Suppr超能文献

机器人辅助子宫切除术治疗子宫内膜癌和宫颈癌:一项系统评价。

Robot-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial and cervical cancers: a systematic review.

作者信息

Nevis Immaculate F, Vali Bahareh, Higgins Caroline, Dhalla Irfan, Urbach David, Bernardini Marcus Q

机构信息

Health Quality Ontario, 130 Bloor Street West, 10th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5S 1N5, Canada.

Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St. Michael's Hospital, 30 Bond St, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.

出版信息

J Robot Surg. 2017 Mar;11(1):1-16. doi: 10.1007/s11701-016-0621-9. Epub 2016 Jul 16.

Abstract

Total and radical hysterectomies are the most common treatment strategies for early-stage endometrial and cervical cancers, respectively. Surgical modalities include open surgery, laparoscopy, and more recently, minimally invasive robot-assisted surgery. We searched several electronic databases for randomized controlled trials and observational studies with a comparison group, published between 2009 and 2014. Our outcomes of interest included both perioperative and morbidity outcomes. We included 35 observational studies in this review. We did not find any randomized controlled trials. The quality of evidence for all reported outcomes was very low. For women with endometrial cancer, we found that there was a reduction in estimated blood loss between the robot-assisted surgery compared to both laparoscopy and open surgery. There was a reduction in length of hospital stay between robot-assisted surgery and open surgery but not laparoscopy. There was no difference in total lymph node removal between the three modalities. There was no difference in the rate of overall complications between the robot-assisted technique and laparoscopy. For women with cervical cancer, there were no differences in estimated blood loss or removal of lymph nodes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic procedure. Compared to laparotomy, robot-assisted hysterectomy for cervical cancer showed an overall reduction in estimated blood loss. Although robot-assisted hysterectomy is clinically effective for the treatment of both endometrial and cervical cancers, methodologically rigorous studies are lacking to draw definitive conclusions.

摘要

全子宫切除术和根治性子宫切除术分别是早期子宫内膜癌和宫颈癌最常见的治疗策略。手术方式包括开放手术、腹腔镜手术,以及最近出现的微创机器人辅助手术。我们检索了多个电子数据库,查找2009年至2014年间发表的有对照组的随机对照试验和观察性研究。我们感兴趣的结果包括围手术期结果和发病率结果。本综述纳入了35项观察性研究。我们未找到任何随机对照试验。所有报告结果的证据质量都非常低。对于子宫内膜癌女性患者,我们发现与腹腔镜手术和开放手术相比,机器人辅助手术的估计失血量有所减少。机器人辅助手术与开放手术相比住院时间缩短,但与腹腔镜手术相比无差异。三种手术方式在总淋巴结切除方面无差异。机器人辅助技术与腹腔镜手术在总体并发症发生率上无差异。对于宫颈癌女性患者,机器人辅助手术与腹腔镜手术在估计失血量或淋巴结切除方面无差异。与剖腹手术相比,机器人辅助宫颈癌根治术的估计失血量总体减少。尽管机器人辅助子宫切除术在治疗子宫内膜癌和宫颈癌方面临床有效,但缺乏方法学严谨的研究来得出明确结论。

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