• 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

机器人与腹腔镜治疗症状性贲门失弛缓症的比较:系统评价与荟萃分析。

Robotic versus laparoscopic approach to treat symptomatic achalasia: systematic review with meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Clinical Medcine and Surgery, Federico II University, Naples, Italy.

Division of Gastroenterology, Department of GI Physiology, University College London Hospitals, London, England, UK.

出版信息

Dis Esophagus. 2019 Dec 13;32(10):1-8. doi: 10.1093/dote/doz062.

DOI:10.1093/dote/doz062
PMID:31274153
Abstract

Minimally invasive Heller myotomy is considered the gold standard surgical approach for symptomatic achalasia because it is a safe and effective procedure. Over the last years, several studies comparing the laparoscopic and robotic approach for Heller myotomy have been published. Although the robotic approach appears to have some advantages over standard laparoscopy, data on this topic are still controversial and no definite conclusions have been drawn. This metanalysis has been designed to systematically evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of the robot-assisted Heller myotomy as compared to the standard laparoscopic approach. According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a systematic search on both laparoscopic and robotic Heller myotomy was performed in all the major electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE), using the following search string: (achalasia OR Dor) AND robotic. Six articles were included in the final analysis. A metaregression analysis was performed to assess the possible effects of demographic variables (age, gender, body mass indes (BMI)) and previous abdominal surgery or endoscopic intervention on the analyzed outcomes. No statistical difference was observed in operative times (mean difference (MD) = 20.79, P = 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.05,51,62), estimated blood loss (MD = -17.10, P = 0.13, 95% CI -40.48,5.08), conversion rate to open surgery (risk difference (RD) = -0.01, P = 0.33, 95% CI -0.05,0.02), length of hospital stay (MD = -0.73, P = 0.15, 95% CI -1.71,0.25) and long-term recurrence (odds ratio (OR) = 0.59, P = 0.45, 95% CI 0.15,2.33). On the contrary, the robotic approach was found to be associated with a significantly significant lower rate of intraoperative esophageal perforations (OR = 0.13, P < 0.001, 95% CI 0.04, 0.45). Our results suggest that the robotic approach is safer than the laparoscopic Heller myotomy, encouraging the use of robot-assisted surgery. However, our analysis is limited because of the exiguous number of comparative studies and because most of the included studies were statistically underpowered, given the small sample size. Moreover, a high degree of heterogeneity was observed in most of published studies. Taking in consideration the additional costs of robot-assisted procedures, larger Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are advocated to confirm the safety and effectiveness of the robotic approach, and its advantages over standard laparoscopic surgery. In conclusion, well-designed prospective trials and RCTs with homogeneous parameters are needed to draw definitive conclusions about the best surgical approach to pursue in treating symptomatic achalasia.

摘要

微创 Heller 肌切开术被认为是治疗症状性贲门失弛缓症的金标准手术方法,因为它是一种安全有效的方法。在过去的几年中,已经发表了许多比较腹腔镜和机器人 Heller 肌切开术的研究。虽然机器人方法似乎比标准腹腔镜具有一些优势,但关于这个主题的数据仍然存在争议,没有得出明确的结论。本荟萃分析旨在系统评估和比较机器人辅助 Heller 肌切开术与标准腹腔镜方法的有效性和安全性。根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,在所有主要的电子数据库(PubMed、Web of Science、Scopus、EMBASE)中对腹腔镜和机器人 Heller 肌切开术进行了系统搜索,使用以下搜索字符串:(贲门失弛缓症或 Dor)和机器人。最终分析纳入了 6 篇文章。进行了荟萃回归分析,以评估人口统计学变量(年龄、性别、体重指数(BMI))和先前的腹部手术或内镜干预对分析结果的可能影响。手术时间无统计学差异(平均差异(MD)=20.79,P=0.19,95%置信区间(CI)-10.05,51.62),估计出血量(MD=-17.10,P=0.13,95%CI-40.48,5.08),转为开放性手术的转化率(风险差异(RD)=-0.01,P=0.33,95%CI-0.05,0.02),住院时间(MD=-0.73,P=0.15,95%CI-1.71,0.25)和长期复发(比值比(OR)=0.59,P=0.45,95%CI 0.15,2.33)。相反,机器人方法与术中食管穿孔的发生率显著降低相关(OR=0.13,P<0.001,95%CI 0.04,0.45)。我们的结果表明,机器人方法比腹腔镜 Heller 肌切开术更安全,鼓励使用机器人辅助手术。然而,由于比较研究的数量较少,并且由于大多数纳入的研究由于样本量较小,因此在统计学上没有足够的效力,我们的分析受到限制。此外,大多数已发表的研究中观察到高度异质性。考虑到机器人辅助手术的额外成本,提倡进行更大规模的随机对照试验(RCT),以确认机器人方法的安全性和有效性,以及其相对于标准腹腔镜手术的优势。总之,需要设计良好的前瞻性试验和 RCT,并使用同质参数,以得出关于治疗症状性贲门失弛缓症的最佳手术方法的明确结论。

相似文献

1
Robotic versus laparoscopic approach to treat symptomatic achalasia: systematic review with meta-analysis.机器人与腹腔镜治疗症状性贲门失弛缓症的比较:系统评价与荟萃分析。
Dis Esophagus. 2019 Dec 13;32(10):1-8. doi: 10.1093/dote/doz062.
2
Optimal surgical intervention for achalasia: laparoscopic or robotic approach.贲门失弛缓症的最佳手术干预:腹腔镜还是机器人方法。
J Robot Surg. 2019 Jun;13(3):397-400. doi: 10.1007/s11701-018-0865-7. Epub 2018 Sep 14.
3
Robotic and per-oral endoscopic myotomy have fewer technical complications compared to laparoscopic Heller myotomy.与腹腔镜 Heller 肌切开术相比,机器人辅助和经口内镜肌切开术的技术并发症较少。
Surg Endosc. 2020 Jul;34(7):3191-3196. doi: 10.1007/s00464-019-07093-2. Epub 2019 Sep 3.
4
Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted Heller myotomy for the treatment of achalasia: A systematic review with meta-analysis.腹腔镜与机器人辅助 Heller 肌切开术治疗贲门失弛缓症的系统评价与荟萃分析。
Int J Med Robot. 2021 Aug;17(4):e2253. doi: 10.1002/rcs.2253. Epub 2021 Apr 12.
5
Robotic-assisted vs. Laparoscopic Heller's Myotomy for Achalasia in Children.机器人辅助与腹腔镜下 Heller 肌切开术治疗儿童贲门失弛缓症。
J Pediatr Surg. 2024 Jun;59(6):1072-1076. doi: 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2023.11.003. Epub 2023 Nov 10.
6
Robotic-assisted Heller Myotomy Is a Safe Operation.机器人辅助 Heller 肌切开术是一种安全的手术。
Isr Med Assoc J. 2021 Oct;23(10):631-634.
7
Achalasia: laparoscopic Heller myotomy with fundoplication versus peroral endoscopic myotomy-a systematic review and meta-analysis.贲门失弛缓症:腹腔镜 Heller 肌切开术联合胃底折叠术与经口内镜肌切开术的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Esophagus. 2024 Jul;21(3):298-305. doi: 10.1007/s10388-024-01063-x. Epub 2024 May 22.
8
Esophageal Achalasia: From Laparoscopic to Robotic Heller Myotomy and Dor Fundoplication.食管失弛缓症:从腹腔镜到机器人 Heller 肌切开术和 Dor 胃底折叠术。
JSLS. 2022 Jul-Sep;26(3). doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2022.00027.
9
Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes of Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy (POEM) and Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy (LHM) for Achalasia.经口内镜下肌切开术(POEM)与腹腔镜下Heller肌切开术(LHM)治疗贲门失弛缓症围手术期结果的系统评价和荟萃分析
Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2017 Jun;27(3):123-131. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000000402.
10
From laparoscopic to robotic-assisted Heller myotomy for achalasia in a single high-volume visceral surgery center: postoperative outcomes and quality of life.从腹腔镜到机器人辅助 Heller 肌切开术治疗食管失弛缓症:单一大容量内脏外科中心的术后结果和生活质量。
BMC Surg. 2022 Nov 11;22(1):391. doi: 10.1186/s12893-022-01818-2.

引用本文的文献

1
30-day outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic Heller myotomy.机器人辅助与腹腔镜下Heller肌切开术的30天结局
Surg Endosc. 2025 Aug 29. doi: 10.1007/s00464-025-12085-6.
2
Robotic versus laparoscopic heller myotomy for esophageal achalasia: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.机器人辅助与腹腔镜下贲门失弛缓症肌切开术的比较:一项更新的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2025 Feb 17;410(1):75. doi: 10.1007/s00423-025-03648-1.
3
Achalasia-associated megaoesophagus presenting with dyspnoea and cough.贲门失弛缓症相关巨大食管伴呼吸困难和咳嗽。
BMJ Case Rep. 2024 Feb 17;17(2):e258950. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2023-258950.
4
Abdominal Wall Hernias-State of the Art of Laparoscopic versus Robotic Surgery.腹壁疝——腹腔镜手术与机器人手术的现状
J Pers Med. 2024 Jan 16;14(1):100. doi: 10.3390/jpm14010100.
5
Robot-Assisted Heller Myotomy Versus Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.机器人辅助Heller肌切开术与腹腔镜Heller肌切开术:一项系统评价和荟萃分析
Cureus. 2023 Nov 8;15(11):e48495. doi: 10.7759/cureus.48495. eCollection 2023 Nov.
6
Minimally invasive thoracic surgery: robot-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.微创胸外科手术:机器人辅助与电视辅助胸腔镜手术
Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne. 2023 Sep;18(3):436-444. doi: 10.5114/wiitm.2023.128714. Epub 2023 Jun 20.
7
Robotic Heller's cardiomyotomy for achalasia: early outcomes for a high-volume UK centre.机器人辅助 Heller 肌切开术治疗贲门失弛缓症:大容量英国中心的早期结果。
Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2024 Apr;106(4):353-358. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2023.0065. Epub 2023 Oct 16.
8
Modern Achalasia: Diagnosis, Classification, and Treatment.现代贲门失弛缓症:诊断、分类与治疗
J Neurogastroenterol Motil. 2023 Oct 30;29(4):419-427. doi: 10.5056/jnm23125.
9
Robotic Heller myotomy and Dor fundoplication: Twelve steps.机器人辅助Heller肌切开术和Dor胃底折叠术:十二个步骤。
JTCVS Tech. 2022 Aug 20;16:163-168. doi: 10.1016/j.xjtc.2022.07.028. eCollection 2022 Dec.
10
Robotic-assisted foregut surgery is associated with lower rates of complication and shorter post-operative length of stay.机器人辅助的前肠手术并发症发生率较低,术后住院时间较短。
Surg Endosc. 2023 Apr;37(4):2800-2805. doi: 10.1007/s00464-022-09814-6. Epub 2022 Dec 7.