首页> 外文期刊>European urology >Robotic versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis
【24h】

Robotic versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

机译:机器人与腹腔镜肾上腺切除术:系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Context Over the last decade, robot-assisted adrenalectomy has been included in the surgical armamentarium for the management of adrenal masses. Objective To critically analyze the available evidence of studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy. Evidence acquisition A systematic literature review was performed in August 2013 using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic search engines. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis criteria. Evidence synthesis Nine studies were selected for the analysis including 600 patients who underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy (277 robot assisted and 323 laparoscopic). Only one of the studies was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) but of low quality according to the Jadad scale. However, the methodological quality of included nonrandomized studies was relatively high. Body mass index was higher for the laparoscopic group (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], - 3.01 to -1.74; p < 0.00001). A transperitoneal approach was mostly used for both techniques (72.5% of robotic cases and 75.5% of laparoscopic cases; p = 0.27). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.39-1.75; p = 0.61) and operative time (WMD: 5.88; 95% CI, -6.02 to 17.79; p = 0.33). There was a significantly longer hospital stay in the conventional laparoscopic group (WMD: -0.43; 95% CI, -0.56 to -0.30; p < 0.00001), as well as a higher estimated blood loss (WMD: -18.21; 95% CI, -29.11 to -7.32; p = 0.001). There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.04; 95% CI, -0.07 to -0.00; p = 0.05) between groups. Most of the postoperative complications were minor (80% for the robotic group and 68% for the conventional laparoscopic group). Limitations of the present analysis are the limited sample size and including only one low-quality RCT. Conclusions Robot-assisted adrenalectomy can be performed safely and effectively with operative time and conversion rates similar to laparoscopic adrenalectomy. In addition, it can provide potential advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and lower occurrence of postoperative complications. These findings seem to support the use of robotics for the minimally invasive surgical management of adrenal masses.
机译:背景技术在过去的十年中,机器人辅助肾上腺切除术已被纳入外科武器库,以管理肾上腺肿块。目的严格分析比较腹腔镜和机器人肾上腺切除术的现有证据。证据收集2013年8月,使用PubMed,Scopus和Web of Science电子搜索引擎进行了系统的文献综述。根据系统评价的首选报告项目和荟萃分析标准,根据搜索策略进行文章选择。证据综合选择了9项研究作为分析对象,其中包括600例接受了微创肾上腺切除术的患者(277台机器人辅助手术和323腹腔镜手术)。只有一项研究是随机临床试验(RCT),但根据Jadad量表的质量较低。但是,纳入的非随机研究的方法学质量相对较高。腹腔镜组的体重指数较高(加权平均差异[WMD]:-2.37; 95%置信区间[CI];-3.01至-1.74; p <0.00001)。两种技术都主要采用经腹膜入路(72.5%的机器人病例和75.5%的腹腔镜病例; p = 0.27)。两组的转化率(优势比[OR]:0.82; 95%CI,0.39-1.75; p = 0.61)和手术时间(WMD:5.88; 95%CI,-6.02至17.79; p = 0.33)。常规腹腔镜组的住院时间明显更长(WMD:-0.43; 95%CI,-0.56至-0.30; p <0.00001),以及较高的估计失血量(WMD:-18.21; 95%CI ,-29.11至-7.32; p = 0.001)。两组之间的术后并发症发生率(OR:0.04; 95%CI,-0.07至-0.00; p = 0.05)也没有统计学上的显着差异。大多数术后并发症是轻微的(机器人组为80%,常规腹腔镜组为68%)。本分析的局限性在于样本量有限,并且仅包括一项低质量的RCT。结论机器人辅助肾上腺切除术可以安全有效地进行,其手术时间和转换率与腹腔镜肾上腺切除术相似。此外,它还具有缩短住院时间,减少失血量以及减少术后并发症发生的潜在优势。这些发现似乎支持使用机器人技术对肾上腺肿块进行微创手术治疗。

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