机器人肝切除术与腹腔镜和开放式肝切除术治疗肝癌的可行性比较:一项网络meta分析。

IF 10.1 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Sang-Hoon Kim, Ki-Hun Kim, Hugo Pinto-Marques, João Santos Coelho
{"title":"机器人肝切除术与腹腔镜和开放式肝切除术治疗肝癌的可行性比较:一项网络meta分析。","authors":"Sang-Hoon Kim, Ki-Hun Kim, Hugo Pinto-Marques, João Santos Coelho","doi":"10.1097/JS9.0000000000003528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robotic liver resection (RLR) has gained popularity in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, its efficacy compared to laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Comprehensive literature search of electronic databases from January 2010 to December 2024 identified studies comparing RLR, LLR, or OLR. Operative, postoperative, and survival data were extracted, and pooled odd ratios or hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a frequentist network meta-analysis including RLR, LLR and OLR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 69 studies, comprising 1 randomized controlled, 3 prospective, and 65 retrospective-matched studies, involving 13,257 patients were analyzed. This network meta-analysis showed that RLR had significantly lower blood loss than both OLR and LLR, with comparable operative time, RBC transfusion rates, Pringle maneuver use, Pringle time, and R1 resection rates. RLR showed similar rates of overall and major complications and hospital stay duration as LLR, with significant benefits over OLR. No significant differences in 90-day mortality were found among the three groups. For long-term outcomes, RLR showed no significant advantage over LLR or OLR in overall and recurrence-free survival, though it generally ranked higher with a greater P-score.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This network meta-analysis suggests that RLR is a feasible surgical treatment option for HCC, offering perioperative and long-term outcomes comparable to LLR, with reduced postoperative morbidity and shorter hospital stays compared to OLR. However, further studies are needed to confirm RLR's efficacy due to its limited sample size.</p>","PeriodicalId":14401,"journal":{"name":"International journal of surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Feasibility of robotic liver resection compared with laparoscopic and open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sang-Hoon Kim, Ki-Hun Kim, Hugo Pinto-Marques, João Santos Coelho\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JS9.0000000000003528\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Robotic liver resection (RLR) has gained popularity in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, its efficacy compared to laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Comprehensive literature search of electronic databases from January 2010 to December 2024 identified studies comparing RLR, LLR, or OLR. Operative, postoperative, and survival data were extracted, and pooled odd ratios or hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a frequentist network meta-analysis including RLR, LLR and OLR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 69 studies, comprising 1 randomized controlled, 3 prospective, and 65 retrospective-matched studies, involving 13,257 patients were analyzed. This network meta-analysis showed that RLR had significantly lower blood loss than both OLR and LLR, with comparable operative time, RBC transfusion rates, Pringle maneuver use, Pringle time, and R1 resection rates. RLR showed similar rates of overall and major complications and hospital stay duration as LLR, with significant benefits over OLR. No significant differences in 90-day mortality were found among the three groups. For long-term outcomes, RLR showed no significant advantage over LLR or OLR in overall and recurrence-free survival, though it generally ranked higher with a greater P-score.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This network meta-analysis suggests that RLR is a feasible surgical treatment option for HCC, offering perioperative and long-term outcomes comparable to LLR, with reduced postoperative morbidity and shorter hospital stays compared to OLR. However, further studies are needed to confirm RLR's efficacy due to its limited sample size.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14401,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000003528\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000003528","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:机器人肝切除术(RLR)在肝细胞癌(HCC)的治疗中得到了广泛的应用;然而,与腹腔镜肝切除术(LLR)和开放肝切除术(OLR)相比,其疗效尚不清楚。方法:对2010年1月至2024年12月的电子数据库进行综合文献检索,找出比较RLR、LLR和OLR的研究。提取手术、术后和生存数据,并使用包括RLR、LLR和OLR在内的频率网络meta分析计算95%置信区间的合并奇比或风险比。结果:共纳入69项研究,包括1项随机对照研究、3项前瞻性研究和65项回顾性匹配研究,共纳入13257例患者。该网络荟萃分析显示,RLR的失血量明显低于OLR和LLR,其手术时间、红细胞输血率、品客手法使用、品客时间和R1切除率相当。RLR显示出与LLR相似的总体和主要并发症发生率和住院时间,与OLR相比有显著的益处。三组间90天死亡率无显著差异。对于长期预后,RLR在总生存率和无复发生存率方面没有明显优势于LLR或OLR,尽管其通常排名较高,p评分较高。结论:该网络荟萃分析表明,RLR是HCC的一种可行的手术治疗选择,与LLR相比,RLR提供了可媲美的围手术期和长期结果,与OLR相比,术后发病率降低,住院时间缩短。然而,由于样本量有限,RLR的有效性还需要进一步的研究来证实。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Feasibility of robotic liver resection compared with laparoscopic and open liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.

Background: Robotic liver resection (RLR) has gained popularity in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, its efficacy compared to laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) and open liver resection (OLR) remains unclear.

Methods: Comprehensive literature search of electronic databases from January 2010 to December 2024 identified studies comparing RLR, LLR, or OLR. Operative, postoperative, and survival data were extracted, and pooled odd ratios or hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a frequentist network meta-analysis including RLR, LLR and OLR.

Results: A total of 69 studies, comprising 1 randomized controlled, 3 prospective, and 65 retrospective-matched studies, involving 13,257 patients were analyzed. This network meta-analysis showed that RLR had significantly lower blood loss than both OLR and LLR, with comparable operative time, RBC transfusion rates, Pringle maneuver use, Pringle time, and R1 resection rates. RLR showed similar rates of overall and major complications and hospital stay duration as LLR, with significant benefits over OLR. No significant differences in 90-day mortality were found among the three groups. For long-term outcomes, RLR showed no significant advantage over LLR or OLR in overall and recurrence-free survival, though it generally ranked higher with a greater P-score.

Conclusions: This network meta-analysis suggests that RLR is a feasible surgical treatment option for HCC, offering perioperative and long-term outcomes comparable to LLR, with reduced postoperative morbidity and shorter hospital stays compared to OLR. However, further studies are needed to confirm RLR's efficacy due to its limited sample size.

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
17.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Surgery (IJS) has a broad scope, encompassing all surgical specialties. Its primary objective is to facilitate the exchange of crucial ideas and lines of thought between and across these specialties.By doing so, the journal aims to counter the growing trend of increasing sub-specialization, which can result in "tunnel-vision" and the isolation of significant surgical advancements within specific specialties.
×
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