456 Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
{"title":"456 Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis","authors":"A. Wuheb","doi":"10.1093/bjs/znae163.110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n To evaluate comparative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic bowel resection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).\n \n \n \n A systematic online search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane database, The Virtual Health Library, Clinical trials.gov and Science Direct. Comparative studies comparing robotic versus laparoscopic resection for IBD were included. Primary outcomes were post-operative complications rate. Operative time, conversion to open, length of hospital stays, and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters.\n \n \n \n Eleven studies with total number of 5,566 patients divided between those undergoing robotic (n=365) and conventional laparoscopic (n=5,201) surgery. Moreover, subgroup analysis for sub-total colectomy group showed shorter LOS [MD: -1.62, P=0.03]. Overall complications rate was significantly higher in the laparoscopy group compared to robotic group [OR: 0.48, P=0.03], however the operative time was longer in the robotic group [MD: 40.61, P=0.00001]. Pooled analysis showed comparable results regarding conversion to open [OR: 0.46, P=0.15], anastomosis leak [OR: 0.92, P=0.84], abdominal abscess / collection [OR: 0.34, P=0.21], and mortality [RD: 0.00, P=1.00].\n \n \n \n Compared to laparoscopic approach, Robotic surgery provides a significantly lower rate of post-operative complications and shorter LOS at the expense of operative time with similar 30-day Mortality.\n","PeriodicalId":136,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae163.110","RegionNum":1,"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
Abstract
To evaluate comparative outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic bowel resection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD).
A systematic online search was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane database, The Virtual Health Library, Clinical trials.gov and Science Direct. Comparative studies comparing robotic versus laparoscopic resection for IBD were included. Primary outcomes were post-operative complications rate. Operative time, conversion to open, length of hospital stays, and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters.
Eleven studies with total number of 5,566 patients divided between those undergoing robotic (n=365) and conventional laparoscopic (n=5,201) surgery. Moreover, subgroup analysis for sub-total colectomy group showed shorter LOS [MD: -1.62, P=0.03]. Overall complications rate was significantly higher in the laparoscopy group compared to robotic group [OR: 0.48, P=0.03], however the operative time was longer in the robotic group [MD: 40.61, P=0.00001]. Pooled analysis showed comparable results regarding conversion to open [OR: 0.46, P=0.15], anastomosis leak [OR: 0.92, P=0.84], abdominal abscess / collection [OR: 0.34, P=0.21], and mortality [RD: 0.00, P=1.00].
Compared to laparoscopic approach, Robotic surgery provides a significantly lower rate of post-operative complications and shorter LOS at the expense of operative time with similar 30-day Mortality.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal of Surgery (BJS), incorporating the European Journal of Surgery, stands as Europe's leading peer-reviewed surgical journal. It serves as an invaluable platform for presenting high-quality clinical and laboratory-based research across a wide range of surgical topics. In addition to providing a comprehensive coverage of traditional surgical practices, BJS also showcases emerging areas in the field, such as minimally invasive therapy and interventional radiology.
While the journal appeals to general surgeons, it also holds relevance for specialty surgeons and professionals working in closely related fields. By presenting cutting-edge research and advancements, BJS aims to revolutionize the way surgical knowledge is shared and contribute to the ongoing progress of the surgical community.