Suppr超能文献

肝切除术中快速康复计划与传统护理的比较:一项随机对照试验的荟萃分析

Fast-track programs versus traditional care in hepatectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

作者信息

Lei Qiucheng, Wang Xinying, Tan Shanjun, Xia Xianfeng, Zheng Huazhen, Wu Chao

机构信息

Department of General Surgery, Jinling Hospital, Southern Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, China.

出版信息

Dig Surg. 2014;31(4-5):392-9. doi: 10.1159/000369219. Epub 2014 Dec 24.

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: The role of fast-track programs in hepatectomy is unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fast-track programs versus traditional care.

METHODS

We searched Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fast-track with traditional care in hepatectomy. Length of hospital stay, time to first flatus, postoperative complications, operating time, and intraoperative blood loss were assessed. Meta-analyses were performed using RevMan 5.2 software.

RESULTS

Four original RCTs with 372 patients were included: 187 in the fast-track and 185 in the traditional care group. Fast-track patients had shorter hospital stay (WMD -2.32; 95% CI, -3.54 to -1.11; p < 0.001) and time to first flatus (WMD -0.99; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.84; p < 0.001), and less postoperative complications (RR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.93; p < 0.05). However, there was significant heterogeneity between the studies regarding hospital stay (I(2) = 88%; p < 0.001). Operating time and intraoperative blood loss were not different.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in fast-track programs had less time to first flatus and postoperative complications compared to traditional care. Fast-track programs may reduce the length of hospital stay. Larger, higher quality prospective RCTs are necessary to draw more robust conclusions.

摘要

背景/目的:快速康复计划在肝切除术中的作用尚不清楚。本荟萃分析旨在评估快速康复计划与传统护理相比的疗效和安全性。

方法

我们在PubMed、Embase、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库和谷歌学术中搜索了相关的随机对照试验(RCT),比较肝切除术中快速康复与传统护理的效果。评估住院时间、首次排气时间、术后并发症、手术时间和术中失血量。使用RevMan 5.2软件进行荟萃分析。

结果

纳入了4项原始RCT,共372例患者:快速康复组187例,传统护理组185例。快速康复组患者的住院时间较短(加权均数差-2.32;95%置信区间,-3.54至-1.11;p<0.001),首次排气时间较短(加权均数差-0.99;95%置信区间,-1.15至-0.84;p<0.001),术后并发症较少(风险比0.66;95%置信区间,0.47至0.93;p<0.05)。然而,在住院时间方面,各研究之间存在显著异质性(I² = 88%;p<0.001)。手术时间和术中失血量没有差异。

结论

与传统护理相比,快速康复计划中的患者首次排气时间和术后并发症更少。快速康复计划可能会缩短住院时间。需要进行更大规模、更高质量的前瞻性RCT,以得出更可靠的结论。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验