Suppr超能文献

机器人与腹腔镜左半结肠切除术:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Robotic versus laparoscopic left colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences (DIMEC), University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

General and Oncologic Surgery, Morgagni-Pierantoni Hospital, Ausl Romagna, Forlì, Italy.

出版信息

Int J Colorectal Dis. 2022 Jul;37(7):1497-1507. doi: 10.1007/s00384-022-04194-8. Epub 2022 Jun 1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to review the new evidence to understand whether the robotic approach could find some clear indication also in left colectomy.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies published from 2004 to 2022 in the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases and comparing laparoscopic (LLC) and robotic left colectomy (RLC) was performed. All comparative studies evaluating robotic left colectomy (RLC) versus laparoscopic (LLC) left colectomy with at least 20 patients in the robotic arm were included. Abstract, editorials, and reviews were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies was used to assess the methodological quality. The random-effect model was used to calculate pooled effect estimates.

RESULTS

Among the 139 articles identified, 11 were eligible, with a total of 52,589 patients (RLC, n = 13,506 versus LLC, n = 39,083). The rate of conversion to open surgery was lower for robotic procedures (RR 0.5, 0.5-0.6; p < 0.001). Operative time was longer for the robotic procedures in the pooled analysis (WMD 39.1, 17.3-60.9, p = 0.002). Overall complications (RR 0.9, 0.8-0.9, p < 0.001), anastomotic leaks (RR 0.7, 0.7-0.8; p < 0.001), and superficial wound infection (RR 3.1, 2.8-3.4; p < 0.001) were less common after RLC. There were no significant differences in mortality (RR 1.1; 0.8-1.6, p = 0.124). There were no differences between RLC and LLC with regards to postoperative variables in the subgroup analysis on malignancies.

CONCLUSIONS

Robotic left colectomy requires less conversion to open surgery than the standard laparoscopic approach. Postoperative morbidity rates seemed to be lower during RLC, but this was not confirmed in the procedures performed for malignancies.

摘要

背景

本研究旨在综述新证据,以了解机器人方法是否也能在左结肠切除术中有明确的适应证。

方法

对 2004 年至 2022 年期间在 Web of Science、PubMed 和 Scopus 数据库中发表的研究进行了系统评价,并对腹腔镜(LLC)和机器人左结肠切除术(RLC)进行了比较。纳入了所有比较机器人左结肠切除术(RLC)与腹腔镜(LLC)左结肠切除术的研究,这些研究在机器人组中至少有 20 例患者。排除了摘要、社论和综述。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表对队列研究进行了方法学质量评估。采用随机效应模型计算合并效应估计值。

结果

在 139 篇文章中,有 11 篇符合条件,共 52589 例患者(RLC 组 n=13506 例,LLC 组 n=39083 例)。机器人手术中转开腹的比例较低(RR 0.5,0.5-0.6;p<0.001)。在汇总分析中,机器人手术的手术时间较长(WMD 39.1,17.3-60.9,p=0.002)。总体并发症(RR 0.9,0.8-0.9,p<0.001)、吻合口漏(RR 0.7,0.7-0.8;p<0.001)和浅表伤口感染(RR 3.1,2.8-3.4;p<0.001)的发生率在 RLC 后较低。死亡率无差异(RR 1.1;0.8-1.6,p=0.124)。在对恶性肿瘤手术的亚组分析中,RLC 和 LLC 在术后变量方面没有差异。

结论

机器人左结肠切除术比标准腹腔镜方法需要更少的中转开腹手术。RLC 术后发病率似乎较低,但在针对恶性肿瘤的手术中并未得到证实。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2e4a/9262793/55b0e8524a11/384_2022_4194_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验