成人机器人辅助输尿管再植术与开放输尿管再植术:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Atef A Hassan, Abdelrahman M Mady, Hesham Abozied, Mohamed I Algammal, Amr A Hassan, Mohamed Salman, Mohamed E Metwally, Moaz Abouelmagd, Hossam A Shouman, Ibrahim Tagreda, Mohamed Elsalhy, Esam Elnady, Mohamed Rehan, Saed Khater
{"title":"成人机器人辅助输尿管再植术与开放输尿管再植术:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Atef A Hassan, Abdelrahman M Mady, Hesham Abozied, Mohamed I Algammal, Amr A Hassan, Mohamed Salman, Mohamed E Metwally, Moaz Abouelmagd, Hossam A Shouman, Ibrahim Tagreda, Mohamed Elsalhy, Esam Elnady, Mohamed Rehan, Saed Khater","doi":"10.1007/s11701-025-02511-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ureteral reimplantation is a critical surgical procedure for restoring ureteral function, traditionally performed using open ureteral reimplantation (OUR). However, robotic-assisted ureteral reimplantation (RUR) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative with potential perioperative advantages. To systematically compare the postoperative outcomes and efficacy of RUR and OUR in ureteral reimplantation in adults through a meta-analysis of existing studies. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library identified studies comparing RUR and OUR in adults up to January 2025. Studies reporting at least one outcome of interest, such as complications, blood loss, hospital stay, or reintervention rates, were included. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I<sup>2</sup> statistic. Four retrospective studies encompassing 258 patients (RUR: 141, OUR: 117) were included. RUR was associated with significantly fewer complications (RR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.17-0.91; p = 0.03), shorter hospital stays (MD: -4.97 days; 95% CI: -9.55 to -0.38; p = 0.03), and reduced transfusion requirements (RR: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.02-0.46; p = 0.004) compared to OUR. No significant differences were observed in reintervention rates or operating time. RUR demonstrates significant perioperative advantages over OUR, including reduced complications, shorter hospital stays, and lower blood loss, while maintaining comparable long-term efficacy. These findings support the adoption of RUR as a safe and effective alternative for ureteral reimplantation. Further high-quality, multicenter studies are needed to confirm these results and address remaining gaps.</p>","PeriodicalId":47616,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","volume":"19 1","pages":"373"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12254083/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Robotic assisted vs. open ureteral reimplantation in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Atef A Hassan, Abdelrahman M Mady, Hesham Abozied, Mohamed I Algammal, Amr A Hassan, Mohamed Salman, Mohamed E Metwally, Moaz Abouelmagd, Hossam A Shouman, Ibrahim Tagreda, Mohamed Elsalhy, Esam Elnady, Mohamed Rehan, Saed Khater\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11701-025-02511-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Ureteral reimplantation is a critical surgical procedure for restoring ureteral function, traditionally performed using open ureteral reimplantation (OUR). However, robotic-assisted ureteral reimplantation (RUR) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative with potential perioperative advantages. To systematically compare the postoperative outcomes and efficacy of RUR and OUR in ureteral reimplantation in adults through a meta-analysis of existing studies. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library identified studies comparing RUR and OUR in adults up to January 2025. Studies reporting at least one outcome of interest, such as complications, blood loss, hospital stay, or reintervention rates, were included. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I<sup>2</sup> statistic. Four retrospective studies encompassing 258 patients (RUR: 141, OUR: 117) were included. RUR was associated with significantly fewer complications (RR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.17-0.91; p = 0.03), shorter hospital stays (MD: -4.97 days; 95% CI: -9.55 to -0.38; p = 0.03), and reduced transfusion requirements (RR: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.02-0.46; p = 0.004) compared to OUR. No significant differences were observed in reintervention rates or operating time. RUR demonstrates significant perioperative advantages over OUR, including reduced complications, shorter hospital stays, and lower blood loss, while maintaining comparable long-term efficacy. These findings support the adoption of RUR as a safe and effective alternative for ureteral reimplantation. Further high-quality, multicenter studies are needed to confirm these results and address remaining gaps.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47616,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Robotic Surgery\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"373\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12254083/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Robotic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02511-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Robotic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-025-02511-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

输尿管再植术是恢复输尿管功能的关键手术,传统上采用开放输尿管再植术(OUR)。然而,机器人辅助输尿管再植术(RUR)已成为一种微创替代方案,具有潜在的围手术期优势。通过对现有研究的荟萃分析,系统比较RUR和OUR在成人输尿管再植术中的术后结果和疗效。通过对PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science和Cochrane图书馆的全面搜索,发现了截至2025年1月比较成人RUR和OUR的研究。研究报告了至少一个感兴趣的结果,如并发症、失血、住院时间或再干预率。使用随机效应模型计算合并效应估计,使用I2统计量评估异质性。纳入了四项回顾性研究,包括258例患者(rr: 141, OUR: 117)。RUR与并发症显著减少相关(RR: 0.40;95% ci: 0.17-0.91;p = 0.03),住院时间较短(MD: -4.97天;95% CI: -9.55 ~ -0.38;p = 0.03),输血需求减少(RR: 0.09;95% ci: 0.02-0.46;p = 0.004)。再干预率和手术时间无显著差异。与OUR相比,RUR在围手术期表现出显著的优势,包括减少并发症、缩短住院时间和减少失血量,同时保持相当的长期疗效。这些发现支持将尿路再灌注作为输尿管再植的一种安全有效的选择。需要进一步的高质量、多中心研究来证实这些结果并解决剩余的差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Robotic assisted vs. open ureteral reimplantation in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ureteral reimplantation is a critical surgical procedure for restoring ureteral function, traditionally performed using open ureteral reimplantation (OUR). However, robotic-assisted ureteral reimplantation (RUR) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative with potential perioperative advantages. To systematically compare the postoperative outcomes and efficacy of RUR and OUR in ureteral reimplantation in adults through a meta-analysis of existing studies. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library identified studies comparing RUR and OUR in adults up to January 2025. Studies reporting at least one outcome of interest, such as complications, blood loss, hospital stay, or reintervention rates, were included. Pooled effect estimates were calculated using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. Four retrospective studies encompassing 258 patients (RUR: 141, OUR: 117) were included. RUR was associated with significantly fewer complications (RR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.17-0.91; p = 0.03), shorter hospital stays (MD: -4.97 days; 95% CI: -9.55 to -0.38; p = 0.03), and reduced transfusion requirements (RR: 0.09; 95% CI: 0.02-0.46; p = 0.004) compared to OUR. No significant differences were observed in reintervention rates or operating time. RUR demonstrates significant perioperative advantages over OUR, including reduced complications, shorter hospital stays, and lower blood loss, while maintaining comparable long-term efficacy. These findings support the adoption of RUR as a safe and effective alternative for ureteral reimplantation. Further high-quality, multicenter studies are needed to confirm these results and address remaining gaps.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
145
期刊介绍: The aim of the Journal of Robotic Surgery is to become the leading worldwide journal for publication of articles related to robotic surgery, encompassing surgical simulation and integrated imaging techniques. The journal provides a centralized, focused resource for physicians wishing to publish their experience or those wishing to avail themselves of the most up-to-date findings.The journal reports on advance in a wide range of surgical specialties including adult and pediatric urology, general surgery, cardiac surgery, gynecology, ENT, orthopedics and neurosurgery.The use of robotics in surgery is broad-based and will undoubtedly expand over the next decade as new technical innovations and techniques increase the applicability of its use. The journal intends to capture this trend as it develops.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信