Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional video-assisted hepatectomy for liver disease: a meta-analysis of clinical data.

INTRODUCTION

The benefit of three-dimensional (3D) visualization for liver disease is uncertain.

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of 3D versus two-dimensional (2D) video-assisted hepatectomy for LD.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Medline, and Web of Science for studies addressing 3D versus 2D for 2D until 30 February 2020. Study-specific effect sizes and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined to calculate the pooled value using a fixed-effects or random-effects model.

RESULTS

Nine studies with 808 patients were included. The 3D group had shorter operative time (mean difference (MD) = 34.39; 95% CI = 59.50, 9.28), experienced less intraoperative blood loss (MD = 106.55; 95% CI = 183.76, 29.34), and a smaller blood transfusion volume (MD = 88.25; 95% CI = 141.26, 35.24). The 3D group had a smaller difference between the predicted volume and the actual resected volume (MD = 103.25; 95% CI = 173.24, 33.26) and a lower rate of postoperative complications (odds ratio (OR) = 0.57; 95% CI: 0.35, 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

During surgery, 3D video-assisted hepatectomy could effectively reduce operative time, intraoperative bleeding, and blood transfusion volume, and had a smaller difference between the predicted volume and the actual resected volume and a lower rate of postoperative complications. More high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to verify the reliability and validity of our conclusion.