Eltyeb H A, Mohamedahmed A Y Y, Mills G A, Khan J
Department of General Surgery, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Queen Elizabeth Ave, Gateshead, NE9 6SX, UK.
Faculty of Science, University of Portsmouth, St Michael's Building, Portsmouth, PO1 2DT, UK.
Tech Coloproctol. 2025 May 25;29(1):121. doi: 10.1007/s10151-025-03155-x.
Around 50% of people aged 60 years and above are affected by diverticular disease, and 25% of these individuals will require surgical intervention. Our objective is to compare the results of left colonic resection for sigmoid diverticular disease using both robotic and laparoscopic approaches. Our primary aim is to conduct a meta-analysis while investigating the rates of conversion to open surgery, stoma and complications between the two methods.
A systematic review was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. A meta-analysis was performed using RevMan Version 5.4 software. The random-effect model was employed to pool dichotomous outcomes and estimate risk and odds ratios (OR).
Eight studies were thought to fulfil the eligibility criteria: 1892 patients (49.2%) had robotic surgery, and 1952 patients (50.84%) underwent a laparoscopic approach. There were fewer conversions to open surgery in the robotic group when compared to the laparoscopic group (P < 0.00001), a lower rate of postoperative ileus (P = 0.005), shorter length of stay (mean difference (MD) 0.18 P = 0.003) and fewer morbidities (P = 0.002). There were similar rates of stoma formation (4.7%, P = 1.00), anastomotic leak (2.6%, P = 0.85) and mortality (0.3% vs 0.2%, P = 0.59). The operative time was shorter in the robotic approach, although the difference was not significant (P = 0.47).
Robotic surgery is feasible for diverticular disease compared to laparoscopic left colectomy. Our study observed a reduction in the conversion to open rate, reduced morbidity, and less ileus while demonstrating similar rates of stoma formation, anastomotic leak, and mortality. However, more high-quality research needs to be conducted to investigate this further. The study is registered in Prospero (reg # CRD42023440509).
60岁及以上人群中约50%受憩室病影响,其中25%的个体需要手术干预。我们的目的是比较机器人手术和腹腔镜手术治疗乙状结肠憩室病的左半结肠切除术结果。我们的主要目标是进行一项荟萃分析,同时调查两种方法中转开腹手术、造口和并发症的发生率。
按照PRISMA指南进行系统评价。使用RevMan 5.4版软件进行荟萃分析。采用随机效应模型汇总二分结果并估计风险和比值比(OR)。
八项研究被认为符合纳入标准:1892例患者(49.2%)接受机器人手术,1952例患者(50.84%)接受腹腔镜手术。与腹腔镜组相比,机器人组中转开腹手术的情况更少(P<0.00001),术后肠梗阻发生率更低(P = 0.005),住院时间更短(平均差值(MD)0.18,P = 0.003),并发症更少(P = 0.002)。造口形成率(4.7%,P = 1.00)、吻合口漏发生率(2.6%,P = 0.85)和死亡率(0.3%对0.2%,P = 0.59)相似。机器人手术的手术时间较短,尽管差异不显著(P = 0.47)。
与腹腔镜左半结肠切除术相比,机器人手术治疗憩室病是可行的。我们的研究观察到转开腹率降低、并发症减少、肠梗阻减少,同时造口形成率、吻合口漏发生率和死亡率相似。然而,需要进行更多高质量研究以进一步调查。该研究已在国际前瞻性系统评价注册库(Prospero)注册(注册号CRD42023440509)。