Department of General Surgery, The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730030, China.
Department of Hepatology, The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, 82 Cuiyingmen, Lanzhou 730030, China.
Int J Surg. 2018 Mar;51:151-163. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.01.016. Epub 2018 Jan 31.
BACKGROUND: The present meta-analysis focused on comparing the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic hepatectomy (LH) versus open hepatectomy (OH) for hepatolithiasis. In detail, short-term outcomes including operative time, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative blood transfusion, postoperative time to oral intake, length of hospital stay, overall postoperative complication rate, initial residual stone, and stone recurrence were analyzed systematically. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were comprehensively searched for eligible studies up to Jun. 30. 2017. Bibliographic citation management software (EndNoteX7) was applied to literature management. Quality assessment was carried out according to the modification of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The data were analyzed by Stata SE12.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX). Sensitivity analysis was conducted by deleting single study step by step. Odds ratio (OR) were calculated for dichotomous data, and standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) was calculated continuous data. RESULTS: A total of 17 eligible studies with 1351 patients were identified after a thorough literature search. The pooled results of the present meta-analysis showed that laparoscopic approach was related to significantly less intraoperative estimated blood loss in patients with hepatolithiasis (SMD: -0.52; 95% CI: -0.93 to -0.1; I= 91%; P < 0.0001); lower overall postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.39 to 0.70; I = 0%; P < 0.0001) and intraoperative transfusion rate (OR = 0.25; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.53; P < 0.0001; I = 30.1%; P = 0.239); shorter time to oral intake (SMD: -1.66; 95% CI: -2.41 to -0.92; I= 91%; P < 0.0001), and shorter stay in hospital (SMD: -0.89; 95% CI: -1.19 to -0.59; I= 83%; P < 0.00001). However, no significant differences was detected between LH and OH in terms of operative time (SMD: 0.22; 95% CI: -0.21 to 0.65; I= 92%; P = 0.31), initial residual stones (OR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.25; I= 0%; P = 0.31), and stone recurrence (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.35 to 1.27; I= 0%; P = 0.22). In addition, our stratified analysis according to types of LH indicated that the laparoscopic approach still produced more favorable outcomes whatever patients underwent left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) or left hemihepatectomy (LHH). CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic hepatectomy is a better alternative to open approach in patients with hepatolithiasis, providing less overall complication rate, shorter postoperative stay of hospital stay, less blood loss, and shorter time to oral intake. However, high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are badly needed to provide higher-level evidence due to unavoidable bias from non-randomized trials.
背景:本次荟萃分析专注于比较腹腔镜肝切除术(LH)与开腹肝切除术(OH)治疗肝内胆管结石的疗效和安全性。具体而言,系统分析了短期结果,包括手术时间、术中出血量、术中输血、术后开始口服摄入时间、住院时间、总术后并发症发生率、初始残余结石和结石复发。
方法:全面检索了 PubMed、Embase、Web of Science 和 Cochrane Library 截至 2017 年 6 月 30 日的合格研究。使用文献管理软件(EndNoteX7)管理文献。根据纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)的修改进行质量评估。使用 Stata SE12.0(StataCorp,德克萨斯州学院站)进行数据分析。通过逐步删除单个研究进行敏感性分析。二分类数据采用比值比(OR),连续性数据采用标准均数差(SMD)和 95%置信区间(CI)。
结果:经过彻底的文献搜索,共确定了 17 项合格研究,涉及 1351 名患者。本荟萃分析的汇总结果表明,腹腔镜方法与肝内胆管结石患者术中估计出血量明显减少相关(SMD:-0.52;95%CI:-0.93 至-0.1;I=91%;P<0.0001);总体术后并发症发生率较低(OR:0.52;95%CI:0.39 至 0.70;I=0%;P<0.0001)和术中输血率(OR=0.25;95%CI:0.12 至 0.53;P<0.0001;I=30.1%;P=0.239);口服摄入时间较短(SMD:-1.66;95%CI:-2.41 至-0.92;I=91%;P<0.0001),住院时间较短(SMD:-0.89;95%CI:-1.19 至-0.59;I=83%;P<0.00001)。然而,LH 和 OH 在手术时间(SMD:0.22;95%CI:-0.21 至 0.65;I=92%;P=0.31)、初始残余结石(OR:0.79;95%CI:0.50 至 1.25;I=0%;P=0.31)和结石复发(OR:0.67;95%CI:0.35 至 1.27;I=0%;P=0.22)方面无显著差异。此外,根据 LH 的类型进行的分层分析表明,无论患者接受左外侧段切除术(LLS)还是左半肝切除术(LHH),腹腔镜方法都产生了更有利的结果。
结论:对于肝内胆管结石患者,腹腔镜肝切除术是一种优于开腹手术的选择,可降低总并发症发生率,缩短术后住院时间,减少出血量,缩短口服摄入时间。然而,由于非随机试验固有的偏倚,迫切需要高质量的随机对照试验(RCT)提供更高水平的证据。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-9-14
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-11-17
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018-7
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-9-13
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2025-1-29
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024-1-8
World J Gastrointest Surg. 2024-12-27
World J Gastroenterol. 2024-4-7
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2023-9-13