...
首页> 外文期刊>Medicine. >A systematic review and meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer
【24h】

A systematic review and meta-analysis of robot-assisted versus laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy for gastric cancer

机译:机器人辅助与腹腔镜辅助胃切除术治疗胃癌的系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Robotic-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) has been used for gastric cancer since 2002. This meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate whether RAG is safer and more effective than conventional laparoscopically assisted gastrectomy (LAG) for gastric cancer. Methods: We performed a manual search for these 2 types of operations (RAG and LAG) in the PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases up to April 30, 2016. Twelve nonrandomized controlled trials that reported on RAG and LAG for gastric cancer were included. Outcomes evaluated included operation time, number of retrieved lymph nodes, blood loss, length of the resection margin, complications, and postoperative hospital stay. Results: A total of 3744 patients in 12 studies were included (1134 patients in the RAG group and 2610 patients in the LAG group). The operation time was significantly shorter in the LAG group [weighted mean difference (WMD) 42.0 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI 28.11–55.89) minutes; P < .00001], while the loss of blood volume was lower in the RAG group ( P = .01). The number of retrieved lymph nodes, duration of postoperative stay, length of the proximal resection margin, length of the distal resection margin, and postoperative complications were similar between groups. Conclusion: We conclude that RAG is a safe and appropriate treatment for gastric cancer patients in comparison to LAG. Nevertheless, RAG is not superior to LAG. Future research on RAG should focus on comparing the differences in retrieved lymph nodes in different tiers, evaluating the postoperative recovery and reducing the cost of the treatment.
机译:背景:自2002年以来,机器人辅助胃切除术(RAG)已用于胃癌。这项荟萃分析旨在评估RAG是否比常规腹腔镜辅助胃切除术(LAG)更安全,更有效。方法:截至2016年4月30日,我们在PubMed,Embase和Cochrane图书馆数据库中手动搜索了这两种类型的操作(RAG和LAG)。在RAG和LAG上报道的胃癌的十二项非随机对照试验为包括在内。评估的结果包括手术时间,收回的淋巴结数目,失血量,切除切缘的长度,并发症和术后住院时间。结果:共纳入12个研究中的3744名患者(RAG组为1134例,LAG组为2610例)。 LAG组的手术时间明显缩短[加权平均差异(WMD)42.0(95%置信区间,95%CI 28.11-55.89)分钟; P <.00001],而RAG组的失血量则较低(P = .01)。两组之间的淋巴结数目,术后停留时间,近端切除边缘的长度,远端切除边缘的长度以及术后并发症相似。结论:我们得出结论,与LAG相比,RAG对于胃癌患者是一种安全,适当的治疗方法。尽管如此,RAG并不优于LAG。 RAG的未来研究应集中在比较不同层级的回收淋巴结的差异,评估术后恢复情况并降低治疗成本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号