Suppr超能文献

机器人辅助与腹腔镜结肠切除术的荟萃分析。

A meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy.

作者信息

Chang Yin-Shu, Wang Jia-Xiang, Chang Da-Wei

机构信息

Department of Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.

Department of Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.

出版信息

J Surg Res. 2015 May 15;195(2):465-74. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.01.026. Epub 2015 Jan 22.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Robotics, as an innovation of minimally invasive surgical methods, is developing rapidly for colectomy. But there is still no consensus on its comparative merit compared with laparoscopic resections. We conducted this meta-analysis that included randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized controlled trials of robotic colectomy (RC) versus laparoscopic colectomy (LC) to evaluate whether the safety and efficacy of RC are equivalent to those of LC.

METHODS

A search of five databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Ovid, and Web of Science), gray literature, hand searches, reference, and forward citation were performed for studies that compared clinical or oncologic outcomes of LC with RC. Clinical outcomes evaluated were conversion rates, operation times, estimated blood loss, length of hospital stay, and complications. Oncologic outcome evaluated was the number of lymph nodes collected.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies were identified that included 125,989 patients in total, 4934 in the robotic cohort and 121,055 in the laparoscopic cohort. Meta-analysis suggested that there was a significantly longer hospital stay in the laparoscopic group (mean difference [MD] -0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.02 to -0.27; P = 0.0008). Robotic surgery was associated with a significantly lower complication rate (odds ratio 0.78; 95% CI 0.72-0.85; P < 0.00001) and a significantly shorter time to recovery of bowel function (MD -0.58; 95% CI -0.96 to -0.20; P = 0.003). There were statistically significant differences in estimated blood loss (MD -19.24; 95% CI -29.38 to -9.09; P = 0.0002) and intraoperative conversion to open (odds ratio 0.56; 95% CI 0.44-0.72; P < 0.00001), but not clinical relevant. There were no significant differences in the number of lymph nodes extracted between the two groups. However, operating time (MD 49.25; 95% CI 36.78-61.72; P < 0.00001) was longer for RC than for LC.

CONCLUSIONS

RC can be performed safely and effectively with the number of lymph nodes extracted similar to LC. In addition, it can provide potential advantages of a shorter hospital stay, a shorter time to recovery of bowel function, and lower occurrence of postoperative complications. These findings seem to support the use of robotics for the minimally invasive surgical management of colectomy. However, RC had longer operating time. Future studies involving RC should focus on minimizing duration of operation.

摘要

背景

机器人技术作为微创外科手术方法的一项创新,在结肠切除术方面发展迅速。但其与腹腔镜切除术相比的相对优势仍未达成共识。我们进行了这项荟萃分析,纳入了机器人结肠切除术(RC)与腹腔镜结肠切除术(LC)的随机对照试验和非随机对照试验,以评估RC的安全性和有效性是否等同于LC。

方法

检索了五个数据库(PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、Ovid和科学网)、灰色文献、手工检索、参考文献和正向引用,以查找比较LC与RC临床或肿瘤学结局的研究。评估的临床结局包括转化率、手术时间、估计失血量、住院时间和并发症。评估的肿瘤学结局是收集的淋巴结数量。

结果

共确定了14项研究,总共纳入125989例患者,机器人手术队列中有4934例,腹腔镜手术队列中有121055例。荟萃分析表明,腹腔镜组的住院时间明显更长(平均差[MD]-0.65;95%置信区间[CI]-1.02至-0.27;P = 0.0008)。机器人手术的并发症发生率显著更低(比值比0.78;95%CI 0.72 - 0.85;P<0.00001),肠功能恢复时间显著更短(MD -0.58;95%CI -0.96至-0.20;P = 0.003)。估计失血量(MD -19.24;95%CI -29.38至-9.09;P = 0.0002)和术中转为开放手术(比值比0.56;95%CI 0.44 - 0.72;P<0.00001)存在统计学显著差异,但与临床无关。两组之间提取的淋巴结数量无显著差异。然而,RC的手术时间(MD 49.25;95%CI 36.78 - 61.72;P<0.00001)比LC更长。

结论

RC可以安全有效地进行,提取的淋巴结数量与LC相似。此外,它可以提供住院时间更短、肠功能恢复时间更短和术后并发症发生率更低的潜在优势。这些发现似乎支持在结肠切除术的微创外科治疗中使用机器人技术。然而,RC的手术时间更长。未来涉及RC 的研究应专注于尽量缩短手术时间。

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