Suppr超能文献

肺癌肺叶切除术:比较开放、电视辅助胸腔镜手术和机器人手术方法的系统评价和网络荟萃分析。

Pulmonary lobectomy for cancer: Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing open, video-assisted thoracic surgery, and robotic approach.

机构信息

Department of Biomedical Science for Health, Division of General Surgery, University of Milan, Istitituto Clinico Sant'Ambrogio, Milan, Italy.

Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Thoracic Surgery and Lung Transplant Unit Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Granda - Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy.

出版信息

Surgery. 2021 Feb;169(2):436-446. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2020.09.010. Epub 2020 Oct 21.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Although minimally invasive lobectomy has gained worldwide interest, there has been debate on perioperative and oncological outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes among open lobectomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, and robotic lobectomy.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were consulted. A fully Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies (183,426 patients) were included; 88,865 (48.4%) underwent open lobectomy, 79,171 (43.2%) video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, and 15,390 (8.4%) robotic lobectomy. Compared with open lobectomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery, lobectomy and robotic lobectomy had significantly reduced 30-day mortality (risk ratio = 0.53; 95% credible intervals, 0.40-0.66 and risk ratio = 0.51; 95% credible intervals, 0.36-0.71), pulmonary complications (risk ratio = 0.70; 95% credible intervals, 0.51-0.92 and risk ratio = 0.69; 95% credible intervals, 0.51-0.88), and overall complications (risk ratio = 0.77; 95% credible intervals, 0.68-0.85 and risk ratio = 0.79; 95% credible intervals, 0.67-0.91). Compared with video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, open lobectomy, and robotic lobectomy had a significantly higher total number of harvested lymph nodes (mean difference = 1.46; 95% credible intervals, 0.30, 2.64 and mean difference = 2.18; 95% credible intervals, 0.52-3.92) and lymph nodes stations (mean difference = 0.37; 95% credible intervals, 0.08-0.65 and mean difference = 0.93; 95% credible intervals, 0.47-1.40). Positive resection margin and 5-year overall survival were similar across treatments. Intraoperative blood loss, postoperative transfusion, hospital length of stay, and 30-day readmission were significantly reduced for minimally invasive approaches.

CONCLUSION

Compared with open lobectomy, video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, and robotic lobectomy seem safer with reduced 30-day mortality, pulmonary, and overall complications with equivalent oncologic outcomes and 5-year overall survival. Minimally invasive techniques may improve outcomes and surgeons should be encouraged, when feasible, to adopt video-assisted thoracic surgery lobectomy, or robotic lobectomy in the treatment of lung cancer.

摘要

背景

虽然微创肺叶切除术已在全球范围内引起关注,但有关围手术期和肿瘤学结果仍存在争议。本研究旨在比较开胸肺叶切除术、电视辅助胸腔镜肺叶切除术和机器人肺叶切除术的结果。

方法

检索了 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Web of Science 数据库。进行了完全贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。

结果

共纳入 34 项研究(183426 例患者);88865 例(48.4%)接受开胸肺叶切除术,79171 例(43.2%)接受电视辅助胸腔镜肺叶切除术,15390 例(8.4%)接受机器人肺叶切除术。与开胸肺叶切除术相比,电视辅助胸腔镜肺叶切除术和机器人肺叶切除术的 30 天死亡率显著降低(风险比=0.53;95%可信区间,0.40-0.66 和风险比=0.51;95%可信区间,0.36-0.71)、肺部并发症(风险比=0.70;95%可信区间,0.51-0.92 和风险比=0.69;95%可信区间,0.51-0.88)和总并发症(风险比=0.77;95%可信区间,0.68-0.85 和风险比=0.79;95%可信区间,0.67-0.91)。与电视辅助胸腔镜肺叶切除术相比,开胸肺叶切除术和机器人肺叶切除术的总淋巴结检出数(均数差值=1.46;95%可信区间,0.30,2.64 和均数差值=2.18;95%可信区间,0.52-3.92)和淋巴结站数(均数差值=0.37;95%可信区间,0.08-0.65 和均数差值=0.93;95%可信区间,0.47-1.40)明显更高。阳性切缘和 5 年总生存率在治疗上相似。微创手术的术中出血量、术后输血、住院时间和 30 天再入院率均显著降低。

结论

与开胸肺叶切除术相比,电视辅助胸腔镜肺叶切除术和机器人肺叶切除术似乎更安全,30 天死亡率、肺部和总体并发症降低,且肿瘤学结果和 5 年总生存率相当。微创手术可能改善结果,应鼓励外科医生在可行的情况下采用电视辅助胸腔镜肺叶切除术或机器人肺叶切除术治疗肺癌。

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