Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted comparative laparoscopic surgery in lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer

Hao Shi, Xianhao Yi, Xin Yan, Wenjie Wu, Hui Ouyang, Chengke Ou, Xiangheng Chen
{"title":"Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted comparative laparoscopic surgery in lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer","authors":"Hao Shi, Xianhao Yi, Xin Yan, Wenjie Wu, Hui Ouyang, Chengke Ou, Xiangheng Chen","doi":"10.1007/s00464-024-11111-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Introduction</h3><p>A meta-analysis was conducted on the perioperative and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection in rectal cancer. There are few articles and reports on this topic, and a lack of high-quality research results in unreliable research conclusions. This study includes prospective and retrospective studies to obtain more reliable findings.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Materials and methods</h3><p>Databases were searched, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science. The search was conducted from the time of database construction to March 2024. The quality of the literature was evaluated using the NOS scoring system. Meta-analysis was performed using R language software. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> statistic, and sensitivity analysis was performed.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Six relevant literatures that met the criteria were finally included, and 652 patients were included, including 316 (48.5%) in the robot-assisted lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer group (RLLND) and 336 (51.5%) in the laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer group (LLLND). Analysis of the results showed that compared with the laparoscopic group, the robotic group had less mean intraoperative blood loss (MD = − 22, 95% CI − 40.03 to − 3.97, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.05), longer operative time (MD = 51.57, 95%CI 7.69 to 95.45, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.05), and a shorter mean hospital stay (MD = − 1.25, 95%CI − 2.46 to − 0.05, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.05), a low rate of urinary complications (OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.23 to 0.64, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01), a low overall rate of postoperative complications (OR 0.6, 95%CI 0.42 to 0.87, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.01), and a high number of lateral lymph node dissection (MD = 1.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.23, <i>P</i> &lt; 0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of postoperative anastomotic leakage, postoperative intestinal obstruction, and total number of lymph nodes obtained (<i>P</i> &gt; 0.05).</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Compared with laparoscopy, robotic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer reduces intraoperative blood loss, shortens the average length of hospital stay, reduces urologic complications, decreases overall postoperative complications, and collects more lateral lymph nodes. However, the surgical time is prolonged.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Graphical abstract</h3>\n","PeriodicalId":501625,"journal":{"name":"Surgical Endoscopy","volume":"109 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-024-11111-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

A meta-analysis was conducted on the perioperative and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection in rectal cancer. There are few articles and reports on this topic, and a lack of high-quality research results in unreliable research conclusions. This study includes prospective and retrospective studies to obtain more reliable findings.

Materials and methods

Databases were searched, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science. The search was conducted from the time of database construction to March 2024. The quality of the literature was evaluated using the NOS scoring system. Meta-analysis was performed using R language software. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic, and sensitivity analysis was performed.

Results

Six relevant literatures that met the criteria were finally included, and 652 patients were included, including 316 (48.5%) in the robot-assisted lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer group (RLLND) and 336 (51.5%) in the laparoscopic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer group (LLLND). Analysis of the results showed that compared with the laparoscopic group, the robotic group had less mean intraoperative blood loss (MD = − 22, 95% CI − 40.03 to − 3.97, P < 0.05), longer operative time (MD = 51.57, 95%CI 7.69 to 95.45, P < 0.05), and a shorter mean hospital stay (MD = − 1.25, 95%CI − 2.46 to − 0.05, P < 0.05), a low rate of urinary complications (OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.23 to 0.64, P < 0.01), a low overall rate of postoperative complications (OR 0.6, 95%CI 0.42 to 0.87, P < 0.01), and a high number of lateral lymph node dissection (MD = 1.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.23, P < 0.05), and there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of postoperative anastomotic leakage, postoperative intestinal obstruction, and total number of lymph nodes obtained (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Compared with laparoscopy, robotic lateral lymph node dissection for rectal cancer reduces intraoperative blood loss, shortens the average length of hospital stay, reduces urologic complications, decreases overall postoperative complications, and collects more lateral lymph nodes. However, the surgical time is prolonged.

Graphical abstract

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
机器人辅助对比腹腔镜手术在直肠癌侧淋巴结清扫中的疗效和安全性的荟萃分析
引言 一项荟萃分析针对直肠癌机器人辅助和腹腔镜侧淋巴结清扫术的围手术期和肿瘤学结果进行了研究。有关这一主题的文章和报告很少,缺乏高质量的研究导致研究结论不可靠。本研究包括前瞻性研究和回顾性研究,以获得更可靠的结论。材料和方法检索数据库,包括PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane和Web of Science。检索时间为数据库建立后至 2024 年 3 月。文献质量采用 NOS 评分系统进行评估。使用 R 语言软件进行元分析。结果最终纳入了6篇符合标准的相关文献,共纳入652例患者,其中机器人辅助直肠癌侧淋巴结清扫术(RLLND)组316例(48.5%),腹腔镜直肠癌侧淋巴结清扫术(LLLND)组336例(51.5%)。结果分析表明,与腹腔镜组相比,机器人组术中平均失血量更少(MD = - 22,95%CI - 40.03 to - 3.97,P < 0.05),手术时间更长(MD = 51.57,95%CI 7.69 to 95.45,P < 0.05),平均住院时间更短(MD = - 1.25,95%CI - 2.46 to - 0.05,P < 0.05),泌尿系统并发症发生率低(OR 0.39,95%CI 0.23 to 0.64,P < 0.01),术后并发症总发生率低(OR 0.6,95%CI 0.42 to 0.87,P < 0.01),侧淋巴结清扫次数多(MD = 1.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.23, P <0.05),两组在术后吻合口漏、术后肠梗阻、获得淋巴结总数方面差异无统计学意义(P >0.05)。结论与腹腔镜相比,机器人侧淋巴结清扫术治疗直肠癌减少了术中失血,缩短了平均住院时间,减少了泌尿系统并发症,降低了整体术后并发症,并收集了更多的侧淋巴结。但手术时间延长。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Short-term gut microbiota’s shift after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y vs one anastomosis gastric bypass: results of a multicenter randomized control trial Classifying frailty in the ventral hernia population Retrospective study on endoscopic treatment of recurrent esophageal cancer patients after radiotherapy State of the art medical devices for fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS): technical review and future developments Conquering the common bile duct: outcomes in minimally invasive transcystic common bile duct exploration versus ERCP
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1