• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术与传统腹腔镜手术及剖腹手术治疗子宫内膜癌的比较安全性和有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。

Comparative safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Park D A, Lee D H, Kim S W, Lee S H

机构信息

Division for Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency, Seoul, South Korea.

Clinical Research Center, Woosuk University Korean Medicine Hospital, Jeonju, South Korea.

出版信息

Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;42(9):1303-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.06.400. Epub 2016 Jun 29.

DOI:10.1016/j.ejso.2016.06.400
PMID:27439723
Abstract

AIM

This study aimed to evaluate the surgical safety and clinical effectiveness of RH compared to OH and LH for endometrial cancer.

METHODS

We searched Ovid-Medline, Ovid-EMBASE, and the Cochrane library for studies published through May 2015. The outcomes of interest included safety (overall; peri-operative and post-operative complications; death within 30-days; and specific morbidities), effectiveness (survival, recurrence, length of stay [LOS], estimated blood loss [EBL], and operative time [OT]), and patient-reported outcomes (pain score, pain medication use, length of pain medication use, and time to return to work). Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies comparing RH to OH and 24 comparing RH to LH were identified. No significant differences were found in survival outcomes. The LOS was shorter, there was less EBL, and the rates of complications, readmission, and transfusion were lower with RH compared to OH. However, RH showed a longer OT and a higher incidence of vaginal cuff dehiscence compared to those for OH. Compared to LH, the LOS was shorter, there was less EBL, and the rates of conversion to laparotomy, intra-operative complications, urinary tract injuries, and cystotomy were lower in RH. Several patient-reported outcomes showed a significant benefit of RH, but each outcome was reported in only one study.

CONCLUSIONS

RH may be a generally safer and better option than OH and LH for patients with endometrial cancer. Further prospective studies with long-term follow-up are required.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估与卵巢切除术(OH)和腹腔镜手术(LH)相比,机器人辅助手术(RH)治疗子宫内膜癌的手术安全性和临床疗效。

方法

我们检索了Ovid-Medline、Ovid-EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆,查找截至2015年5月发表的研究。感兴趣的结果包括安全性(总体;围手术期和术后并发症;30天内死亡;以及特定的发病率)、有效性(生存率、复发率、住院时间[LOS]、估计失血量[EBL]和手术时间[OT])以及患者报告的结果(疼痛评分、止痛药物使用情况、止痛药物使用时间和恢复工作时间)。两名独立的审阅者提取数据并评估偏倚风险。

结果

确定了24项比较RH与OH的研究以及24项比较RH与LH的研究。在生存结果方面未发现显著差异。与OH相比,RH的住院时间更短,失血量更少,并发症、再次入院和输血率更低。然而,与OH相比,RH的手术时间更长,阴道残端裂开的发生率更高。与LH相比,RH的住院时间更短,失血量更少,开腹手术转化率、术中并发症、尿路损伤和膀胱切开术的发生率更低。一些患者报告的结果显示RH有显著益处,但每个结果仅在一项研究中报道。

结论

对于子宫内膜癌患者,RH可能是比OH和LH总体上更安全、更好的选择。需要进一步进行长期随访的前瞻性研究。

相似文献

1
Comparative safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for endometrial cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术与传统腹腔镜手术及剖腹手术治疗子宫内膜癌的比较安全性和有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;42(9):1303-14. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.06.400. Epub 2016 Jun 29.
2
Surgical and clinical safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy compared to conventional laparoscopy and laparotomy for cervical cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.与传统腹腔镜手术和开腹手术相比,机器人辅助腹腔镜子宫切除术治疗宫颈癌的手术及临床安全性和有效性:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2017 Jun;43(6):994-1002. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.07.017. Epub 2016 Aug 5.
3
Laparoscopy versus laparotomy for the management of early stage endometrial cancer.腹腔镜手术与开腹手术治疗早期子宫内膜癌的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12(9):CD006655. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006655.pub2.
4
Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.良性妇科疾病的子宫切除术手术入路。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Aug 29;8(8):CD003677. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003677.pub6.
5
Perioperative morbidity of different operative approaches in early cervical carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing minimally invasive versus open radical hysterectomy.不同手术入路在早期宫颈癌围手术期发病率的比较:微创与开腹广泛子宫切除术的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022 Aug;306(2):295-314. doi: 10.1007/s00404-021-06248-8. Epub 2021 Oct 8.
6
Robot-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial and cervical cancers: a systematic review.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。
J Robot Surg. 2017 Mar;11(1):1-16. doi: 10.1007/s11701-016-0621-9. Epub 2016 Jul 16.
7
Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.良性妇科疾病子宫切除术的手术入路
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005 Jan 25(1):CD003677. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003677.pub2.
8
Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease.良性妇科疾病子宫切除术的手术入路
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Apr 19(2):CD003677. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003677.pub3.
9
Robotic-assisted hysterectomy for endometrial cancer compared with traditional laparoscopic and laparotomy approaches: a systematic review.机器人辅助子宫切除术与传统腹腔镜和剖腹手术治疗子宫内膜癌的比较:系统评价。
Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Dec;116(6):1422-1431. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181f74153.
10
Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer.腹腔镜及机器人辅助与开放根治性前列腺切除术治疗局限性前列腺癌的比较
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Sep 12;9(9):CD009625. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009625.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
Understanding Contemporary Endometrial Cancer Survivorship Issues: Umbrella Review and Healthcare Professional Survey.了解当代子宫内膜癌幸存者问题:综合综述与医疗保健专业人员调查。
Cancers (Basel). 2025 Aug 19;17(16):2696. doi: 10.3390/cancers17162696.
2
Different surgical methods of hysterectomy for the management of endometrial cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.子宫内膜癌治疗中子宫切除术的不同手术方法:系统评价与网状Meta分析
Front Oncol. 2025 Jan 15;14:1524991. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1524991. eCollection 2024.
3
Screening of prognostic factors and survival analysis based on histological type for perimenopausal endometrial carcinoma treated with hysterectomy.
基于组织学类型对接受子宫切除术治疗的围绝经期子宫内膜癌进行预后因素筛查及生存分析。
Discov Oncol. 2024 Oct 2;15(1):518. doi: 10.1007/s12672-024-01403-4.
4
Vaginal Cuff Dehiscence after Robotic Hysterectomy in Endometrial Cancer vs. Non-Cancer Patients.子宫内膜癌患者与非癌患者机器人子宫切除术后阴道残端裂开情况
Kans J Med. 2024 Jul 24;17(4):74-77. doi: 10.17161/kjm.vol17.21651. eCollection 2024.
5
Robotic Living Donor Hysterectomy for Uterus Transplantation: An Update on Donor and Recipient Outcomes.用于子宫移植的机器人活体供体子宫切除术:供体和受体结局的最新情况
J Clin Med. 2024 Jul 17;13(14):4186. doi: 10.3390/jcm13144186.
6
Does the presence of abdominal wall adhesions make gynecologic robotic surgery difficult?腹壁粘连是否使妇科机器人手术变得困难?
J Robot Surg. 2024 Apr 13;18(1):173. doi: 10.1007/s11701-024-01938-2.
7
Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Surgery for Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Patients with Gynecologic Malignancies.机器人辅助与腹腔镜手术治疗妇科恶性肿瘤患者盆腔淋巴结清扫术的比较
Gynecol Minim Invasive Ther. 2023 Dec 7;13(1):37-42. doi: 10.4103/gmit.gmit_9_23. eCollection 2024 Jan-Mar.
8
Comparison of the effects of laparoscopic and open hysterectomy on surgical site wound infections in patients with endometrial cancer: A meta-analysis.腹腔镜与开腹子宫切除术对子宫内膜癌患者手术部位伤口感染影响的比较:一项荟萃分析。
Int Wound J. 2023 Sep 24;21(2). doi: 10.1111/iwj.14415.
9
Comparing surgical outcomes of da Vinci SP and da Vinci Xi for endometrial cancer surgical staging in a propensity score-matched study.达芬奇 SP 和达芬奇 Xi 用于子宫内膜癌手术分期的手术结果比较:倾向评分匹配研究。
Sci Rep. 2023 Jul 20;13(1):11752. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-37659-z.
10
Enhanced Recovery after Surgery and Endometrial Cancers: Results from an Initial Experience Focused on Elderly Patients.手术后加速康复与子宫内膜癌:以老年患者为重点的初步经验结果
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Jun 19;15(12):3244. doi: 10.3390/cancers15123244.