A meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer
A meta-analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00464-014-3547-1
复制
发表时间：
2014-10-01
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Wei, Bo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Shen, Wei-Song;Xi, Hong-Qing;Wei, Bo
背景 机器人辅助胃切除术 (RAG) 治疗胃癌对于充分切除肿瘤、淋巴结清扫和术后结果而言仍然是一项有争议的手术技术。方法荟萃分析分析了最新的临床试验，将 RAG 与腹腔镜辅助胃切除术 (LAG) 进行比较，以评估 RAG 是否等同于 LAG。结果 分析中纳入了 8 项研究，共 1,875 名患者。 RAG 与较长的手术时间 (p < 0.05)、较低的估计失血量 (p < 0.05) 和较长的远端切缘 (p < 0.05) 相关。与 LAG 相比，RAG 可以安全地进行，预计失血量更低，远端边缘更长。 RAG 和 LAG 的并发症、住院时间、近端切缘和获取的淋巴结相似。结论 在获得安全并发症和进行根治性胃切除术方面，RAG 与 LAG 一样可以接受。
Background Robot-assisted gastrectomy (RAG) for gastric cancer is still a controversial surgical technique for adequate tumor resection, lymphadenectomy, and postoperative outcome.Methods A meta-analysis analyzed updated clinical trials that have compared RAG with laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy (LAG) to evaluate whether RAG is equivalent to LAG.Results Eight studies were included in the analysis, comprising 1,875 patients. RAG was associated with a longer operative time (p < 0.05), lower estimated blood loss (p < 0.05), and a longer distal margin (p < 0.05). RAG can be performed safely with lower estimated blood loss and a longer distal margin than with LAG. Complications, hospital stay, proximal margin, and harvested lymph nodes for RAG and LAG were similar.Conclusions RAG is as acceptable as LAG for obtaining safe complications and for performing radical gastrectomy.