Robotic adrenalectomy versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy for pheochromocytoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques Pub Date : 2021-07-13 DOI:10.5114/wiitm.2021.107764
Lei Du, Zhan Yang, Jinchun Qi, Yaxuan Wang
{"title":"Robotic adrenalectomy versus laparoscopic adrenalectomy for pheochromocytoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Lei Du, Zhan Yang, Jinchun Qi, Yaxuan Wang","doi":"10.5114/wiitm.2021.107764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction The application of robotic adrenalectomy (RA) has been increasing. However, there is still controversy about whether RA is more feasible than laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) for pheochromocytoma (PHEO). Aim To evaluate the efficacy and safety of RA vs. LA for PHEO. Material and methods A literature search of the PubMed, Ovid, and Scopus databases was performed to identify eligible studies up to April 2021. All studies comparing RA versus LA for PHEO were included. Data were analysed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 software. Results Overall, 4 studies including 386 patients (RA 155; LA 231) were included. RA might have larger tumour size (WMD = 0.72 cm, 95% CI: 0.31 to 1.13; p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in operative time (WMD = –12.49 min, 95% CI: –29.50 to 4.52; p = 0.15), estimated blood loss (EBL) (WMD = –28.48 ml, 95% CI: –58.92, 1.95; p = 0.07), transfusion rate (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.07 to 7.07; p = 0.77), or conversion rate (OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.07 to 2.88; p = 0.39). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative complications (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.82; p = 0.84) and Clavien Dindo score ≥ 3 complications (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.39 to 3.41; p = 0.80). Patients from the RA group could benefit from shorter length of hospital stay (WMD = –0.51 days, 95% CI –0.91 to –0.12; p = 0.01). Conclusions RA is a feasible, safe, and comparable treatment option for PHEO.","PeriodicalId":49361,"journal":{"name":"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques","volume":"17 1","pages":"1 - 8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/wiitm.2021.107764","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction The application of robotic adrenalectomy (RA) has been increasing. However, there is still controversy about whether RA is more feasible than laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) for pheochromocytoma (PHEO). Aim To evaluate the efficacy and safety of RA vs. LA for PHEO. Material and methods A literature search of the PubMed, Ovid, and Scopus databases was performed to identify eligible studies up to April 2021. All studies comparing RA versus LA for PHEO were included. Data were analysed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4 software. Results Overall, 4 studies including 386 patients (RA 155; LA 231) were included. RA might have larger tumour size (WMD = 0.72 cm, 95% CI: 0.31 to 1.13; p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in operative time (WMD = –12.49 min, 95% CI: –29.50 to 4.52; p = 0.15), estimated blood loss (EBL) (WMD = –28.48 ml, 95% CI: –58.92, 1.95; p = 0.07), transfusion rate (OR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.07 to 7.07; p = 0.77), or conversion rate (OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.07 to 2.88; p = 0.39). There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative complications (OR = 1.06, 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.82; p = 0.84) and Clavien Dindo score ≥ 3 complications (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 0.39 to 3.41; p = 0.80). Patients from the RA group could benefit from shorter length of hospital stay (WMD = –0.51 days, 95% CI –0.91 to –0.12; p = 0.01). Conclusions RA is a feasible, safe, and comparable treatment option for PHEO.
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
机器人肾上腺切除术与腹腔镜肾上腺切除术治疗嗜铬细胞瘤:系统综述和荟萃分析
引言机器人肾上腺切除术(RA)的应用越来越多。然而,对于RA是否比腹腔镜肾上腺切除术(LA)更可行治疗嗜铬细胞瘤(PHEO),仍存在争议。目的评价RA与LA治疗PHEO的疗效和安全性。材料和方法对PubMed、Ovid和Scopus数据库进行文献检索,以确定截至2021年4月的合格研究。纳入了所有比较PHEO RA与LA的研究。使用Cochrane Collaboration的Review Manager(RevMan)5.4软件对数据进行分析。结果共纳入4项研究,包括386名患者(RA 155;LA 231)。RA可能有更大的肿瘤大小(WMD=0.72 cm,95%CI:0.31至1.13;p<0.001)。手术时间(WMD=-12.49 min,95%CI:-29.50至4.52;p=0.15)、估计失血量(EBL)(WMD=-28.48 ml,95%CI:-58.92,1.95;p=0.07)、输血率(OR=0.70,95%CI:0.07至7.07;p=0.77)无统计学显著差异,或转化率(or=0.44,95%CI:0.07至2.88;p=0.39)。两组在术后并发症(or=1.06,95%CI:0.62至1.82;p=0.84)和Clavien-Dindo评分≥3个并发症(or=1.15,95%CI:0.39至3.41;p=0.80)方面没有显著差异。RA组患者可以从更短的住院时间中获益(WMD=-0.51天,95%CI-0.91至-0.12;p=0.01)。结论RA是PHEO的一种可行、安全和可比的治疗选择。
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
2.80
自引率
23.50%
发文量
48
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques serves as a forum for exchange of multidisciplinary experiences in fields such as: surgery, gynaecology, urology, gastroenterology, neurosurgery, ENT surgery, cardiac surgery, anaesthesiology and radiology, as well as other branches of medicine dealing with miniinvasive techniques.
期刊最新文献
Early-stage voiding function following uni- versus bilateral inferior vesical vessel resection during therapeutic lateral lymph node dissection with autonomic nerve sparing for advanced low rectal cancer (with video) Effect and prognosis of endoscopic intracranial hematoma removal and hematoma puncture and drainage in patients with hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage Outcomes of minimally invasive surgery for pulmonary metastasis: who benefits the most? Meta-analysis of clinical efficacy and safety of transanal endoscopic microsurgery and endoscopic submucosal dissection in the treatment of rectal tumors Clinical comparative study of laparoscopic partial splenectomy and open partial splenectomy
×
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