中文English
ISSN 1001-5256 (Print)
ISSN 2097-3497 (Online)
CN 22-1108/R
Volume 38 Issue 5
May  2022
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents

Short-term efficacy and safety of Da Vinci robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus traditional laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: A meta-analysis

DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-5256.2022.05.025
Research funding:

Project of Sichuan Youth Science and Technology Fund (2016JQ0023)

More Information
  • Corresponding author: WANG Tao, watopo@163.com(ORCID: 0000-0002-0005-0994)
  • Received Date: 2021-09-13
  • Accepted Date: 2021-10-26
  • Published Date: 2022-05-20
  •   Objective  To systematically evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) versus traditional laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy (LPD), and to provide a reference for clinical research and practice.  Methods  Chinese and English databases such as PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and VIP were searched to include the cohort studies comparing the clinical efficacy of robot-assisted laparoscopy and traditional laparoscopy in pancreaticoduodenectomy. The quality of included articles was evaluated based on Cochrane systematic review, and Stata15.1 software was used to perform a meta-analysis of related outcome measures extracted.  Results  A total of 12 cohort studies were included, with 1630 patients in total, and there were 683 patients in the RPD group and 947 patients in the LPD group. The meta-analysis showed that there were significant differences between the RPD group and the LPD group in postoperative bleeding rate (odds ratio [OR]=0.66, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48-0.91, P < 0.05), rate of conversion to laparotomy (OR=0.41, 95%CI: 0.30-0.56, P < 0.05), estimated intraoperative blood loss (weighted mean difference [WMD]=-0.77, 95%CI: -1.33 to -0.22, P < 0.05), and length of postoperative hospital stay (WMD=-0.45, 95%CI: -0.80 to -0.11, P < 0.05). Country of publication might be one of the sources of heterogeneity in the incidence rate of postoperative complications between subgroups (P < 0.05).  Conclusion  Compared with traditional LPD, da Vinci RPD can reduce postoperative bleeding rate, intraoperative blood loss and rate of conversion to laparotomy and shorten postoperative hospital stay, and meanwhile, it does not increase the operation time and the incidence rate of postoperative complications. Both surgical procedures are safe and feasible.

     

  • loading
  • [1]
    GAGNER M, POMP A, et al. Laparoscopic pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy[J]. Surg Endosc, 1994, 8(5): 408-410. DOI: 10.1007/bf00642443.
    [2]
    GIULIANOTTI PC, CORATTI A, ANGELINI M, et al. Robotics in general surgery: Personal experience in a large community hospital[J]. Arch Surg, 2003, 138(7): 777-784. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.138.7.777.
    [3]
    STANG A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses[J]. Eur J Epidemiol, 2010, 25(9): 603-605. DOI: 10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z.
    [4]
    DURAN H, IELPO B, CARUSO R, et al. Does robotic distal pancreatectomy surgery offer similar results as laparoscopic and open approach? A comparative study from a single medical center[J]. Int J Med Robot, 2014, 10(3): 280-285. DOI: 10.1002/rcs.1569.
    [5]
    CHEN S, ZHAN Q, CHEN JZ, et al. Robotic approach improves spleen-preserving rate and shortens postoperative hospital stay of laparosc opic distal pancreatectomy: A matched cohort study[J]. Surg Endosc, 2015, 29(12): 3507-3518. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4101-5.
    [6]
    LAI EC, TANG CN. Robotic distal pancreatectomy versus conventional laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy: A comparative study for short-term outcomes[J]. Front Med, 2015, 9(3): 356-360. DOI: 10.1007/s11684-015-0404-0.
    [7]
    LIU R, ZHANG T, ZHAO ZM, et al. The surgical outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary neoplasms: A comparative study of a single center[J]. Surg Endosc, 2017, 31(6): 2380-2386. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-5238-6.
    [8]
    NASSOUR I, WANG SC, POREMBKA MR, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy: A nsqip analysis[J]. J Gastrointest Surg, 2017, 21(11): 1784-1792. DOI: 10.1007/s11605-017-3543-6.
    [9]
    ZHANG Y, HONG D, ZHANG C, et al. Total laparoscopic versus robot-assisted laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. Biosci Trends, 2018, 12(5): 484-490. DOI: 10.5582/bst.2018.01236.
    [10]
    ZIMMERMAN AM, ROYE DG, CHARPENTIER KP. A comparison of outcomes between open, laparoscopic and robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy[J]. HPB (Oxford), 2018, 20(4): 364-369. DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2017.10.008.
    [11]
    TU GP, SUN JC, NIE WP, et al. Comparison of efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer[J]. Chin J Gen Surg, 2020, 3(29): 269-275. DOI: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2020.03.003.

    涂广平, 孙吉春, 聂晚频, 等. 机器人辅助与腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除术治疗胰腺癌的效果与安全性比较[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2020, 3(29): 269-275. DOI: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2020.03.003.
    [12]
    BUTTURINI G, DAMOLI I, CREPAZ L, et al. A prospective non-randomised single-center study comparing laparoscopic and robotic distal pancreatec tomy[J]. Surg Endosc, 2015, 29(11): 3163-3170. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-014-4043-3.
    [13]
    LEE SY, ALLEN PJ, SADOT E, et al. Distal pancreatectomy: A single institution's experience in open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2015, 220(1): 18-27. DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2014.10.004.
    [14]
    DAOUADI M, ZUREIKAT AH, ZENATI MS, et al. Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique[J]. Ann Surg, 2013, 257(1): 128-132. DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e31825fff08.
    [15]
    WATERS JA, CANAL DF, WIEBKE EA, et al. Robotic distal pancreatectomy: Cost effective?[J]. Surgery, 2010, 148(4): 814-823. DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2010.07.027.
    [16]
    ZHANG C, AN L, WANG Y, et al, Impact of different operative approaches for laparoscopic pancreaticoduodenectomy on short-term treatment outcomes[J]. Chin J Hepatobiliary Surg, 2020, 4(26): 286-289. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn113884-20190926-00318.

    张成, 安琳, 王羊, 等. 腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除不同手术入路的近期疗效[J]. 中华肝胆外科杂志, 2020, 4(26) : 286-289. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn113884-20190926-00318.
    [17]
    ALIP S, KOUKOURIKIS P, HAN WK, et al. Comparing revo-i and da vinci in retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A preliminary propensity score analysis of outcomes[J]. J Endourol, 2022, 36(1): 104-110. DOI: 10.1089/end.2021.0421.
    [18]
    WU CJ, CHEN HH, CHENG PW, et al. Outcome of robot-assisted bilateral internal mammary artery grafting via left pleura in coronary bypa ss surgery[J]. J Clin Med, 2019, 8(4): 502. DOI: 10.3390/jcm8040502.
    [19]
    GAVRIILIDIS P, LIM C, MENAHEM B, et al. Robotic versus laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy-the first meta-analysis[J]. HPB (Oxford), 2016, 18(7): 567-574. DOI: 10.1016/j.hpb.2016.04.008.
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(14)  / Tables(3)

    Article Metrics

    Article views (733) PDF downloads(37) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return