胆管癌机器人辅助手术、开腹手术和腹腔镜辅助手术的比较:网络荟萃分析。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.1007/s00423-024-03541-3
Sifan Dong, An Jiang, Shiqi An, Junzhi Xiao
{"title":"胆管癌机器人辅助手术、开腹手术和腹腔镜辅助手术的比较:网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Sifan Dong, An Jiang, Shiqi An, Junzhi Xiao","doi":"10.1007/s00423-024-03541-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of robot-assisted, laparoscopic-assisted and open surgery in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma, and to evaluate the clinical effect of three surgical methods in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma by network Meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematical retrieval in PubMed and Web of Science was performed for relative literature on the effects of robot-assisted(RA), laparoscopy-assisted(LA), and open surgery(OA) for cholangiocarcinoma in treating cholangiocarcinoma. A literature search updated to September 1st, 2024, was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Studies have shown that the length of R0 resection, complication rate, 30-day mortality, Transfusion rate, Lymph Node Metastasis Rate, and hospital stay in RA are superior to LA and open surgery. The relative effectiveness of the three surgical methods in terms of operation time were: open surgery, laparoscope-assisted surgery, and robot-assisted surgery, and there was no significant difference among the three groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robot-assisted surgery is safe and feasible in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma, but more clinical evidence is needed to confirm these findings.</p>","PeriodicalId":17983,"journal":{"name":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","volume":"409 1","pages":"336"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of robot-assisted, open, and laparoscopic-assisted surgery for cholangiocarcinoma: a network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sifan Dong, An Jiang, Shiqi An, Junzhi Xiao\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00423-024-03541-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of robot-assisted, laparoscopic-assisted and open surgery in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma, and to evaluate the clinical effect of three surgical methods in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma by network Meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematical retrieval in PubMed and Web of Science was performed for relative literature on the effects of robot-assisted(RA), laparoscopy-assisted(LA), and open surgery(OA) for cholangiocarcinoma in treating cholangiocarcinoma. A literature search updated to September 1st, 2024, was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Studies have shown that the length of R0 resection, complication rate, 30-day mortality, Transfusion rate, Lymph Node Metastasis Rate, and hospital stay in RA are superior to LA and open surgery. The relative effectiveness of the three surgical methods in terms of operation time were: open surgery, laparoscope-assisted surgery, and robot-assisted surgery, and there was no significant difference among the three groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Robot-assisted surgery is safe and feasible in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma, but more clinical evidence is needed to confirm these findings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery\",\"volume\":\"409 1\",\"pages\":\"336\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-024-03541-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-024-03541-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在比较机器人辅助手术、腹腔镜辅助手术和开腹手术治疗胆管癌的疗效,并通过网络Meta分析评价三种手术方法治疗胆管癌的临床效果:在PubMed和Web of Science中系统检索了机器人辅助(RA)、腹腔镜辅助(LA)和开腹手术(OA)治疗胆管癌效果的相关文献。文献检索更新至2024年9月1日:研究表明,RA手术的R0切除时间、并发症发生率、30天死亡率、输血率、淋巴结转移率和住院时间均优于LA手术和开放手术。三种手术方式在手术时间上的相对效果分别为:开腹手术、腹腔镜辅助手术和机器人辅助手术,三组之间无显著差异:结论:机器人辅助手术治疗胆管癌安全可行,但还需要更多临床证据来证实这些结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of robot-assisted, open, and laparoscopic-assisted surgery for cholangiocarcinoma: a network meta-analysis.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of robot-assisted, laparoscopic-assisted and open surgery in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma, and to evaluate the clinical effect of three surgical methods in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma by network Meta-analysis.

Methods: A systematical retrieval in PubMed and Web of Science was performed for relative literature on the effects of robot-assisted(RA), laparoscopy-assisted(LA), and open surgery(OA) for cholangiocarcinoma in treating cholangiocarcinoma. A literature search updated to September 1st, 2024, was performed.

Results: Studies have shown that the length of R0 resection, complication rate, 30-day mortality, Transfusion rate, Lymph Node Metastasis Rate, and hospital stay in RA are superior to LA and open surgery. The relative effectiveness of the three surgical methods in terms of operation time were: open surgery, laparoscope-assisted surgery, and robot-assisted surgery, and there was no significant difference among the three groups.

Conclusion: Robot-assisted surgery is safe and feasible in the treatment of cholangiocarcinoma, but more clinical evidence is needed to confirm these findings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
342
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Langenbeck''s Archives of Surgery aims to publish the best results in the field of clinical surgery and basic surgical research. The main focus is on providing the highest level of clinical research and clinically relevant basic research. The journal, published exclusively in English, will provide an international discussion forum for the controlled results of clinical surgery. The majority of published contributions will be original articles reporting on clinical data from general and visceral surgery, while endocrine surgery will also be covered. Papers on basic surgical principles from the fields of traumatology, vascular and thoracic surgery are also welcome. Evidence-based medicine is an important criterion for the acceptance of papers.
期刊最新文献
Low vs. conventional intra-abdominal pressure in laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a prospective cohort study. Comparative effectiveness totally endoscopic thyroidectomy via completely submental tri-hole approach and transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy without insufflation. Curative treatment for oligometastatic gastroesophageal cancer- results of a prospective multicenter study. New purse-string suture clamp and multi-functional seal cap: a simple intracorporeal circular-stapled oesophagojejunostomy after laparoscopic total gastrectomy. The importance of microvascular invasion in patients with non-functioning pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm.
×
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