、术后胆漏及其他结局方面的证据。

方法

对比较使用血管封闭系统(VSS-LigaSure)、超声外科吸引器(CUSA)或射频解剖密封器(RFDS)进行肝切除术与传统钳夹粉碎技术(CC)的临床研究进行系统评价。采用荟萃分析方法对每种方式的数据进行综合并分别与CC进行比较。

结果

共纳入8项随机对照试验(RCT)和7项非随机研究,涉及1539例患者。与CC相比,VSS组(3项RCT和3项非随机研究)平均失血量显著减少109 mL(加权平均差[WMD]=-109;95%置信区间[CI]=-192,-26;494例患者的数据),术后胆漏风险降低63%(优势比[OR]=0.37;CI=0.17,0.78;559例患者),总住院时间缩短2天(WMD=-2.04;CI=-3.08,-1;340例患者);肝实质离断时间和死亡率无差异。CUSA组(4项RCT和1项非随机研究)或RFDS组(3项RCT和3项非随机研究)与CC相比,在所研究的任何结局方面均无差异。

结论

在肝切除术中使用的3种方式(VSS、CUSA和RFDS)中,只有VSS似乎比标准CC有显著优势。然而,已发表研究的稀缺性和临床异质性限制了我们研究结果的推广。需要开展大型、设计良好且实施得当的RCT,以进一步研究肝切除术中使用的新方式的有效性。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验