Cundy Thomas P, Harling Leanne, Marcus Hani J, Athanasiou Thanos, Darzi Ara W
The Hamlyn Centre, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College, London, UK; Department of Surgery and Cancer, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College, London, UK.
Department of Surgery and Cancer, St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College, London, UK.
J Pediatr Surg. 2014 Apr;49(4):646-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.12.014. Epub 2013 Dec 21.
Minimally invasive fundoplication may be performed using either a robot-assisted (RF) or conventional laparoscopic (LF) technique. Evidence comparing RF and LF in children remains unclear. This study aims to elucidate the comparative safety and efficacy of RF versus LF by systematic review and meta-analysis.
Comparative studies investigating RF versus LF in children were identified from multiple electronic literature databases. Meta-analysis was performed using random effects modeling. Safety parameters investigated were post-operative morbidity and intra-operative conversions. Efficacy outcomes of interest were operative success, re-operation, post-operative complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), total operating time (OT), analgesia requirement, and cost.
Six observational studies met inclusion criteria, reporting outcomes of 297 children. No randomized controlled trials were identified. Pooled analysis determined no statistically significant differences between RF and LF for conversions, OT, LOS, and post-operative complications. There was no standardized follow up beyond the early post-operative period to enable data synthesis for remaining outcomes of interest. Limited evidence indicates higher costs with RF.
Safety and short-term efficacy seem comparable between RF and LF in children. There is insufficient evidence to assess comparative effectiveness for many important procedure specific outcome measures. Higher quality and longer follow-up studies are required.
微创胃底折叠术可采用机器人辅助(RF)或传统腹腔镜(LF)技术进行。比较儿童RF和LF的证据仍不明确。本研究旨在通过系统评价和荟萃分析阐明RF与LF的相对安全性和有效性。
从多个电子文献数据库中识别比较儿童RF与LF的研究。采用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。研究的安全参数为术后发病率和术中中转情况。感兴趣的疗效指标为手术成功率、再次手术、术后并发症、住院时间(LOS)、总手术时间(OT)、镇痛需求和费用。
六项观察性研究符合纳入标准,报告了297例儿童的结果。未识别到随机对照试验。汇总分析确定RF和LF在中转、OT、LOS和术后并发症方面无统计学显著差异。术后早期之后没有标准化的随访,无法对其余感兴趣的结果进行数据综合。有限的证据表明RF费用更高。
儿童RF和LF的安全性和短期疗效似乎相当。对于许多重要的手术特定结局指标,评估相对有效性的证据不足。需要更高质量和更长随访期的研究。