Bahaa I Aburayya, Ahmad K Al-Hayk, Ahmad A Toubasi, Abubaker Ali, Awni D Shahait
{"title":"腹腔镜胆囊切除术中安全入路与腹股沟技术的批判性观点,哪一种更安全?系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Bahaa I Aburayya, Ahmad K Al-Hayk, Ahmad A Toubasi, Abubaker Ali, Awni D Shahait","doi":"10.1007/s13304-024-02029-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains the gold standard procedure for the management of benign gallbladder disease. Recognizing the need to mitigate complications, mainly bile duct injury (BDI), various techniques for ductal identification during LC have emerged, including the \"Critical View of Safety\" (CVS) and the infundibular technique (IT). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess and compare the outcomes of both techniques, with a primary focus on evaluating their impact on BDIs. A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases. The search focused on the surgical technique, incidences of minor and major BDIs, operative time, conversion rate, and length of stay, among patients undergoing LC for benign gallbladder disease. Our initial search retrieved 264 studies. After screening the unique studies against our predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, only five met our criteria and were included. Additionally, a manual search identified eight more relevant studies, bringing the total number of included studies to 13. The total number of included patients was 4,837. Approximately two-thirds underwent LC using the CVS approach (61.1%), and 66.3% were female, with a mean age of 44.4 ± 11.2 years. The CVS approach was associated with a significant reduction in overall BDIs (RR = 0.36; 95% CI 0.18-0.71) and major BDIs (RR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.13-0.63). However, there were no significant differences in terms of minor BDIs, operative time, conversion rates, or length of stay. Our study demonstrated the superiority of the CVS approach in terms of reducing the incidence of overall and major BDIs compared to IT. However, our study revealed no other significant differences between the two techniques. Further research, including multicentric randomized controlled trials, will be necessary to further evaluate the efficacy of these techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical view of safety approach vs. infundibular technique in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which one is safer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Bahaa I Aburayya, Ahmad K Al-Hayk, Ahmad A Toubasi, Abubaker Ali, Awni D Shahait\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13304-024-02029-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains the gold standard procedure for the management of benign gallbladder disease. Recognizing the need to mitigate complications, mainly bile duct injury (BDI), various techniques for ductal identification during LC have emerged, including the \\\"Critical View of Safety\\\" (CVS) and the infundibular technique (IT). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess and compare the outcomes of both techniques, with a primary focus on evaluating their impact on BDIs. A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases. The search focused on the surgical technique, incidences of minor and major BDIs, operative time, conversion rate, and length of stay, among patients undergoing LC for benign gallbladder disease. Our initial search retrieved 264 studies. After screening the unique studies against our predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, only five met our criteria and were included. Additionally, a manual search identified eight more relevant studies, bringing the total number of included studies to 13. The total number of included patients was 4,837. Approximately two-thirds underwent LC using the CVS approach (61.1%), and 66.3% were female, with a mean age of 44.4 ± 11.2 years. The CVS approach was associated with a significant reduction in overall BDIs (RR = 0.36; 95% CI 0.18-0.71) and major BDIs (RR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.13-0.63). However, there were no significant differences in terms of minor BDIs, operative time, conversion rates, or length of stay. Our study demonstrated the superiority of the CVS approach in terms of reducing the incidence of overall and major BDIs compared to IT. However, our study revealed no other significant differences between the two techniques. Further research, including multicentric randomized controlled trials, will be necessary to further evaluate the efficacy of these techniques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-024-02029-5\",\"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":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-024-02029-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Critical view of safety approach vs. infundibular technique in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which one is safer? A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) remains the gold standard procedure for the management of benign gallbladder disease. Recognizing the need to mitigate complications, mainly bile duct injury (BDI), various techniques for ductal identification during LC have emerged, including the "Critical View of Safety" (CVS) and the infundibular technique (IT). In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we assess and compare the outcomes of both techniques, with a primary focus on evaluating their impact on BDIs. A comprehensive search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases. The search focused on the surgical technique, incidences of minor and major BDIs, operative time, conversion rate, and length of stay, among patients undergoing LC for benign gallbladder disease. Our initial search retrieved 264 studies. After screening the unique studies against our predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria, only five met our criteria and were included. Additionally, a manual search identified eight more relevant studies, bringing the total number of included studies to 13. The total number of included patients was 4,837. Approximately two-thirds underwent LC using the CVS approach (61.1%), and 66.3% were female, with a mean age of 44.4 ± 11.2 years. The CVS approach was associated with a significant reduction in overall BDIs (RR = 0.36; 95% CI 0.18-0.71) and major BDIs (RR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.13-0.63). However, there were no significant differences in terms of minor BDIs, operative time, conversion rates, or length of stay. Our study demonstrated the superiority of the CVS approach in terms of reducing the incidence of overall and major BDIs compared to IT. However, our study revealed no other significant differences between the two techniques. Further research, including multicentric randomized controlled trials, will be necessary to further evaluate the efficacy of these techniques.
期刊介绍:
Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future.
Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts.
Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.