Abstract：
To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of robot-assisted resection and open surgery for cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for studies comparing treatment for CCA, covering the period from database inception to January 30, 2024. Two researchers will independently screen literature and extract data, followed by meta-analysis using Review Manager 5.3 software. A total of 5 articles with 513 patients were finally included. Among them, 231 in the robotic group, and 282 in the open group. The Meta-analysis revealed that the robotic group had a significant advantage in terms of intraoperative blood loss (MD = - 101.44, 95% CI - 135.73 to - 67.15, P < 0.05), lymph node harvest(MD = 1.03, 95% CI 0.30- 1.76, P < 0.05) and length of hospital stay(MD = - 1.92, 95% CI - 2.87 to- 0.97, P < 0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of transfusion rate (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.31-1.23, P > 0.05), R0 resection (OR = 1.49, 95% CI 0.89- 2.50, P > 0.05), 30-day mortality (OR = 1.68, 95% CI 0.43-6.65, P > 0.05) and complications (OR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.30- 1.95, P > 0.05). Robotic-assisted radical resection for CCA is feasible and safe, and its long-term efficacy and oncological outcomes need to be confirmed by further studies.
摘要：
比较机器人辅助切除与开放手术治疗胆管癌的临床疗效和安全性。我们对PubMed进行了全面搜索，Cochrane图书馆,和Embase数据库，用于比较CCA的治疗方法，涵盖从数据库开始到2024年1月30日的时期。两名研究人员将独立筛选文献并提取数据，然后使用ReviewManager5.3软件进行荟萃分析。共纳入5篇文章，共513例患者。其中,机器人组中的231人，公开组282人。Meta分析显示,机器人组在术中出血量方面具有显著优势(MD=-101.44,95%CI-135.73~-67.15,P<0.05)。淋巴结收获（MD=1.03，95％CI0.30-1.76，P<0.05）和住院时间（MD=-1.92，95％CI-2.87至-0.97，P<0.05）。然而,两组输血率比较差异无统计学意义(OR=0.62,95%CI0.31~1.23,P>0.05),R0切除(OR=1.49,95%CI0.89-2.50,P>0.05),30d死亡率(OR=1.68,95%CI0.43~6.65,P>0.05)和并发症(OR=0.76,95%CI0.30~1.95,P>0.05)。机器人辅助下CCA根治术是可行和安全的,其长期疗效和肿瘤结局需要进一步研究证实.
