{"title":"456 机器人手术与腹腔镜手术治疗炎症性肠病的术后效果比较:系统回顾与元分析","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":8,"journal":{"name":"ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering","volume":"328 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"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\":8,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering\",\"volume\":\"328 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae163.110\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae163.110","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
456 Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Robotic and Laparoscopic Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
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:
ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering is the leading journal in the field of biomaterials, serving as an international forum for publishing cutting-edge research and innovative ideas on a broad range of topics:
Applications and Health – implantable tissues and devices, prosthesis, health risks, toxicology
Bio-interactions and Bio-compatibility – material-biology interactions, chemical/morphological/structural communication, mechanobiology, signaling and biological responses, immuno-engineering, calcification, coatings, corrosion and degradation of biomaterials and devices, biophysical regulation of cell functions
Characterization, Synthesis, and Modification – new biomaterials, bioinspired and biomimetic approaches to biomaterials, exploiting structural hierarchy and architectural control, combinatorial strategies for biomaterials discovery, genetic biomaterials design, synthetic biology, new composite systems, bionics, polymer synthesis
Controlled Release and Delivery Systems – biomaterial-based drug and gene delivery, bio-responsive delivery of regulatory molecules, pharmaceutical engineering
Healthcare Advances – clinical translation, regulatory issues, patient safety, emerging trends
Imaging and Diagnostics – imaging agents and probes, theranostics, biosensors, monitoring
Manufacturing and Technology – 3D printing, inks, organ-on-a-chip, bioreactor/perfusion systems, microdevices, BioMEMS, optics and electronics interfaces with biomaterials, systems integration
Modeling and Informatics Tools – scaling methods to guide biomaterial design, predictive algorithms for structure-function, biomechanics, integrating bioinformatics with biomaterials discovery, metabolomics in the context of biomaterials
Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine – basic and applied studies, cell therapies, scaffolds, vascularization, bioartificial organs, transplantation and functionality, cellular agriculture