Comparison of different Kasai portoenterostomy techniques in the outcomes of biliary atresia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

IF 1.5 3区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS Pediatric Surgery International Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI:10.1007/s00383-024-05920-9
Yanran Zhang, Shaowen Liu, Qianhui Yang, Rongjuan Sun, Jiaying Liu, Yu Meng, Jianghua Zhan
{"title":"Comparison of different Kasai portoenterostomy techniques in the outcomes of biliary atresia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.","authors":"Yanran Zhang, Shaowen Liu, Qianhui Yang, Rongjuan Sun, Jiaying Liu, Yu Meng, Jianghua Zhan","doi":"10.1007/s00383-024-05920-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Biliary atresia (BA) is a progressive disease affecting the bile duct structure and function, leading to poor outcomes without timely surgical intervention. Kasai portoenterostomy (KPE) is a commonly used treatment to restore bile flow. However, the success rate and postoperative outcomes of KPE vary with different surgical techniques, including laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and open approaches.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following the PRISMA guidelines, this study systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for literature on BA surgical techniques of KPE. Studies comparing two or all three techniques-laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and open-in terms of postoperative outcomes of KPE in BA patients were included. Utilizing the \"gemtc\" package in R version 4.3.3, NMA was conducted to compare postoperative clearance of jaundice (COJ) among different surgical techniques. We also performed traditional paired meta-analysis in which multiple surgical outcomes were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>According to the traditional definition of a successful KPE surgery, in terms of successful postoperative COJ, robotic-assisted Kasai portoenterostomy (RAKPE) shows advantage over open Kasai portoenterostomy (OKPE) and laparoscopic Kasai portoenterostomy (LKPE), while the outcomes between OKPE and LKPE are equivalent. However, statistically speaking, there is no significant difference among the three techniques. LKPE has a longer operation time and less intraoperative bleeding compared to OKPE. There are no statistically significant differences in hospital stay, cholangitis incidence, or liver survival rates at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, or 5 years.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The surgical success rates of KPE with various technical aids are similar, highlighting the need to consider individual patient conditions and cost when choosing a surgical technique. Effective postoperative management is vital for preventing complications and slowing liver fibrosis. Future research should focus on improving surgical techniques and postoperative care to enhance long-term outcomes for BA patients. For those who cannot maintain liver function with KPE, timely LT consideration is crucial.</p>","PeriodicalId":19832,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Surgery International","volume":"41 1","pages":"6"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Surgery International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00383-024-05920-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Biliary atresia (BA) is a progressive disease affecting the bile duct structure and function, leading to poor outcomes without timely surgical intervention. Kasai portoenterostomy (KPE) is a commonly used treatment to restore bile flow. However, the success rate and postoperative outcomes of KPE vary with different surgical techniques, including laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and open approaches.

Methods: Following the PRISMA guidelines, this study systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for literature on BA surgical techniques of KPE. Studies comparing two or all three techniques-laparoscopic, robot-assisted, and open-in terms of postoperative outcomes of KPE in BA patients were included. Utilizing the "gemtc" package in R version 4.3.3, NMA was conducted to compare postoperative clearance of jaundice (COJ) among different surgical techniques. We also performed traditional paired meta-analysis in which multiple surgical outcomes were compared.

Results: According to the traditional definition of a successful KPE surgery, in terms of successful postoperative COJ, robotic-assisted Kasai portoenterostomy (RAKPE) shows advantage over open Kasai portoenterostomy (OKPE) and laparoscopic Kasai portoenterostomy (LKPE), while the outcomes between OKPE and LKPE are equivalent. However, statistically speaking, there is no significant difference among the three techniques. LKPE has a longer operation time and less intraoperative bleeding compared to OKPE. There are no statistically significant differences in hospital stay, cholangitis incidence, or liver survival rates at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, or 5 years.

Conclusion: The surgical success rates of KPE with various technical aids are similar, highlighting the need to consider individual patient conditions and cost when choosing a surgical technique. Effective postoperative management is vital for preventing complications and slowing liver fibrosis. Future research should focus on improving surgical techniques and postoperative care to enhance long-term outcomes for BA patients. For those who cannot maintain liver function with KPE, timely LT consideration is crucial.

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
比较不同的卡萨伊肠管造口术对胆道闭锁的治疗效果:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。
背景:胆道闭锁(BA)是一种影响胆管结构和功能的渐进性疾病,如果不及时进行手术干预,会导致不良后果。葛西肠管造口术(KPE)是恢复胆汁流动的常用治疗方法。然而,不同的手术技术,包括腹腔镜、机器人辅助和开放式方法,KPE 的成功率和术后效果各不相同:本研究遵循 PRISMA 指南,系统检索了 PubMed、EMBASE 和 Cochrane 数据库中有关 BA KPE 手术技术的文献。研究纳入了比较两种或所有三种技术(腹腔镜、机器人辅助和开放式)在 BA 患者 KPE 术后效果方面的研究。我们利用 R 4.3.3 版中的 "gemtc "软件包进行了 NMA,以比较不同手术技术的术后黄疸清除率(COJ)。我们还进行了传统的配对荟萃分析,对多种手术结果进行了比较:结果:根据 KPE 手术成功的传统定义,就术后 COJ 成功率而言,机器人辅助葛西肠管造口术(RAKPE)比开腹葛西肠管造口术(OKPE)和腹腔镜葛西肠管造口术(LKPE)更具优势,而 OKPE 和 LKPE 的结果相当。不过,从统计学角度来看,三种技术之间没有显著差异。与 OKPE 相比,LKPE 的手术时间更长,术中出血更少。住院时间、胆管炎发生率以及 6 个月、1 年、2 年或 5 年的肝脏存活率在统计学上没有明显差异:结论:采用不同技术辅助的 KPE 手术成功率相似,这说明在选择手术技术时需要考虑患者的个体情况和成本。有效的术后管理对于预防并发症和减缓肝纤维化至关重要。未来的研究应侧重于改进手术技术和术后护理,以提高 BA 患者的长期疗效。对于那些无法通过KPE维持肝功能的患者,及时考虑LT至关重要。
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
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
215
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Pediatric Surgery International is a journal devoted to the publication of new and important information from the entire spectrum of pediatric surgery. The major purpose of the journal is to promote postgraduate training and further education in the surgery of infants and children. The contents will include articles in clinical and experimental surgery, as well as related fields. One section of each issue is devoted to a special topic, with invited contributions from recognized authorities. Other sections will include: -Review articles- Original articles- Technical innovations- Letters to the editor
期刊最新文献
A comparative study on the efficacy of laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy versus single ureteral bladder reimplantation in treating pediatric complete renal duplication. Chyme reinfusion practices in the neonatal population. Comparison of different Kasai portoenterostomy techniques in the outcomes of biliary atresia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Association between nighttime/weekend visits and patient outcomes in children with blunt liver and spleen injuries. Innovative minimally invasive gastric pull-up techniques in children: SILS and robot-assisted gastric pull-up.
×
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