文献类型：期刊文献

英文题名：Effectiveness and safety of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic hepatectomy for liver neoplasms: A meta-analysis of retrospective studies

作者：Hu, Lidong[1,2];Yao, Liang[4];Li, Xiaofei[2,3];Jin, Penghui[1,2];Yang, Kehu[5];Guo, Tiankang[2]

第一作者：Hu, Lidong

通信作者：Guo, TK[1];Yang, KH[2]

机构：[1]Gansu Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Dept Clin Med, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China;[2]Gansu Prov Peoples Hosp, Dept Gen Surg, 204 Donggang West Rd, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China;[3]Ningxia Med Univ, Dept Clin Med, Yinchuan 750004, Peoples R China;[4]Gansu Prov Peoples Hosp, Inst Clin Res & Evidence Based Med, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China;[5]Lanzhou Univ, Sch Basic Med Sci, Evidence Based Med Ctr, 199 Donggang West Rd, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China

第一机构：甘肃中医药大学临床医学院

通信机构：[1]corresponding author), Gansu Prov Peoples Hosp, Dept Gen Surg, 204 Donggang West Rd, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China;[2]corresponding author), Lanzhou Univ, Sch Basic Med Sci, Evidence Based Med Ctr, 199 Donggang West Rd, Lanzhou 730000, Gansu, Peoples R China.

年份：2018

卷号：41

期号：5

起止页码：401

外文期刊名：ASIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY

收录：;Scopus(收录号：2-s2.0-85028972399);WOS:【SCI-EXPANDED(收录号:WOS:000446398100001)】；

语种：英文

外文关键词：Robotic-assisted hepatectomy; Laparoscopic hepatectomy; Liver neoplasms; Meta-analysis

摘要：This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of RAH and LLR for liver neoplasms. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, EMbase, the Cochrane Library, Web of science, and China Biology Medicine disc up to July 2016 for studies that provided comparisons between the surgical outcomes of RAH and LLR for liver neoplasms. WMD, OR and 95% CI were calculated and data combined using the random-effect model. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods. A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis, in which 487 patients were in the RAH group and 902 patients were in the LLR group. The meta-analysis results indicated: compared to LLR, RAH was associated with more estimated blood loss, longer operative time, and longer time to first nutritional intake (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay, conversion rate during operation, R0 resection rate, complications and mortality (p > 0.05). Three studies reported the total cost, and the result showed a higher cost in the RAH group when compared with the LLR group (p < 0.05). This meta-analysis indicated that RAH and LLR display similar effectiveness and safety in hepatectomy. Considering the lack of high quality original studies, prospective clinical trials should be conducted to provide strong evidence for clinical guidelines formation, and the insurance coverage policies should be established to promote the application of robotic surgery in the future. (C) 2017 Asian Surgical Association and Taiwan Robotic Surgical Association. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.